PAule the seruaunt of Iesus Christ, called to the office of an Apostle, put aparte to preach the Gospell of God, which he before had promised by his Prophets in the holy Scriptures, of hys son which was begotten of the seede of Dauid as touching the fleshe, and declared to bee the sonne of God with power, according to the spirite of sanctification, in that Iesus Christ our Lord rose agayne frō the dead, by whō we haue receaued grace, and the office of an Apostle, to be obedyent to fayth amonge all nations in hys name, of the number of whome ye also are, the called of Iesus Christ. To all you which are at Rome the beloued of God called Sainctes: grace and peace to you from God the father, and from the Lord Iesus Christ.

As touchynge the saluation, fyrste we muste note, who it is that wryteth Three things to be conside­red in this salutation. it: secondlye, to whome it is written: lastly, what maner of good thinges hee which saluteth wisheth vnto them. It is Paule which saluteth: the Romanes are they whom he saluteth: and the good things which he wisheth thē, are grace and peace: indeede, the chiefest thinges which of men can bee attayned vnto. Rhethorici­ās precepts concernyng Prohemes are here ob­serued. Rhetoricians vse in theyr Prohemes to gette vnto them selues authoritie, dili­gent hearing, and beneuolence: which thinge the holy Ghoste here fullye per­formeth. For whilest that Paule doth adorne him selfe with these titles, he win­neth vnto him selfe authoritie, and he also when he maketh mencion what are the thynges that hee will entreate of, maketh the mindes of the readers atten­tiue. And in wyshing vnto them such excellent good thinges, and opening hys great loue towardes them, he obteyneth theyr good will. For by that meanes are they drawen to loue agayne such a man, which so well wisheth vnto them. Why he is so lōg in his salutation. If any man thinke that thys salutation is more full of wordes then nedeth, they must remember that Paul was greuously accused of false Apostles, that he had fallen from the lawe, and agreed not with the other Disciples of the Lorde: and that hee was not to be counted for an Apostle, which had not bene conuersant with the Lorde in the fleshe, as the other Apostles were. To all these false accu­sations it was necessary to aunswere euen in hys Proheme, that he might haue the better eare geuen vnto hym. As touching hys name I will nothing speake, for I know that the elders dyd not rashlye geue names. But because the holy Scripture testifieth not, for what cause he was eyther called Saule in y ^e Iewishe religion, or Paule after hys conuersion, I will omitte coniectures, neither will Paule clai­meth vnto himself thre titles. The pro­priety of a seruaunt. I stand about thys thing. In hys superscription hee setteth forth three titles wherby he beautifieth hys name: the fyrst is, The seruaunt of Iesus Christ,] and that name is common vnto all the faythfull. And the propertie of a seruant is thys, not to bee hys owne man, but to doe the busines of hys maister. Wher­fore if we be the seruauntes of Christ, thys is required of vs, that what soeuer we liue, breath, and thinke, be directed vnto Christ. And in these wordes are false Apostles reproued, which sought their owne thinges, to satisfie the bellye, and to increase their gaine: and they wanne not men to Christ, but rather to Moyses, [Page] or to them selues. For as much as to be the seruauntes of Christ, is (as we haue sayde) a thing cōmon vnto vs all, let vs diligently consider y ^e Metaphore, wher­by we are so called: namely because we ought so to obey God, as seruauntes do their maisters. But we are farre of, frō performing it. For seruaūtes do spēd the Note wherein the most part of men differeth from the seruice of God. least parte of the daye about theyr own busines: and all the rest of the tyme they are occupyed about their maisters affayres. But we do farre otherwise. We are a very short space, or an houre of our time, occupied about things pertaining to God, but al the rest of y ^e time that is graūted vs, we spēd about thinges humaine and earthly. A seruaunt hath nothyng of hys owne nor proper vnto hym selfe: but we doo priuatly possesse many thynges, whiche we will neither bestowe for Gods sake, nor for Christes sake. Seruauntes when they are beaten, and strikē, do humbly desire pardō and forgeuenes of their masters: but we in aduersities resiste God, murmure agaynst hym, and blaspheme hys name. Seruauntes do receaue onely meate and drinke and apparell, and therewith are content: but we neuer come to any ende or measure of heapyng vp of wealth and riches. Ser­uaunts when they heare the threatnynges of their maisters, do tremble frō top to toe: but we are nothyng moued with the threatnynges of the Prophetes, Apostles and holy Scriptures. Seruauntes wil neither haue talke, nor familia­rity, nor yet shewe any signes of amitye vnto their maisters enemyes: but we are continually in fellowshyp with the deuill, the fleshe, and the world. Wher­fore We ought to serue God more then ser­uauntes ought to serue their maisters. we are farre from that seruice whiche we owe vnto God, whom yet we ought much more both to obey and to serue, then our seruauntes ought to obey and serue vs. For God besides that hē both fedeth and nourisheth vs, hath also brought vs forth, & hath geuē vs euē our being. Farther what soeuer seruaunts do towardes vs, all that is to our commoditie, and nothyng helpeth them: but we contrarywise, when we serue God, do bryng no profite or commoditie vn­to him. For thoughe we lyue iustly, he is therby made neuer a whit the better or more blessed thē he was before. Also we geue litle or nothyng vnto our seruaūts: but God hath for vs geuen forth his onely sonne, and together with hym hath geuen vs all thinges: We promise vnto our seruantes a very small rewarde: but God hath promised vnto vs the same felicity, whiche Christ him selfe hath the fruition of. Whereby appeareth how much more we are bounde to serue hym, then are our seruauntes bounde vnto vs.

But in that we haue sayd, that this vocation is common to all, to be the ser­uauntes of Christ, it semeth not very well to agree with that whiche is written in the Gospell: Now I will not call you seruauntes, but frendes. Paul also semeth Iohn. 15. Rom. 8. to be against it, whiche sayde: Ye haue not receaued agayne the spirite of serui­tude in feare: but the spirite of children, whereby we cry: Abba, Father. And con­trarily we can not deny but that we are the seruauntes of God. Christ hath payd the price for vs, wherefore beyng redemed of hym, we are hys seruauntes. God hath created vs: and it is the rule of the workes of euery artificer, to serue There are two maner of serui­tudes. hym that made them. Wherefore there must be had a distinction, namely of the inward man, and of the outward, of the spirite and of the flesh. As touchyng the outward man, and workes of the body, we are called seruauntes: bycause we execute offices in seruing God, and our neighbours as much as lieth in vs. Fur­ther, In what part we are seruaūtes. as concerning aduersities and the crosse which we dayly suffer, we are pu­nished of God, no otherwise then seruauntes are striken and beaten: not in ded [...] alwayes for punishement sake, as they are, but for the most part, to try our faith, and that the fleshe and the lustes therof should be repressed, and that repen­taunce of our faultes and sinnes, whiche cōtinually breake forth should be stir­red vp. Also the forme and humble behauiour, whiche the faythfull vse, hath a shew of a certayne seruitude. After whiche maner Christ also to the Philippiās is sayd to haue taken vpon him the shape of a seruaunt. But our spirite because, In what part we are free. it is not moued with the hope of reward chiefly, or with the feare of punish­mentes, but frely and of hys owne accord executeth the commaundementes of [Page 2] God, therefore we are sayd to haue the spirite of children. Also bycause we are kyndled with loue and not compelled of necessitie, we are frendes, neither are we dishonored with a seruile condition. Paul hath manifestly said: when I was free from all men I was made the seruaunt of all men, and in that maner to serue God is a thing of no smal weight. For in the last chapter of the booke of Iosuah wee reade, that that Captayne preached vnto the people of Israel: Ye are Iosu 24. Augu­stine. not able to serue God. Of which place Augustine entreatyng in his questions, whiche he made vpon that booke, sayth: If we will serue God accordyng to hys dignitie and maiesty, and as the law requireth, it is impossible for vs. Where­fore that people should haue aunswered the Prophet, we will go about and en­deuour our selues to performe that: and when we fayle, we will desire pardon, and by prayers we will obteyne strength, dayly to behaue our selues better. But they with great stoutnes and much pride aūswered: we will serue our God, and will do all those thynges, whiche thou hast spoken. What could be more arro­gantly spoken then this? Yet experiēce taught that the Prophet spake the truth. And for as much as it is a thing so hard vnto our fleshe, hereof it commeth, that commonly we finde that men are sayd so to serue God, as Nabucadnezar in the 45. chap. of Ieremy, is called the seruant of y ^e Lord: namely bycause he fulfilled How the wicked serue God. hys will in ouerthrowyng of Ierusalem, although he ment farre otherwise. So many in dede do the will of God, but not with that minde to serue hym: but the godly onely haue a regard to that, wherefore they may truly be called the ser­uauntes of God. And Dauid to amplifie that sayde: Because I am thy seruaunte Psal. 116. and the sonne of thy handmayden. For hee whiche is borne of a handmayden is not onely a sernaunt: but also is borne a seruaunt, for the child foloweth the condition of the mother. But to serue is sometymes all on with that whiche o­therwise To serue is religiously to worship▪ we say to worshyp, & seruitude is a worshyppyng or Religion whiche is geuen vnto God. The Hebrues call it Abad and Aboda, neither displeaseth it me so to vnderstand Paul, as if he had said: I was once a persecutor, but now I am a worshipper of Iesus Christ. And in this phrase of speache is to be sene the Hebrue phrase, wherby Abraham, Moyses, Dauid and Iob, and many other are commēded, for that chiefly, bycause they were y ^e seruauntes of God. But that in other tongues is not counted an honor or praise, but the Hebrues do after such maner commēd the most excellēt men. Wherfore in Esay the 49. chap. it is sayd vnto the people of Israell, that it is not a thyng of small wayght, to be the ser­uaunt of the Lord. And vndoubtedly to acknowledge the true God and to wor­shyp him, is the head and chief poynt of wisedome. In that that he sayth he is the seruaunt of Iesus Christ, that is, of our saluation, of our kyng and Priest, it foloweth, that they to whom he writeth, should gladly and willyngly receaue & heare hym. He claymeth also vnto hym selfe an other title, namely that he was called to be an Apostle. For there are manye kyndes of seruices: for some are Prophetes, some Apostles some Euangelistes. &c. He declareth now presently by what kynde of seruice he pertained vnto Christ: namely bycause he was his Apostle: whiche degree is the chiefest in the Churche, and he doth not arrogantly clayme the same vnto hym selfe, as thoughe he hym selfe vsurped it. For he affirmeth that he was called: wherby he sheweth the great power and strength of the word of God, by which God most mightely bryngeth to passe what soeuer plea­seth hym. Neither, to call is any thyng els as touchyng God, then to bring to How God is sayd to call any thing. passe or els to appoint any thyng. Wherfore by creation it is sayd that he called those thynges, whiche were not, as if they had bene. And the Prophetes write, that he sometymes called pestilence, famine, and the sword, that is he brought to passe that they should bee, and raunge abroade among men. They amonge vs are sayd to be of excedyng great power, whiche bryng to passe great thyngs onely by their commaundement. Therfore we attribute the same thyng vnto God, bycause by hys worde and callyng he maketh to consiste what thynges so euer he will. Apostles, in the Greke are called, sent, yea and Christ also in the [Page] Epistle to the Hebrues is called an Apostle, that is, sent of the father: and this his Christ hath communi­cated his Apostleship vnto his disciples. dignitie he hath cōmunicated vnto his Disciples, for he sayd: As my father hath sent me so send I you. And in that Paul sayth that he was called he sheweth that he was called when he thought nothing of it, but was occupyed otherwise, for he was persecutyng the Churche, and was taken in the very crime it selfe, and as the Grecians say, [...], that is, in y ^e very acte. By which place they whiche defend workes of preparation may see, that Paul had none such: vnles a man will say that to persecute the Church was a good worke. They are wont to obiect that God had a regard to hys zeale, purpose, and hys good entent: and therfore had mercy vpō hym. For it is written vnto Tim: that he obteyned mer­cy, 1. Tim. 1. Paule ac­knowledgeth that merites were not the cause of his calling. A place to Timothe expounded. bycause he did it ignorantly and of infidelitie. But Paul acknowledgeth no merite to be the cause of his callyng, when he sayth vnto the Galathiās: When it pleased hym, whiche is in Greke [...]. And to Timothe: and I haue obtey­ned mercy that God should in me first show hys long sufferyng, & that I should be an example of those whiche should beleue. So he vtterly ascribeth his callyng vnto the mercy of God and not to his merites. But where they alledge, bycause I did it ignorauntly and of infidelitie that is therfore sayd, to declare that there neded mercy, where so perillously reigned ignoraunce and infidelity: not that in­fidelity and ignoraunce whiche are sinnes, should deserue pardon. And by thys prerogatiue, that he is an Apostle by callyng, he stoppeth the mouth of hys ad­uersaries, which sayd he was not an Apostle, bycause he was not cōuersāt with Christ: he aunswereth them that notwithstādyng yet was he called of hym. And agaynst those whiche sayd, that he had fallen from the Iewishe Religion, he ex­cuseth hym selfe, bycause he obeyed God whiche called hym. But althoughe it here appeare not by whom he was called, yet vnto the Galathians it is expres­sed. For there it is written, not of men, neither by men. For that whiche the Grecians call, Apostles, the Hebrues call Scheluthtls, Ierome interpreteth that Hierome maketh three ma­ner of sen­dinges. some are sent of God and not by men, as Moses, Esay, and Paul: other are sent of God, but yet by men as Elizeus by Elias, Dauid by Samuel, and as there were also many other: other are sent by men onely & not by God, as they which are set ouer Churches not by iust election, but by affection of the fleshe, or by fa­uour or giftes. And these can not be deposed, for as much as they haue the ordi­nary maner of institution although they can not be counted chosen of God: last­ly there be other whiche thrust in them selues, neither are they sent of God nor yet of men: as at this day do many Anabaptistes, whiche beyng moued onely of their owne will, breake into the ministery. This was the office of Paul, & of the other Apostles to execute this functiō in Christes stede, which thing in Paul god dyd illustrate by many miracles, to the end there should be no doubt therof, for as much as it was not knowen vnto men, for they had not sene him conuersant with Christ. There is also added an other title, whereby Paul adorneth hys What was the putting a part of Paule. name: namely that he was put apart for the Gospels sake, to declare that hys vo­cation, whiche hee hath now made mencion of, had hys begynnyng euen of the predestinacion and election of God. And in the Epistle whiche hee writeth to the Galathians he manifestly openeth the nature of such a puttyng a part when he sayth, that hee was segregated from hys mothers wombe, that is elected, not rashlye, but with great wisedome and obseruation. Hereby we learne that that is false which some men thinke, namely that some men are borne good, and o­ther some euill: Vndoubtedly we are all borne the children of wrath, neyther is We are all borne in sinne. there any inequalitie, as touchyng byrth, but it is the predestination and electi­on of God, wherby we are vnited and grafted into the members of Christ: al­though some of the fathers sometymes sayd, that therefore some are predesti­nate of God, or separated from other, because he foresawe that they would vp­rightly vse both grace and also frée will: howbeit they speake not that out of the wordes of God. Neyther did Paule at any tyme vse thys reason, yea rather he sayd of Iacob and Esau: before they were borne, or before they had done any [Page 3] good or euill. &c. Which reason, had sclenderlye commended the grace of electi­on, which then chieflye hee entended to doe, if it should be vnderstand accordyng to these mens interpretation. For a man myght haue sayd: although these being little ones had as yet done nothing in acte and in very deede, yet as tou­ching the prouidence and sight of God, vnto whom all thynges are present, they had done both good and euill: accordyng vnto the which they were eyther pre­destinate or reprobate. And by thys obiection, the argument of Paule should haue bene very much weakened. Farther, to rēder this cause of y ^e electiō of God, it was not so hard a thing, y ^e the Apostle should haue needed to stoppe the mouth of man, complayning of the iustice of God. Which thyng yet hee doth, when hee sayth: But who art thou O man which aunswerest vnto God? Hath not the potter po­wer ouer the claye, of one ond the selfe same lumpe, to make one vessell to honour, and an other to contumely? And he cryeth out, Oh the depth of the riches of the wisdome and knowledge of God: how vnsearchable are hys iudgementes, how inuestigable are hys wayes? which thyng vndoubtedly neded not to haue bene spoken, if the questi­on might so easily haue bene dissolued. Adde thys also which he saith in an other place. It is not of him which willeth, nor of hym which runneth, but of God which hath compassion. And agayne, he hath mercy vpon whom he wil, and hardeneth whō he wil. Wherby is manifest, that we are chosen to saluation, not by our workes fore­seene, but of meare goodnes. But the knowledge of election and predestina­tion hath a double vtilitie: fyrst that we shoulde not dispayre in aduersitie, but The knowledge of predisti­nation is profitable. rather remembryng that we were deare vnto God, before the foundations of the worlde were layde, and that he hath not onely elected vs, but also called vs and iustified vs, we shoulde not doubt, but that he hath a care ouer vs, so that he euen now also will not forsake vs. It is of force also to represse our pryde, that we shoulde not bee puffed vp for our workes or holynes of our life, know­ing that we haue these thynges onely of the election of God. And hereby al­so it manifestly appeareth that God chooseth vs not for our good workes which hee foreseeth: for as much as they are comprehended in predestination. For whom God hath predestinated to saluation, vnto those same also hath he appoin­ted to geue both grace and meanes, whereby they should come vnto saluation. These are the two principall vtilities which the knowledge of predestination bryngeth vnto the electe. Wherefore they which haue such cogitations of it, that Who abuse the know­ledge of predestina­tion. they are driuen to desperation, as though they coulde finde no remedye wherby to auoyde reprobation: or ells doe put so much confidence therin to liue losely and at pleasure, saying that it maketh no matter, for that, seing they are prede­stinate they can not be condemned: what doe they els, but most wicked­ly abuse a good thing? Euery thing ought to be taken by that part wherby it may be holden. For a sworde is not drawē by the edge or by the blade, but by the Euery thing must be taken by that part wherby it may be hol­den. hafte: neyther is a vessell taken by the middest of the bellye, but by the handle or eare. So predestination ought to be referred to the commodities now de­clared, and not to those thinges which may engender destruction. These notes and these titles hath Paule affixed vnto hys name, that we shoulde not thinke hym to be a wandryng man, which rashlye sowed contentions concernyng re­ligion, and that we shoulde vnderstand that there is a great difference betwene Apostles and other common ministers: although there be some which dare teach, that we must no lesse beleue the Byshop of Rome, then Paule y ^e Apostle. I graūt in deede that eyther of them do both thunder and lighten, but yet after a farre diuers and sundrye manner. The Pope thundreth and lightneth with bulles, belles, gunnes, and weapons of warre: but Paule hath by the worde of God, The Pope and Paule do diuersly thunder and lightē. by admonitions, rebukinges, wholesome doctrine, & by miracles thundred and lightned in the Church. But let vs see by what reason these men defend theyr opinion. They say: the byshops succeded the Apostles, wherefore both haue one and the selfe same authoritie, and to both ought we to obey a lyke. But [Page] we aunswere them thus. It is true that the Apostles departyng out of thys world, left Byshops to be gouernours ouer Churches: but we vtterly deny that Apostles & Byshops are not of lyke autho­ritie. Byshops succeding the Apostles, are endued with the selfe same or lyke authori­tie: and that thyng we proue after thys sorte: Fyrst, because we see that the A­postles were to thys end chosen, to constitute the religion and dignitie of the Gospell, and to publishe vnto the beleuers, the thynges which they had heard of The diffe­rence be­twene the Apostles & Byshops. Christ. But byshops are to this ende instituted, to defend those thynges which are conteyned in the Gospell, and in the holy Scriptures: which they must so take in hand to defend, that they adde no newe thynges vnto them, nor fayne a­ny new traditions at theyr owne will and pleasure. Farther, the holy fathers which were Byshops, when they gaue them selues to wryting, do confesse, that they are onely intreaters or interpreters of the holy Scriptures, and will not that those thinges which they write, should be had in so great authoritie as we attribute vnto the Canonicall Scriptures: yea rather they forbidde that any credite should be geuen vnto them, if they speake any thyng agaynst the holy Scriptures. Thyrdly to the Apostolicall doctrine were adioyned many mira­cles, wherby theyr authoritie is confyrmed: which thyng we see is not done in these traditions of the elders. Farther, we are sure that the Apostles wrote by the inspiration of the holy ghost: which thing vndoubtedly we dare not af­firme of our Byshops. Wherefore we conclude, that the Apostles could not erre in those thynges which they wrote. But we see that the Byshoppes very often tymes made vngodly decrees as touchyng rules of religiō, as it appeareth in y ^e Counsell of Ariminum, and also in the seconde Synode of Ephesus, and also in many other, yea and they also erred very much in their actes. At Chalcedon and Chryso­stome deposed. Constantinople were Synodes gathered together, in which Chrysostome was condempned and deposed: which thyng also was done in the name of those By­shoppes which were of a ryght and perfect fayth. And there myght be alleaged many examples of the lyke sorte. Paule also writing vnto Timothe, prayeth hym to saue that which is geuen hym to keepe, declaryng, that he ought neither to adde nor to diminishe any thyng of the doctrine of the Gospell receaued: that is, to keepe iustly the thyng committed vnto hym. Let thys also be added, that the Apostles be so vnto the Bishops and Ordinarye pastours, as in the olde time were the Prophetes vnto the high priestes and priestes. For they myght write bookes, and adioyne them vnto the Canonicall Scripture. For Samuell added hys bookes vnto the Scripture. Esaie, Ieremie, and the other Prophets, added theyr Monuments vnto the Scripture: which thyng the Scribes, Priestes, and high Priestes could not doe. The Apostles called the Gentiles, and abrogated the ceremonies of the lawe: which thing was aboue y ^e power of the high priestes and priestes. The Apostle doth therefore set forth hym selfe by these titles, that Why Paul ascribed vnto hym selfe these titles. when we read hym, or heare hym, we should thinke that we heare not y ^e wordes of a man, but oracles from heauen. Here is also put in the prayse of the Gospell, which must bee read by a parenthesis, and the same extendeth euen vnto thys place, where he sayth:

To all which are at Rome. &c.] The Gospell to speake brieflye, is the prea­chyng The grosse definitiō of the Gospell takē of the matter. of Christ offred vnto vs to saluation, accordyng to the promises made in the olde tyme. Thys commendation is taken of the matter, which is entrea­ted of in the Gospell: because euery science and facultie hath hys dignitie of the thyng, that it intreateth of. Afterward is geuen an other definition, and that is An other definitiō of the Gospell takē of the efficient cause. taken of the strength of working, namely that the Gospell is the power of God vnto saluation: that is, the instrument wherby Christ would haue vs saued. De­finitions takē of these causes ought to be ioyned together, to the end to haue the more full knowledge of the Gospell. In that it is sayd:

VVhich he had before promysed. &c.] It is a preuenting, where­by hee declineth the enuious name of newnes. For the Gospell was coun­ted a new doctrine. For they which heard Paule, thus reasoned with them [Page 4] selues: The olde Patriarches and the Prophets had saluation, and a Church, and yet they wanted your Gospell: therefore thys doctrine is not necessary, yea rather more then needeth. Here Paule confesseth that the elders were saued, but The doc­trine of the Gospell is not newe. not without the Gospell. For in as much as God had before promised it, by the fayth of thys promise they were all made safe. But now it appeareth new doc­trine vnto you, because ye haue ouerwhelmed thys promise with humane tra­ditions, and haue made it obscure with your owne inuentions. Thys selfe same argumēt may we at this day make against our aduersaries, which cry out that we bryng in new doctrine. Vndoubtedly we go about no new thyng: but they haue vtterly brought in straunge and new thynges, of which there is no menti­on at all made in the holy Scriptures: yea we know that very many thinges which they defend, were receaued long after y ^e Apostles tyme, out of the decrees or Synodes of Byshops. And if there be any, whose originall is not certainly knowen, yet doe not the holy Scriptures make any mention of them. But here the Apostle doth for thys cause commend hys Gospel, because it was before pro­mised by the Prophets in the holy Scriptures. All these thynges haue a wonder­full When the promise of the Gos­pell beg [...]n. emphasis. For that which was so long tyme before promised of God, can not be but excellent and wonderfull. And thys promise beganne frō that, which Adam, inspyred with the holy ghost spake: Thys is nowe bone of my bones, and fleshe of my fleshe: which the Apostle to the Ephesians, taketh to be spoken of Christ Gen. 2. and of the Church: and from that also, which was sayd vnto Eue: Thy seede shall Gen. 3. breake hys head in peeces. Afterward it was extended with continuall oracles by the Patriarckes, & holy Prophets, euen vnto the end. Prophets are here taken for excellent men, namely interpreters of the worde of God: and by thys worde are signified all the writers of the Canonicall Scripture, of what degree soeuer they were of. And that which is added: in the holy Scriptures,] pertayneth to this end, to shew that they are not vayne oracles which he citeth, for as much as they are extant in the holy Scriptures. For they are sealed with publicke writings, and ratified and firme by an instrument. And in speakyng of these thynges, he commendeth hym self, which was the minister of so great a Gospell. And by the selfe same meanes he calleth them backe, both from ceremonyes, and also from Philosophie: vnto which thynges they were wonderfully bent. It followeth:

VVhich was made of the seede of Dauid.] The incarnation of the Sonne Howe the sonne of God was made. of God is here touched: and in consideration of the person, he is sayd to haue bene made, although thys agreeth not with hym, but as touching hys humani­tie. But it is sayd: of the seede of Dauid, because vnto Dauid was made a no­table promise, so that Messias was commonly called the sonne of Dauid: as we read in the Gospell, that the Scribes & the Phariseis testified, vnto whom Christ obiecteth, How doth Dauid call hym hys Lorde? By thys place are the wicked Math. 22. heretickes ouerthrowen, which affirme that Christ had a body not of the nature and substaunce of the Virgin, but brought from heauen. They faine vnto them Christ had a true body and flesh of the Virgin Mary. selues this argument. Because our fleshe is subiecte vnto damnation & the curse, therfore it is not very likely (say they) that the sonne of God would take it vp­on hym. Which argument may easily be confuted. For curse and damnation are accidences: wherefore God was able easilye remoue them, and yet keepe whole the nature and substaunce of man. Wherefore he could no lesse geue vn­to Christ a holy and cleane body of the Virgin, then he could out of the vyle clay bring forth a noble and most cleane body vnto Adam. And in that we heare that the sonne of God so abased hym selfe, to take vpon hym humane fleshe, it ought to be vnto vs no small spurre, that nothing be offered vnto vs so hard which for Christes sake we will not suffer. Many demaunde why Christ the sonne of God Why Christ tok [...] vpon hym humane fleshe. tooke vpon hym humane fleshe. And although many reasons might be brought, yet will I bryng that which Ambrose hath rendred vpon this place: namely that punishment myght be taken in that fleshe which sinned, euen as men that are malefactours are there accustomed to suffer punishmentes, where they haue cō ­mitted Ambrose. [Page] great wicked crimes.

VVhich was declared to be the Sonne of God.] Here I can not tell howe the Latine translation had: Qui praedestinatus est: that is, which was predestinate.] By meanes whereof the interpreters had much adoe to declare it aptlye. They myght in deede saye, that Christ was to thys end predestinate, to be the Media­tour and redemer of mankinde. But the thynges which followe agree not ther­with: for the cause of thys predestination, could not be eyther the resurrec­tion from the dead, or effusion of the holy ghost. Therefore we must read it as the Greke bookes haue it, [...], which signifieth, as Chrysostome interpreteth it, [...], that is, shewed, declared, and iudged. The Apostle first entreateth of the veritie of the humane nature: which is hereby she­wed, because he was made & borne of the seede of Dauid. Now he setteth forth the deuine nature. For he sayth, that Christ was by sure argumentes publi­shed, declared, and shewed, to bee the sonne of God. And although here is no mention of predestination, yet is not y ^e Latine translatiō new. For Origene ma­keth Origene eiteth the Latine translatiō. mention of it: who yet followeth it not. For he interpreteth it as it is in the Greke [...]. But how he shoulde cite the Latine translation, there are sondrye opinions. Some attribute thys to hys diligent and painfull studye, which had a care to search out all translations. Neyther is it to be thought that he was ignoraunt of the Latine tongue, for as much as he was called to Rome by Mammaea the mother of Alexander the Emperour. Some thinke that these thynges were not written by the author, but put in by the interpreter. And there are some which thinke that that booke is none of Origenes: among whom is Erasmus. Hierome expounding the first chap. to the Ephesians, playnlye shew­eth Hierome. that we shoulde here reade [...], neyther addeth he the preposition [...]. And vndoubtedly thys worde is vsed, when Magistrates elected, are published and declared. Therefore thys is the sense: Christ which was man in very dede, The signi­fication of this word [...]. The resur­rections is the only signe of the deuine na­ture of Christ. and of the seede of Dauid, was declared, appoynted, and published to be y ^e sonne of God, by the reasons following.

In power, according to the spirite of sanctification, & resurrection of the dead.] Thys kinde of speache being very darcke, hath sondrye expositions. Some thus expounde it, as though it were one onely argument to proue the diuinitie of Christ, namely hys resurrection, which they say was done by power and by the holy ghost. And to proue thys argument to be of great force, they alleage that Christ gaue no other signe, but the signe of Ionas the Prophete, & that also which hee sayd: Lose thys Temple, and on the thyrd daye I will rayse it vppe agayne. Iohn. 2. And it seemeth that some of the Apostles dyd therfore dispayre of the diuine na­ture, because they saw the resurrection to be differred, as Cleophas sayd vnto the straunger vpō y ^e way: We had well hoped that he should haue rysē againe the third day. Luke. 24. An other opinion is, which thinketh that it is one onely argument taken of the sendyng of the holy ghost. For none but onely God can geue the holy ghost: The sen­ding also of the holy ghost is no small token of the de­uine nature of Christ. for by it we are made companions of the diuine nature, and partakers of the minde of God. And thus they frame the wordes: that Christ was declared to be the sonne of God in power, that is to say, to be therby mighty, because he sent vpon hys, the spirite of sanctification, and that from the resurrection of the dead, that is, after he was raysed vp from the helles. For although before also he had geuen the spirit vnto such as beleued, yet because it was not done so largely and so aboundātly, therefore (as Iohn also testifieth) the spirit was not yet geuē. And Iohn. 7. so this argument is taken of the effusion of the holy ghost: which effusion, al­though as touching miracles it be not at this day extant, yet it so indureth, that without it the Church can not consist. For regeneration hath no place without the holy ghost. I leue to speake of this, that some take y ^e resurrectiō of the dead, as touching those which were raysed vp at the death & resurrectiō of Christ, whē the graues were opened: because this agréeth not well with those thinges which afterward shalbe spoken. But me thinketh that here are touched three princi­pall [Page 5] argumentes, wherby Christ is proued to be the sonne of God: One is of the Three ar­guments of the deuini­ty of Christ. miracles, and that is signified by this particle, [...], that is, in power. For [...] with Paule signifieth the working of miracles. An other argument is of the resurrection, whereby he was raysed from the dead, and liueth for euer, and wherby we also shall ryse agayne with hym. The third argument is of the sending of the holy ghost, and these thrée thinges were done, according to the order and course of tyme. For Christ whilest he liued wrought very many mi­racles: after his death he was raysed agayne from the dead, and after his re­surrection sent the holy ghost.

By whom we haue receaued grace and Apostleship.] He had before sayd Paule cal­led by Christ vn­to the Apo­stleship, what grace is. What is the diffe­rence be­tweene the loue of God and the loue of mē. that he was called: but he added not by whom. Here he expressedly sayth, he re­ceaued this of Christ. Grace signifieth in the holy scripture cheifely that be [...]e­nolence & fauor, wherwith God loueth vs. Wherefore we are wont to call those gracious which are loued of many, & are also acceptable vnto many. But this is the difference: they whom we call gracious, haue some thing in them whereby they allure men to loue them: whether the same be beauty or vertue or any such like thing. For men are not moued to loue a man, who hath not in him some thing that is worthy to be loued. But we can not so say of God: because he be­fore all thinges loueth vs, and whē he hath loued he geueth vnto vs his gyftes, whereby he maketh vs both acceptable, and worthy of loue. And if we should af­firme otherwise, God should not be counted the author of all thinges. For by that meanes we should put some thing to be in vs before we were loued of him, which should allure him to loue vs, and so of a creature we should make a crea­tor, The defi­nition of grace. in affirming that we haue something, which depēdeth not of God. Where­fore grace signifieth the liberall fauour and good will of God, which he fréely beareth vnto vs for Christes sake. And this may be taken eyther generally so that it is afterward contracted by adding thys, namely the office of an Apostle: or els it signifieth in this place a gift and faculty fréely geuē vnto Paule: which faculty is straytway expressed, when he addeth.

And Apostleship to the obedience of fayth.] He addeth the ende where­unto The ende of the Apo­stleship. the faculty of the Apostleship pertayneth, namely to obey fayth. And this may be done two maner of wayes: either in receauing faith, for it; forasmuch as it is a firme assent which is geuen vnto the wordes of god, may be called obedi­ence: as Paule wrote vnto the Corrinthyans: that he had spirituall armors, Obedience of sayth. wherewith he would make captiue all vnderstāding vnto the obedience of god. Or els it may be vnderstand of a good life, and holynes of maners, which follow fayth, whyles we expresse the might of our fayth by honest actions.

For his name.] We execute not the office of an Apostle for our owne gayne or glory, but for the name, that is, for the glory and prayse of Christ Iesu. in al nacions. And in that he addeth in all nacions, he sheweth that the office of the A­postles was not contract to certayne limites, but that they should throughout the whole world preach the word committed vnto them, and found Churches and bringe disciples vnto Christ.

In which ye also are the called of Iesus Christ.] Although ye be Lordes ouer all, yet neuertheles ye are in the number of other nacions. He calleth them the called of Christ: because without calling they had not come vnto him. Neyther Called is not here a participle but a now [...]e vsed he the participle which hath the signification of tyme, and that to the ende he would wish them constancye, and stability in the purpose which they had ta­ken in hand, as though they had not a temporall calling, but a firme & constant. And in that he so often vseth the name of calling he sufficiently declareth, what maner of thing our conuersation is when we embrace Christ. It is vndoubtedly voluntary, and not compelled nor violent. We are perswaded, when we are with efficacy called by the inward word of God. Here is the ende of the parēthe­sis, which began at these words, which he had before promised by his prophetes.

Now commeth the second part of the salutation of the epistle, wherein [Page] are expressed the men whom he saluteth, when he sayth. Whome he seluteth. The Church of Rome con­sisted of many naci­ons.

To all which are at Rome, the beloued of God, Sainctes by calling, He saluteth all the Romaines, because at Rome the church consisted not only of towne borne men: but also of an innumerable company of straungers which were partlye Iewes, and partly Grecians. Therfore Paul maketh the salutacion common vnto thē all, so y ^e they beleue in Christ, To the beloued of God, he sayth, which worde ought to admonish y ^t beleuers, to loue one an other: for how can I not loue him, whome I beleue is loued of God? He rightly calleth them the beloued of God, & not those which loue God, because it is he which loueth vs first. And therfore he geueth vs charity and other most noble vertues. He addeth, Called Sainctes. by which worde he admonisheth them of their state past. If they be called to holynes, for as much as there cā be no motiō, but where limites are apointed, therfore they mought well conclude, that they were called from vncleanes and Why the Romanes were called holy. vnpurenes to holynes. Neither say thou: All they which were at Rome, ought not to be called holy, for that there were many there whiche were not absolute, and not yet perfecte: for these thynges let not. For Paule first had a regarde vnto the better sort, and in theyr name and prayse beautified the whole church. For certayne preregatiues of singular members do redounde vnto the other members. Further the Apostle had a consideracion, wherevnto they were cal­led, namely, to be made holy. He sawe, that they were called to the communion Augu­stine. of Sainctes: whereof they also tooke theyr name. And Augustine in his 6. booke against Iulianus, admonisheth vs not to thinke that this woord holynes, signifi­eth This word holy­nes signifi­eth not perfection. perfection. And he citeth a place of Paul in the first epistle to the Cor. where he sayeth: The Temple of God is holy, which Temple ye be: And no man is ignorant but that the Corinthians were infected with many vices. And if we wil serche out the strenght of the significacion of the worde Sancti, that is Sainctes or holy, as the same Augustine teacheth in his booke, de Symbolo & fide, it cometh of this Whence this word holynes is deriued. worde Sanctio, that is, to constitute. For that is called holy, whiche is constant and firme, and appoynted to abyde: but nothing more letteth vs, to abyde for euer then doth sinne: for it is sayd, that the reward of sinne is death. Therfore it cometh to passe, that holynes consisteth chiefely in the forgeuenes & remissi­on of sinnes. Frō which sētence that disagreeth not which Paul hath in the first to the Cor. when he sayeth, after he had rehearsed a cathaloge of enormious sinnes: And these thinges were yee sometymes, but nowe yee are washed, yee are sanctified. But the forgeuenes of sinnes is had by the holy ghost. If that we shal call any thynge holy by reason of preparatiō, they mought truly be called holy, which haue beleued in Christ, because that by the grace and spirite of Christe, they are prepared to glory, and highe purenes of lyfe to come. Ambrose semeth Ambrose. to searche out, who are they which are called, the beloued of God and called Sainctes. And he aunswereth, that these are they, which thinke well of Christ. If thou wilt agayne demaund, what those are, he aunswereth: That those thinke What those be that thinke well of Christ. well of Christ, which thinke that we ought to put our confidence in hym only, and that in hym is perfect saluation. And of it may be concluded as of contra­ries, that they thynke not well of Christ, which trust in theyr owne strengthes or workes: which thinge such as doo, are not to be nombred amonge the called Sainctes, and beloued of God, as Ambrose now speaketh of them. The called, he nameth Sainctes, because men of theyr owne nature are not able to attayne Holynes is not the cause of calling. vnto holynes, vnles they be led by the celestiall might of the holy Ghost. And this is not to be left vnspokē of, that men are not therfore called of god, because they are holy, but that they are therefore holy because they are called. Paul doth not rashely vse this kind of speach, because y ^e Iewes, for that they had theyr original The Iewes claymed holynes vnto them­selues on­ly. frō the holy Patriarches & Prophetes, boasted that all holynes consisted in theyr stocke only: as thoughe other nacions were so wicked, that it shoulde be counted an vnlawfull thing to communicate with them this proprietye of ho­lynes. But now yt is manifest, that through the grace of Christ it is brought to [Page 6] passe, that as well the Gentiles as the Iewes haue obtained the prerogatiue of ho­lynes in an equall balance, so that they haue the fayth of Christ. Here we see also, that Paule in placing of these two wordes, obserued a iust order. For fyrst he setteth, to the beloued of God, before, called Saintes: because that holynes A t [...]im [...] placing of wordes. breaketh forth of no other thing, then of that charity and loue wherewith God loueth vs. And he might haue set forth the Romanes with other most ample ti­tles: namely that they had the dominion ouer the whole world, & ruled ouer all. But passing ouer these things, he speaketh only of y ^• things that are of more va­lue, & chiefly, because it was not expediēt to flatter y ^• Gentiles more then y ^• Iewes: and especially because there was risen no smale discord betwene both nacions: Wherefore he ouerskippeth those titles, which were proper vnto y ^e Romanes, & he toucheth the cōmon prayses of all such as beleue, that they which were of the Gentiles, and they which were of y ^e circumcisiō might in that church be the bet­ter vnited together betweene them selues. But we may not therfore be afrayd, It is law­full to call Princes by their titles. both to salute, and also to call Princes by their proper titles. For in so doing, we both admonishe our selues what we owe vnto thē, and also we put thē in minde of theyr duety. For Paule also when in the actes of the Apostles he made an o­ration to Agryppa, was not afraid to call him by the title of a king. Hetherto we haue expounded the second parte of the salutation, that is, what they were whom Paule saluteth. Now let vs see what good thinges he wisheth vnto them.

Grace saith he to you and peace. &c.] By y ^e name of peace, he vnderstandeth What peace sig­nifieth with the Hebreues. after the maner of the Hebrues, the increase of all good thinges. For as the Eth­nikes say [...], that is, grace, & salutem, that is, health: so the Hebrues say. Schalom, that is, peace. And in the olde testament this salutatiō is oftē vsed. Yea and Christ also comming vnto the Apostles sayd: Peace be with you. And he com­maunded Luke. 24. the Apostles that into what house soeuer they entred, they should say: Peace be vnto this house. To this salutacion commōly vsed among the Hebrues, Math. 10. Paule addeth this word grace, which word is not often found in the olde testa­ment Grace is ioyned with peace. added vnto salutations. But Paule herein nothing offendeth: For it aunswereth vnto his vocation, for he was a preacher of grace, and in the meane tyme admonisheth them to whom he writeth, that peace is not to be looked for, that is, the heape of all good thinges, from our owne strengthe and merites, but from the grace of God. He sheweth the roote, and putteth it fyrst, from whence other good thinges are powred vppon vs, that we may haue the childe together with the mother. Yet let vs not perswade our selues, that whilest we Perfect peace is not had whilest we lyue here. lyue here, we can haue absolute and perfect peace: how beit it shalbe encreased dayly, and Paule wisheth that they might now haue it begon, and when tyme shal come, to haue it at full. And yet neuertheles we obtaine it presetly by Christ if we haue God pacifyed towardes vs. For afterward it is written: Now ther­fore Rom. 5. being iustified by fayth we haue peace towardes God: out of whiche flow­eth tranquilltty of conscience, and somuch of the spirite and deuine comfort, that what soeuer happeneth, we take it in good parte. Wherefore in the middest of tribulations & tormentes, this fyrme peace was not taken away frō holy men. For they gaue thankes vnto God, and they iudged that all thinges in these their Peace which pas­seth all sence. afflictions were done for the best. And this is that peace, which passeth all sense and humane reason. When he sayth:

From God the father & from our lord Iesus Christ.] He sheweth y ^e fountaine and beginning, from whence these good thinges should be hoped for. For they An argu­ment of de­siring and hoping for the thinges which we pray for. come not of our owne strengthe and workes, but of the mercy of God. And hereby we are encoraged to desire and to hope for these good thinges, which Paule wisheth for. For seing that God, of whome these thinges are desired, is both good and also our father, he will without all doubt geue vs them. And Christ for asmuch as he is our mediator and redemer, will not vndoubtedly de­ny vs them. He is called Lorde, which name is very agreeable vnto him. For Why Christ is called lord, all thinges are geuen him of the father, and he hath paid the price for our salua­tion, [Page] therfore he is iustly called Lord which name we may suppose that he hereby obtayned, because the Hebrues neuer pronounce the holy name Tetra­grammaton, whiche is Iehouah, but pronounce it by other wordes, that is by Elohim, or Adonay, which signify might and dominion. Whereby it semeth it came to passe that the 70. interpreters, whē they red this name Tetragramma­ton, turned it by this word [...], which is Lord, as it appeareth in many pla­ces, of the which we will bring one: The Lord sayd vnto my Lord. Where in the fyrst place is written Iehouah, which they turned, Lord. Wherefore when Christ is called Lord, it is as much as if he had bene called God. Although Ter­tullian agaynst Praxea sayth, that Christ is called Lord when he is ioyned with Tertullian the father. For then the father is called God. If the sonne being ioyned wyth him should also be called God, the Ethnikes might thinke we put more Gods then one. Wherfore to withstād their supersticiō, we make this word Lord an Epitheton of the sonne. But if we name Iesus Christ by himselfe and alone he is playnely called God, as it appeareth in many places of the scriptures. And he vseth a certayne similitude: as a beame of the sunne when we make mencion A simili­tude. of it by it selfe, we cal it the sun, and we say that the sun entreth in at our win­dowes. But when it happneth that the sunne is also to be named together with the beame, we do not call the beame by the name of the sun, but we say it is the beame of the sun. But the fyrst reason is more fyrme: and by that that Paule de­clareth, The equa­lity of the father and of the sonne The salutacions of Paul are not vayne. The office of saluting is to be re­tayned a­mong Christians. that peace is to be looked for of vs as wel frō the son as from the father, is shewed the equality of eyther of them betweene themselues. And the saluta­tion which Paule euery where putteth before his epistles, is of no small force. For if the blessinges of the fathers were of much force, that is, the blessinges of Nohe, Isaac, Iacob, Moses, and of other, vndoubtedly the prayers of Paule also are not to be counted vnprofitable. And for as much as we sée that both nature and the holy ghost abhorred not from this kinde of office to salute one an other, the same maner and vsage is still to be retayned. But we must onely take hede that we salute not any man dissemblingly, and thinking an other thing in the hart, do it onely in outward voyce or writinge. Otherwise saluting is an in­strument not a little apte to admonish vs of loue towardes our neighbours, and that our neighboure may vnderstande what loue we beare vnto him. And thus much touchinge the salutation. Now let vs come to the Exordium, that is, the beginning: wherein Paule very much laboreth to winne vnto him the Romanes, and chiefely for that, that he exceedinglye reioyceth that they are come to Christ.

First, verely I geue thankes vnto God, through Iesus Christ, for you al, because your faith is published, through out al the world. For God is my witnesse, whom I worship wyth my spirite, in the Gospell of his sonne, that without ceasing, I make mencion of you alwayes in my prayers: beseechynge that at one tyme or other, a prosperous iorney might happen vnto me by the wyll of God, that I may come vnto you. For I am desyrous to see you, that I might bestow among you, some spirituall gift, to strengthen you withall: that is, that I might haue consolation together with you, through the mutuall fayth, whiche both ye and I haue. And I woulde not that ye should be ignorant brethren, how that I haue oftentimes, purposed to come vnto you (but haue bene let hetherto) to haue some frute among you, as I haue among other of the nacions. For I am debter both to the Greekes, and also to the Barbarous, vn­to the learned, and also vnto the vn learned: so that as muche as in me is, I am redy to preach the Gospell, to you of Rome also.

All writtinges in the beginning are wont to tend to this ende, to get the The ende whereunto the begin­ning of hys talke tendeth. good will of the hearers, as much as is possible: which thinge Paule here doth, and first in that he sheweth them how he geueth thankes vnto God for them. He declareth the cause thereof, namely, for that their fayth was now published throughout the whole world. And he affirmeth, that he cōtinually maketh pray­ers for them, that they might goe forward as they had begonne. Farther he sheweth that he is exceding desirous to see them present. And thereof he sheweth causes, namely, both to comfort them, and also to confirme both himselfe and them. And he addeth this also, that he desireth to do these things euen of duety. For by reason of his Apostleship which he executed, he acknowledged himselfe debytour vnto all nacions. And he thereunto addeth, that for that cause he is not ashamed of the Gospell. And so concludeth he his Exordium. Here let vs first marke, that it is the duety of a Christian mind, to geue thanks vnto God, What thing is most con­trary vnto enuy. as well for the good thinges of other men, as for his owne: which thinge is cleane contrary vnto enuy, whose nature, when it is of great force, is to be sory for an other mans welfare: or when it is not of great force but somewhat remisse, yet at the least it little regardeth, or reioyceth in y ^e prosperity of others. He sayth that he geueth thankes vnto his God. It is not to be doubted but that God of his owne nature is common to all, and yet the Sainctes do make The saints call God theyr God. him proper vnto themselues, not to this entent to exclude their fellowes and partners, but they are prouoked thereunto by a certayne priuate feeling of the goodnes of God, which stirreth them vp to vse this kind of speach. Besides this they perceyue that certayne thinges are singularly graunted vnto them, which vnto other are not geuen. In which consideration we reade that God named himselfe the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob: when as yet he was the God of all men. Paule geueth thankes for the fayth of the Romanes: for which thing contrarily other men were angry and offended. Wherefore we see that in the Christians and in the vngodly there is a farre sundry mynde.

Through Iesus Christ.] He geueth thankes throughe him: because by the Thankes are to be geuen through Christ. selse same all good thinges are deryued vnto vs. And it is meete, that by thys selfe same mean, they return vnto the author again. For we with our infirmi­ty and weakenes wherewith we are infected, do pollute the good and frce giftes of God, when they are bestowed vpon vs. Wherefore if they should be refer­red vnto God, as we haue them in vs, they should easely waxe vile: but tho­rough Christ they are purged, and being through him offred vnto God, they are made a sweete sauour. Paule is in a maner in all his epistles stirred vp, to geue thankes vnto God for theyr giftes vnto whom he writteth: because he de­sired nothing more, then that the name of God shoulde be sanctified and hys kingdome enlarged, which thinge when he saw to haue successe, straight way he brake forth into geuing of thankes.

Your fayth (sayth he) is published throughout the whole world.] As though he should haue sayd: I do not in vayne geue thankes vnto God, neyther do I alone perceaue the benefite of God towardes you: but the whole world doth now vnderstand, how deare you are vnto God. Wherefore it must nedes be that the fayth of the Romanes was feruent and liuely, and which wrought by charity: otherwise it coulde not so easily be published throughout the whole world. Neyther was this a smale worke of God, that the Gospell was spred The Gos­pell was wonderful­ly spread a­broade in the tyme of Paule. The excee­ding great idolatry of the Ro­manes. abroad so quickly, that in Paules tyme (as he here testefieth vnto the Romanes, and also vnto the Collossians) it was amply sowed throughout the whole world. But by this word VVhole we must vnderstand the principal and chiefe partes of the world, and without doubt it was wonderful meruellous, how the Romanes being ouerwhelmed with supersticions (for when they had ouercome the world, they called vnto themselues deuelishe Gods out of all partes of the world) at the length should repent, and geue their mindes to the true religion. Further in that Paule sayth, he geueth thankes & prayeth for them, he admoni­sheth [Page] them what they should do, namely that they also should geue thankes and The childrē of God do fynd in eue­ry creature occasion of geuinge thankes. pray for him. Let vs in this place behold, that it is the nature of the children of God, to fynd in euery creature occasion to geue thankes vnto God, for this is their endeuour, continually to seeke God, but he is euery where. Wherefore forasmuch as they perceaue him to be euery where, they geue him thankes for all thinges: for that there is nothing so discommodious but that some way it turneth them, to good. On the contrary part we may sée, that the vngodly and The vngodly do neuer truly geue thanks vn­to God. the children of the deuill are neuer at rest, neyther haue they any thing so com­modious or quiet, which troubleth them not. And whilest they alwayes fixe their eyes vpon molestious and greuous thinges, they neuer from their hart geue thankes vnto God, yea they alwayes both blaspheme him, & are vnquiet. He commendeth vnto them the fayth which they had receaued to the ende they should not lightly regard or esteme it. And the alteracions of the Church of Rome are much to be lamented, which being here so highly praysed for the re­ligion The church of Rome hath degee generated. The church hath not al­wayes the selfe same abiding places. which it receaued, hath afterward so degenerated, that it is now made the seate of Antichrist, whereby we are admonished that the Church abideth not alwayes in one and the selfe same state and place. It dayly chaungeth his abiding places, and wandreth from nation to nacion. There were not long agoe in the East, most noble Churches, namely, at Hierusalem, Antioche, A­lexandria, and Constantinople, where at this day reigneth the filthines of Ma­humet, and those Christians which liue there, are addicted vnto infinite super­sticions, and do by litle and litle degenerate into a straunge religion. Where­fore the sentence of our sauior is most true, wherein he pronounced, that the last should be first, and the first last.

Neither is thys to be lefte vnspoken of, that the Apostle myndyng to com­mend the Romanes, which had receaued the Religiō of Christ, calleth the same Religion is called fayth. Religiō fayth: to the end we should vnderstād, that therof depēdeth our holines. Thou shalt find y ^t same kinde of prayse ascribed vnto y ^• Thessalonians in the former A praise ge­uen vnto the Thessa­lonians. Epistle the. 1. Chap, where Paul writeth that they were a paterne & an exā ­ple to all them whiche beleued, both in Macedonia, and also in Achaia: so that their fayth was now euery where published. But of the Romanes the admira­tion is y ^• greater, as Chrisostome testifieth: for as much as they had most large Chriso­stome. What things might feare away the Romanes from bele­uyng. dominions, abounded in riches, and ouerflowed on euery side with pleasures: all which thinges make men to shrinke from sound religion. Farther it was meruellous, that they gaue credite vnto the Iewes, men otherwise hated of all nacions, being also fisher men and vnlearned, and as touching the world men most abiect: & especially whē they had heard preached vnto thē a man that was crucified, conuersante in Iewrye, whome they had neuer seene, and were taughte to hope, that all good thinges shoulde come vnto thē from him, which had bene so cruelly put to death: neither was there any felicity promised thē in this life: but the crosse, persecutions, and all aduersities: moreouer they were commaunded to leade a straite lyfe, to put away pleasures, to dispise the world, and to mortefy wicked affections. All which thinges do rather withdraw men from any religion, then allure them vnto it.

For God is my vvitnes.] After that he hath shewed how he gaue thankes unto God for them, he addeth the perpetuall memory that he maketh of them in his dayly prayers. And all these thinges tend to this ende, that they should perceaue that Paule loued them. For these thinges neither are found, nor can be found without beneuolence and a singular charity. Neither affirmeth he these thinges simply, but ioyneth vnto them an othe. For his chiefe care was that they should geue credite vnto him.

whom I serue in my sprite.] By spirite he vnderstandeth a mynde inspired What the spirite sig­nifieth. with the holy ghost. And Ambrose when he interpreteth this place, sayth, that the spirit is the minde, wherewith we ought chiefly to worship God. For he is a spirite: and therefore it is meete that he be serued inspirite. The false Apo­stles [Page 8] accused Paule as a forsaker of the law, & an Apostata from Moses. Wher­fore the crime of impiety was layd to his charge, which should excedingly haue alienated the mindes of the Romanes from him, if they coulde haue bene so perswaded. Therefore he purgeth himselfe, that althoughe he worshipped not Why Paul so often putgeth him­selfe. A place to Timothe expounded. God with the ceremonyes of Moses and rites of the law, yet neuertheles he ser­ued him in spirite. Which thing he testified also vnto Timothe, when he wrote that he had from his progenitors worshipped God with a pure conscience. By which words we must not thinke, that he excuseth his sinne and persecution agaynst the Sainctes: but only sheweth this, that it was not agaynst his conscience, as some, which by reason of weakenes suffer not those things to take place, which by a sound iudgement of the conscience they know to be vpright. Paule fell of ignoraunce, which without doubt was sinne: but not of that kinde, that it should be sayd, that he did agaynst that which he thought in his mynde. But that which he sayth here, that he serueh God in spirite, Christ expressed, when he spake vnto the woman of Samaria, sayinge of the true worshippers, that they should worship in spirite and in truth. And that was spoken to this ende, to The true worship­pers wor­ship in spi­rite and in truth. expres that one day it should come to passe, that the describing of any certayne place wherein God should be worshipped, should be taken awaye, and the cere­monies of the Iewes should be abolished: so that, to worship in spirite, may be referred vnto the place and ceremonies of the lawe: and that which is added, and in truth, declareth the thinge it selfe, excluding shadowes whiche were set­forth in the olde Testament. These did in deede helpe the fathers in theyr tyme, because they had the worde of God ioyned with them, which might be cōpre­hended in them by fayth. Wherefore God blessed them: so that (if fayth were present) they were in their tyme very profitable: but when Christ came they ought to geue place. But as touching rites inuented by men, we can not in like maner say that they much profited, bycause they had not the worde of God. Therfore they are worthely to be extingueshed and put away: excepte some of them, as touching outward pollicy, may be iudged profitable. We serue in spi­rite, when no part of our flesh is any more circumcised, but the mynde and vi­ces: beastes are not slayne, but we crucify our owne fleshe with the lustes there of. Which selfe same worshipping in spirite Paul in an other place expressed, when he sayde: I desyre you throughe the mercye of God that ye geue your bo­dyes a lyuely sacryfyce holy and acceptable vnto God, and that your woorshyppynge be reasonable. He vseth this verbe [...], from whence they saye is deriued this word [...], which signifieth that worshipping which is dew vnto God [...] Augustin [...] only, whereby we vtterly addicte our selues vnto him: neither can it (as Au­gustine testefieth in his 5. booke De ciuitate Dei the first chapter:) be expressed, by one word of the Lattins. For pietas, that is, piety or godlines, is not only to­wardes God, but also towards our parents and country. Also Religio, that is religion, is not drawen onelye to holye thinges, but also belongeth to that due­ty which we owe vnto kinsefolkes, and humane affinityes. But in the meane Augustines distinction betwene [...] & [...]. while he iudgeth that, by the Greke wordes, diuers thinges are in thys thyng distincted: so that this worde [...], signifieth the worshipping which is geuen vnto God, and [...]. the worship whiche is geuen vnto Princes and magi­strates. As touchinge the thing we easely graunt, that there is a difference. For we worship God after one sorte, and we honour Princes after an other man­ner. Chrisostome in hys. 33. homelye vpon Iohn sayth: that it longeth vnto the Chryso­stome, The body of Christ created. A similitude The reason why the worship of Christ depē deth of his deuinity. creature to worshippe, and vnto the creator to be worshipped. And he obiecteth vnto him selfe, why doo we woorship Christe a man, when as he hath in verye deede a body created? He answereth: No man when he would reuerence a king sayth vnto hym, Put of thy purple garments, and laye away the crowne and other ornamēts: for I wil worship thee naked, he dareth not speake these words but honoreth hym beinge both clothed which purple, & adorned wyth a crown. So we, when we worship Christ, do not put away his humanity from hys deuyne [Page] nature, but worship it together with it: But the reason whereon adoraci­on dependeth is hys deuinity. But as touching the Greeke wordes, [...] is al [...] & [...] as touching the Greeke words sig­nity one and the selfe same thing. [...] to to serue for a re­ward. Augustine one with [...]. For as Suidas testifieth [...] is [...]. But afterward it was vsed to signifye [...], y ^• is, godly to worship. And he addeth, [...]: that is, a hired bondage. And this signification is manifestly had in xeniphon in his. 3. booke of the education of Cirus: where the husband speaketh thus: [...]: that is, Vndoubtedly O Cirus I will spende euen my life, rather then she should be brought to bondage. Then the wife answered, [...]. Yea and we reade in the holy scriptures that in Leui­ticus it is sayd: you shall not do any seruile worke, [...]. And [...] in Iob is called an handemayden. And Augustine also himselfe in his booke Locutionum Deut: acknowledgeth that [...] is not alwayes referred vnto thinges deuine. For where as it is sayde in Deut. the 28. chapter. Thou shalt serue thine enemyes, in Greke it is sayd [...]. And Paule likewise when he affirmeth himselfe to be a worshipper of Iesus Christ writeth [...], where­fore thou seest that this difference of wordes is not obserued among the Greci­cians. Howbeit they haue a worde whiche is proper vnto the worshipping of God called [...]. but whether it be a woord vsed among good and olde au­thors, [...] Augustine [...] I know not. Augustine in the place already alledged Deciuitate Dei, maketh mencion of an other word called [...]. But that properly belongeth vnto rites and misteries. For it is sayd that Orpheus fyrst taught the Thraci­ans misteryes. Wherefore that woord was deriued of the Thracians, turning Whereof [...] is deriued. this letter [...]. into [...]. But to returne to [...]. it is deriued of [...], which parti­cle signifyeth vehememcy, and [...], which is to tremble. For seruauntes do excedingly tremble at the commaundementes of theyr Lordes. The same am­bignitye is there in thys hebrue worde Schaah, which signifyeth to prostrate himselfe and to bowe downe. Wherefore we reade oftentymes Hiskaim, that is, they worshipped, and Histauh, that is, a bowing downe: and in the plurall We pro­strate our bodies both before God and before creatures. number it is sayd Histauidoth, that is, prostracions. And that honour of pro­strating the body, and bowing the knees is not done before God onely, but al­so before kinges and Aungels. For it is a simbole or token whereby we repre­sent our submission and lowlynes. The elders vsed other signes also in wor­shipping. Wherefore Chrisostome, in an homely which he hath when he expoun­deth Chriso­stome. Simboles or tokens of the el­ders in worship­pyng. Augustine what we signifye whilest we prostrate our selues before God. these wordes of Iohn, the true worshippers shall worship in spirite and in truth, sayth: When thou shewest thy handes, openest thy harte, liftest vp thy face vnto heauen, and openest thyne eyes, what other thing els doost thou, then shew the whole man vnto God. Augustine De ciuitate Dei, in the place now al­leaged, sayth that this [...] is a religious and humble submission: which I vnderstand so to be obserued, that when we prostrate our selues before God we signify that we wholy submit our selues vnto him, and that as touching al things without any exception. But if we fal down before an Emperor or king, we signifye that we submitts our selues vnto him, as it pertaineth to his go­uernment: but yet not wholy, because we wil euermore haue god and his word excepted. And in these outward signes which are to be geuen vnto Princes, a Christian must obserue the maners of the countrye, makyng a difference in his mynde betweene ether subiection: and let hym chiefelye beware that herein he How bow­inge or pro­strating is to be geuen vnto men. This honor is not to be geuen neyther vnto images nei­ther vnto the bodies of the dead. do nothyng conterfeately: farther let him not geue these signes, but vnto them whome he by the precept of God is commaunded to reuerence: that is, vnto all those which are put in any high authoritye, whether the same be spirituall or temporall. But let him not in any case prostrate himselfe before Images: forasmuch as that is expressedly prohibited. Yea he must not also shew any such honor of bowing the knees, or inuocation, vnto the sainctes that are dead. For there is no word of God concerning that thyng: neyther can we when we do thys, leane vnto fayth: neyther know we whether they heare vs, or vnderstand [Page 9] what thinges are done among vs. And we must take bede, that when we ho­nour. Princes and fall downe before them, we desire not any thing of them through flattery, which lieth not in their power to geue vs: as is to aske eter­nall life, spirituall giftes, conseruacion of life and such like. But of a king let vs desire the helpe belonging to a king: of learned and wise men, to communi­cate theyr doctryne: of rich mē, to deale somwhat of their goods. These ar the cir­cumstances which we must vse. And to speke briefely, this worshipping of god, which is to serue in spirite, is reduced vnto fower principal points: which are a­doracion, To what principall poynt the worship­ping and adoracion of god must be reduced. trust, inuocation, and geuinge of thankes. Adoracion is an humble and religious submission, whereby we vtterly submitte our selues vnto God, and that in al thinges: Trust is, wherby we rest in him, considering the power, wisedome and high goodnes, wherewith he is adorned: For whiche thinges we cleane vnto him, neither do we thinke, that he will forsake, or frustrate vs. In­uocation is: whereby we flye vnto God, in al perils, and aduersytyes: as which know that he is euery where at hande, and that, accordinge to his promises, he both can and will succor vs with his defence. Geuing of thankes is, wherebye we referre all good thinges vnto him, as vnto the firste author. These fower things, are due vnto God onely, neyther can they, as we haue defined them, be By what meanes the deuill hath darckened this wor­shipping of god. ascribed to other creatures. The Deuil hath with much deceat, diligently tra­ueled to obscure this kynd of worshipping, when he perswaded the worlde, that men might in deede principally, worship one chief God, and in the meane time, adioyne vnto him a number of lesser Gods. Whereby came to passe, that that was deuided, which God would haue most of all vnited and ioyned together, & so the Ethnikes were deceaued. Farther in our times, such certayne distributi­ons and proper offices, are so distributed vnto those which are numbred among the saintes, that very oftentimes, inuocation is made vnto them: This moreo­uer God is worshipped with reue­tence of the childe to the father. is to be considered, that that which Paule sayth: To serue in spirite compre­hendeth a fatherly reuerence, that is, of the children, towarde the father, and not a seruile feare: wherewith the Ethnikes being perswaded, hated the iudge­ment of God, and would haue no God to be at al. Wherfore they haue alwayes applied theyr cogitations vnto fayned religions, and they performed certayne outward woorkes, whereby they thought themselues, ful of all pietie: and yet in the meane time they absteyned not frō witked actes. But godly mē, foras­much as they serue him in spirit, are careful that they faine not vnto thēselues a God, after theyr owne fansy: but do embrace him, euen as it hath pleased him to declare himselfe, in the woorde of the scriptures. And when they see that he is God must be wor­shipped as he hath de­clared in the word of the scripture. set forth vnto vs in the holy scriptures, as a Lord and father, they worship him, obey him, and study to aduaunce his honour, as muche as they are able. And agayne, when they see hym declared as a iudge, they set his iudgement seate be­fore theyr eyes in all theyr actions, lest they shoulde transgresse in any thinge, and incurre the anger of theyr mighty iudge. But they doe not so feare hym, that they hate hym, or that they woulde flye from hym: yea and thoughe there were graunted them a place to flye vnto, they woulde chose rather to em­brace him punishing and chasteninge them. And amonge these thinges whiche oughte to haue the principall place, as touchinge this spirituall worshipping, God is worshipped by obedi­ence. is obedience: wherof we rede, that it is better then sacrifices. Neyther had God a regard in a manner to any other thinge in the whole lawe, and rites of cere­monies, than to haue men truly subiect and obedient vnto him. But we foras­muche as we haue contracted a corrupte and viciate nature by the sinne of Adam, are in nothyng more diligent and exquisite, then to obtrude our own in­nēcions, and fayned rytes, for the worshipping of God: and greater seueritye is vsed agaynst the transgressors of the Commaundements of men, then there is agaynst those which publikely violate the Commaundementes of God. A man shall euery where see blasphemers, whoremongers, adulterers, and periured persons laughed at by the magistrates, so farre are they of, from punishynge [Page] them. But agaynste hym whiche will vse the sacramentes of the Euchariste in both kinds they rage euen vnto the fyre. And to be brief, men are condemned to death for neglecting of humayne traditions: but for violatinge of the lawe of God, they are not so muche as once accused, Wherefore God did not without a cause in Deut. commaund Moyses: Onely the thynges whyche I haue commaunded shalte thou keepe: neyther shalte thou adde nor diminyshe any thynge. And we haue A remedye agaynst hu­mane tradi­tions. no pr [...]sēter remedy against this pestilence, then dayly to be occupied in the holy scriptures, and to gather out of them, by what meanes God would declare him selfe vnto vs, and to picke out such wayes whereby he hath chieflye commaun­ded vs to worship him: & in thus doyng we may w ^tout any great difficulty serue god in spirite. And contrary to this spiritual worshiping is, to serue god in flesh To serue God in flesh. that is, onely wyth fayned rytes, and outward ceremonies, laying away faith and inward piety. This Antithesis or contrarye posicion Paul touched, when he sayd vnto the Galathians. Yee which began in the spirite, beware ye end not in the flesh. Those Galathians were rightly instructed: but by the deceates of false Apostles, they declined vnto the Iewishe ceremonies, and outward rites: which thyng was to fynish in the flesh, that whych was with holynes and vpright [...] begonne. Vnto the Philippians also he sayth: We are the circumcision, whiche serue God in sprite, hauing confidence in God, and not in the flesh. Then he manifestlye de­clareth What it is to trust in the flesh. what it is to trust in the flesh, saying: Although I, if any other, may put con­fidence in flesh: as whych am of the kindred of Israel, of the tribe of Beniamin, an Hebrew borne of the Hebrewes and of the secte of the Pharisies, by feruentnes persec [...]tinge the church of Christe, and as touchinge iustifications of the lawe I was conuersante without blame. &c. Thou seest nowe that carnall woorshippynge consisteth of all these thynges. But spirituall worshippyng consisteth altogether of fayth and chari­ty. Paule addeth:

In the gospell of his sonne:] By which wordes he declareth, that thys spi­rituall Nowe God is serued in the Gospell of hys son. worshipping, if it be expressed in outward workes, consisteth principal­ly in this, y ^e we should preach Christ, & that we should allure vnto him, as much as lyeth in vs, as many of our neyghbours as we can. He hath alreadye decla­red what God he called to witnes: now he goeth to the thyng which he woulde haue signifyed vnto the Romanes. And that is, that he contynually made men­cion of them in his prayers. Neyther can it hereby be gathered, that Paule did alwayes so praye, that he neglected other duetyes. He preached, he iorneyed, be laboured with hys handes: and fynallye he executed all such thinges as per­tayned vnto hys office. Wherefore we must not expound those thynges, which are here spoken, accordyng to the word, but according to the sense: and we must vnderstand them no otherwise thē that, as often as the Apostle prayed, he made mencion of them. And the prayers of the Saincts are deuided into two kyndes. Two kindes of prayer. For there are certayn which are appoynted, as whē they are had in a publique congregation at appoynted and prescribed dayes, the Lordes day (I say) and if there be any other oppoynted by the Church for publike prayers. Farther it is y ^e duety of a Christian man, to haue euery day also appoynted haures, wher­in to pray vnto God, and that three times in a day or fyue tymes or seuen times as hys busines wyll suffer him. There is an other kynd of those prayers, which are called vncertayne, for we vse them so often as any present daunger vrgeth vs. But Paule sayth now, that he alwayes maketh mencion of these men in his prayers: and in some bookes is added this aduerbe [...], which signifyeth euery where: althoughe some exemplars haue put it out. There were heretikes which were called Messaliani: and of them Tripartita Historia maketh mention. An heresye of the Mes­salianits or Euchites. They attributed all things vnto prayers, and that so much, that they vtterly de­rogated both the word of God, and also the sacraments: affirming that al these things do nothing profyte: but what commodity soeuer we haue, the same cō ­meth by prayers: and they could not abyde to labour wyth theyr handes, or to do any other thing. If a man had vrged them to worke they would haue said [Page 10] that that nothing profyted, for as much as we oughte to do nothinge but pray: when as yet the Apostle expressedly admonisheth, that he whiche laboureth not, ought not also to eate. He also wryteth, that a man must not neglecte to haue a care ouer his owne, especially his houshold: which fault if any man commit, he should be counted euen as an infidell. But omitting this superstition, we ought The chil­dren or God ought to pray often. to attribute much vnto prayers, forasmuohe as this is the nature of the chil­dren of God to geue themseltes oftentimes to prayers: for that is to ac­knowledge the prouidence of God. For whilest we beleue, that a man can ob­tayne nothyng, whych is not geuen him of God, we are oftentimes prouoked to emplore hys ayde for such necessities as happen. And whilest we pray, we doo no lesse submitte our selues vnto God, then is the clay subiecte vnto the potter: for this thing we chiefly desire, that whatsoeuer we require, we maye haue the same through his wyll. And forasmuch as when we pray, the mind is led away from cares, and worldly prouisions, and is wholye caryed vp vnto God, there ought nothing to be more pleasaunte vnto vs, then to occupye our selues wyth thys kinde of study. And it is much to be lamented, that the manner of praying is so worne out of vre at this day amonge Christians, that it is a thynge ve­ry rarely vsed: and especially in so great a light of the Gospell and scriptures: wherfore it is no meruaile though all things waxe so cold. Vndoubtedlye heate A Simili­tude. there encreaseth, where the light cannot easely go through, but is beaten backe againe, and as they say reflected backwarde. Wherefore this lower part of the ayre, which compasseth the earth, is most hot, because the beames of the sonne which strike vpon the earth, forasmuch as they cannot pearse it being so thick, are reflected, & in a manner doubled: whereby is stirred vp heat. In like manner ought it to be in our harts, when the light of gods woorde shyneth vpon them. For when we haue receaued it, we oughte to reflect it vnto God, in makynge prayers vnto hym, to performe those thinges in vs which he hath commaun­ded, and which he hath vouchsafed to reuele vnto vs. For when we reade the scriptures, God speaketh vnto vs. But when we pray, we speake vnto God. A profita­ble dialoge betwene God and vs. And we ought to vse this dialogue very often, that when we heare in the holy scriptures that God eyther reuealeth himselfe, or commaundeth any thinges, we agayne may desire of hym, that those thynges be not spoken in vayne vnto vs, but maye be executed wyth profyte and fruite. Paul teacheth vs here so to order our prayers, that we pray not onely for our selues, but also for our neigh­bours. Farther, when he prayeth that he myght haue a prosperous iorney vnto the Romanes, he signifyeth that our workes should beginne with prayers, if we wyll haue them to haue good successe. But some are feared away from cal­ling vpon God because they say he heareth them not. Howbeit they ought here­by Though God seme not to hea [...]e yet we must not leaue of from prayer. to be strengthned, for that they heare that Paul was oftentymes letted from goyng vnto Rome, and yet contynued he still in the same desire, and vsed to re­peate the selfe same prayers. Yea and in the latter epistle to the Corrinthyans he writeth, that he desired as good as three tymes, to be delyuered from the pricke of the flesh, vnto whom yet at the last aunswere was made, that it suffi­sed that he had the fruicion of the grace of God. Wherefore eyther God hea­reth vs at the length, or if he geueth not vs that which we desire, yet geueth he somewhat in steede thereof, which is farre better and more profitable vnto our saluation. And God oftentymes differreth our requestes, to the ende that (as Why the Lord dif­ferreth our requestes. Augustine sayth in a certayne homely) we should learne to desire great thinges with much feruentnes. Others are called away from prayers, because they thus determine with themselues: although I desire not these thinges, yet God wyll do that which shall seeme good vnto hym: neyther shall hys wyll be alte­red Why God will haue vs to aske that which o­therwise he is redy to geue. by my prayers. But these men vnderstand not that God, before he graun­teth any good thinge vnto hys elect, is wont excedingly to kindle their mynde wyth a desire to obtayne those thynges. Farther when he will do any thynge, he stirreth vp those that are hys to desire the same whereby he myght for ho­nours [Page] sake attribute that vnto theyr prayers, which otherwise he would haue done. Thys is an other cause also, for that benefytes are then the more accep­table, when they are required and desired. Farther when we pray, our mynds A simili­tude. are the more ioyned wyth God. Yea these vowes and holy defires seeme to be nothyng els, then ladders and degrées, whereby we ascend vp vnto God. But let vs returne vnto Paule, and sée for what he now prayed.

That I may haue (sayth he) a prosperous iorney, to come vnto you, by the vvill of God] He desired to come vnto the Romanes: wherefore hys prayer was that impedimentes myght be remoued, whiche were partly obiected by Sathan, and partly had theyr begynnyng of sondry necessityes of Churches, which impedimentes, as they dayly hapened a fresh, so they with held Paule, that he could not go whether he would. A prosperous iorney he calleth not only as touchyng commoditye of the lyfe, but also a fruitfull iorney, that hys laubour What ma­ner of pros­perous ior­ney Paule desired. might not be spent in vayne. He remembred also, that he was by the oracle of God prohibyted some tymes to speake, or to go, whether he had appoynted. As we may sée in the Actes the. 16. chapter: where he was forbiddē to speake in Asia: and when he would haue gone into Mysia, and Bythynia, he was letted, and by night admonishrd in a dreame, to get him vnto Macedonia. For there stoode before him a man of Macedonia, which sayd: Come and succour vs. This thyng therefore he desired as touchyng the Romanes: namely, that he might not haue any such impediment. And though we heare, that he desired a prosperous ior­ney yet we must not perswade our selues, that he referred these thynges to his owne commodity or to gayne. The prosperous iorneys which God graunted What prosperous ior­neyes God gaue vnto Paule. him to Macedonia, serued to the increase of the Gospell. For otherwise he was both beaten there, and also cast into prison. And when at the last he shoulde go, vnto Rome, God, which heard hys prayers, brought to passe, that he was com­pelled to appeale vnto Cesar. And when he was in a shippe wracke, he bad hym to be of good chere, for that he should be, a witnes of Christ at Rome also, as he had bene at Ierusalem, whereby appeareth what prosperity or successe is to be What prosperity Christians ought to looke for. looked for in the workes of the elect. Vndoubtedly that kynde of prospe [...]cy is to be looked for, not wherein the fleshe may rest, but whereby may come aboun­dant fruite of the Gospell. And whereas the Apostle sayth, by the will of God, it is not so to be vnderstād, as though he thought that any thing could be done be sides the will of God: but he desireth such a will, which should fauor and pros­per hys enterprise that his labour myght not be in vayne. And he addeth:

For I desire to see you.] Thys myght sufficiently haue bene vnderstand by hys prayers. And yet is it not superfluously added. For he woulde not haue them thinke that hys prayers were slyght and common prayers, but such as procéeded from a perfect and iust desire. For we must not coldely desire those thynges whiche we implore of God in our prayers. This was Paules care to­wardes Paule had a care ouer the Chur­ches of God. the churches. Eyther he went thether hymselfe, when néede required: or when he could not goo, he wrote, or sent some that were very deare and nigh vnto hym. Hys charity did alwayes burst forth into acts, which myght profite hys neighbours. He sawe that the saluation of the Romanes was now at hand: therefore he would aduaūce it also by his labour. And in that he prayeth in his prayers for a prosperous iorney, it is nothyng els, but to desire to be sent, euen as Esay offred hymselfe, saying: Behold Lord I am redy, send me. And the same Paule sayd: He which desireth a bishoppricke desireth a good worke. Furthermore it Holy men desire to be coupled & ioyned to­gether. is a perpetuall affection of good men to desire to be ioyned together, forasmuch as they haue hym to be their God, which is euery where in the holy scriptures called the God of vnity & peace. Moreouer their meetinges together are not without profyte. For alwayes there is some increase of the spirite and grace of God and it séemeth that God geueth strength vnto the members of Christ, then chiefly, when they are ioyned together. Which sentence some abuse, when they cry, that we must geue credite vnto Synodes and counsels, as though god can [Page 11] not permitte so holy fathers which haue assembled together, to be deceaued. The assem­bly of By­shops vnto Synods why it is not vnpro­fitable. That holy assembly (say they) of holy men coulde not be had without fruite: but they (as Paul sayth) ought to haue bene such, as had serued God in spirite, had geuen them selues to aduaunce the gospell of God, had powred out pray­ers wyth most feruent fayth, and attempted nothyng of the flesh, or of humane affection, but suffred all thynges to be done by the will of God. But that they performed not these thynges, the euent sufficiently declareth. For they haue brought in many supersticions, and sometymes haue most seuerly decreed things that are apertly against the word of God. I wyl not deny but that those which assemble rightly and orderly, namely, after that maner that I haue now expressed, may bring forth farre greater fruites, then when they deale seperatly and apart. Of thys thyng Chrisostome bringeth a very apt similitude. Burning A similitude firebrandes (sayth he) when they are seperated a sonder, do conceaue and re­tayne within them some heate and light: but yet not very much. But if they be put all into one place, eyther into a chimney or into a fornace, they wyll stirre vp both a very greate, and also a most feruent flambe. In lyke maner must we thinke of holy men, being eyther assembled together, or seperated a sunder.

To bestovv among you some spiritual gifte.] He declareth, why he so much de­sired, to come vnto them: namely, to make them partakers of the giftes of God. The Apostle was a vessell filled with deuyne gyfts: Wherfore, whether soeuer he went, he bestowed and destributed them vnto the beleuers. But forasmuche as God is, both the author, and geuer of all spirituall giftes, why doth Paule here seme to chalenge, or clayme them vnto hymselfe? Forsoth, bycause he was The work [...] of God and of the mini­sters of the Church is ioyned together. a minister of the Church: and God hath so much honored the ministerye, that he also cōmunicateth euen his own proper worke vnto the ministers. For as tou­chyng theyr functions, they are not seperated from God, whych is the authour of them, but rather are so to be ioyned with him, as though one, & the selfe same woorke proceeded from them both. And after thys manner are ministers sayd to forgeue or to retayne sinnes, to beget men vnto Christe, and to saue them. But if thou looke vpon God, and the minister a parte eche by hym selfe, then heare what Paule sayth: I haue planted, Apollo hath watred, but God hath ge­uen the increase. Also, who is hee, whyche planteth? And who is he, whyche watreth? And in an other place he sayth, that the holye Ghost distributeth his giftes By the mi­nisters of the church the faythful are more strayghtly bound to­gether. vnto euery man, as it pleaseth him, and according to his will. But as we haue sayd the ministers must not be seperated from God: who by this dignity which he geueth vnto them, prouideth chiefely for thys, that the faythfull should more streyghtly be bound together in the church. For euen as a citye is counted one because men helpe one an other, when as some are able to geue counsell, other excell in strength, and other in handycrafts and industrye: so would God haue it to be in the church, namely, that some should teach, and other som be taught, some helpe theyr brethren through prayers, some dispense the sacraments, and other some receaue them: to the ende that by these mutuall offices, Christians shoulde bee so bounde together, that the spirite and grace of God shoulde spreade from one member to an other, by ioyntes and cloysures together, as it is wrytten vnto the Collossians and vnto the Ephesians. All these woords are here set as much conducinge to wynne the hartes of the Romaykes: that they should looke for hym chearefullye, and wyth greate loue receaue hym when he should come, as though therewythall they should receaue some excellente gyfte of the spiryte accordynge to hys promise. These thynges serne also to stirre vp theyr mindes to reade hys Epystle. For vndoubtedlye he wrote it for no other cause, but that that whych by presence of hys body he coulde not performe, he myght yet at the least expresse by hys Epistle. Whych self thynge is a cause al­so, why we ought in lyke manner wyth exquisite diligence to reade and heare Horrible blasphe­mies of cer­taine in our tyme. that whych is here written. Neyther must we harken vnto those blasphemers, whiche beyng enemies vnto pietie, and vnto the true doctrine of iustification [Page] and predestination, are not ashamed to crye out and say: I would to God Paul had neuer writtē this epistle. Which saying though they go about to mitigate, affirming that they spake it because of these daungerous tymes, yet bring they not any sufficient excuse. For what is this els, but to reprehende the counsels Assemblies together of Christians ought not to be vnpro­fitable. of God, and of the holy ghost? Further let vs marke that it is not conuenient, that assemblyes together of Christians should be vnprofytable and idle, as pro­phake assemblyes are: but they ought to haue in them some spirituall commo­dity. And thys Greake word [...], contayneth in it a vehement signifycation. For thereby the Apostle declareth, that he will geue nothyng vnto them, but that which he had first receaued of God. For he sayth he wyll make them per­takers of those giftes which he himselfe had now obtained. And in such sort we ought to visite our neighbours, namely, to haue alwayes some spirituall gifts redy to communicate vnto them. And on the other side, we ought to be prompt, With what mind Chri­stiās ought to assemble together. What pere­grinations and what writings are had in the p [...]pacy. easely to receaue, if any spirituall profyte or commodity be offred vnto vs by their commyng vnto vs. But now a dayes they vse peregrinacions or pilgri­mages to images and to worshippe reliques of the dead: and not to succor the liuely temples of Christ. The bishop of Rome writeth sometymes, but yet on­ly pardons, bulles, and curses. He sendeth men to compound and dispence for sondry kinds of sinnes, and to release vowes. But none of these doth he fréely: but they are altogether instituted for gayne, and to scrape mony together.

To strengthen you.] Here is added the cause, why he so much desired to come vnto the Romanes: namely, to strengthen them. This is it which Christ The office of an Apo­stle is to cō ­firme the brethren. commaunded Peter: And thou at the length when thou art conuerted confyrme thy brethren. By these woordes is signifyed, that the Romanes were not con­stante: for they semed now redy to receaue the religion of the Iewes. And yet because he would not offend their mindes, that which he had before spoken of their confirmation, he straight way lenefleth, and mitigateth wyth these words which follow:

That I may receaue exhortation together with you.] Here he knitteth him­selfe also with their infyrmity, as though he also had neede of instruction. And assuredly there is none in the Church placed so high, that he can not receau [...] None so hygh in the Church but that he may be holpen by inferiours. some confyrmacion and edifycation of the weaker. Neyther doth God vse to geue all thynges vnto all men, but that the weake ones haue oftentymes some singular and priuate gifte of God, whereby to helpe the stronger. Wherefore if Paule, which was a piller of the Church, stronger then any yron, harder then the diamond, confesseth that he myght profyte himselfe through these mens ex­hortacion, why shoulde we then doubt of our selues? But if the fayth of the Romanes were so great, that it was now euery where published, what neded they of any confyrmation? We answere, that fayth is in deede of hys own [...] Our fayth needeth al­wayes to be increased nature sure and constant, and if it be such which iustefyeth, it ought vtterly to differ from opinion, that we doubt not of the verity of the other part, but foras­much as we are weake, and do on euery side slippe, being assaulted of our fleshe, the deuill and the world, we haue neede continually of the increase of faith. Peter beleued truly in Christ, when he sayd: Saue me: otherwise I perish. But the Lord sayd vnto him, O thou of little fayth, why doubtedst thou. By whiche wordes Peter was tought, that the daunger hong not ouer him, eyther by reason of the waters, or of the tempest: but through the want of faith. Where­fore these thinges do nothing disagree betweene themselues, that the fayth of the Romanes was to be magnifyed, and that yet neuertheles they had neede of confyrmacion. We might reade that which we haue here interpreted con­cerninge exhortacion, as if there had bene mencion made of consolacion, as though Paule shoulde haue sayde: therefore I will come vnto you, not only to strengthen you, but also to stirre vp a mutuall consolaciyn, and that through the fayth which is found as well in me as in you. For they which mete together when they perceaue themselues not to be of a sundry opinion, but of one and [Page 12] the selfe same opinion, vse excedinglye to reioyce. Wherefore Chrisostome and the Greke annotacions do admonishe vs, that consolacion in this place may be taken for ioy. Neyther ought we to doubt whether this consolacion should be betweene the Romanes themselues, or betwéene them and Paule: Because the wordes which follow, séeme to dispatch that doubt, in that it is sayd.

Through the mutuall fayth, which both ye, and I haue.] Neyther did he rashely make mencion of faith. Forasmuch as the property thereof is, to powre Fayth is compared vnto leuen. it selfe into an other euen lyke leuen: which when it hath leuened one part of the dow, goeth forward into the next part. But they are to be counted as colde beleuers, which to theyr power labour not to make other of the same mynde, that they are now of, which thyng if it myght be brought to passe, vndoubtedly so many should be amended as are drawen by theyr admonishment. For what soeuer sinne we committe, the same commeth of the imbecillity of fayth. And by these wordes, Paul bringeth to an equality those thinges which he hath spo­ken: affirming that there should come a common gayne both vnto himselfe and vnto the Romanes by their mutuall metyng together. And fayth is required on ether party: as touching Paule, that he might be able to obtaine the gifts which he wished vnto the Romanes: agayne as touching them, that they might re­ceaue those thinges, which were to be ministred vnto them by Paule.

I would not that ye should be ignorant brethern.] Ambrose readeth thys text otherwise: after this maner: I know ye are not ignorant brethern, & he expoun­deth it, that the Romanes were certified of the minde of Paule by such as bele­ued in Christ, which continually went to Rome, as by Aquila, Priscilla, and o­thers, who knew right well Paules purpose and determination. But we will follow the common reading, according vnto which the Apostle séemeth to pre­uent them, as though they should haue sayd: why then hast thou differred thy comming vnto vs, seing thou so much desirest it? Paule answereth, that he of­tentymes assayed to come vnto them: but it would not be, because he was al­wayes letted. To the Thessalonians he sayth that Sathan was the let that he could not come to Thessalonica. And in the latter to the Corrinthyans, he ma­keth mencion of a grenous persecution which he suffred in Asia, and that he was tempted aboue his strength, so that he almost dispayred of his life: and therefore hys comming to Corinth was prolonged longer then he had appoyn­ted. But here he expresseth not of whom he was letted. But there might be thrée kindes of lettes. First God, which by manifest oracles sometymes called hym Lettes which might hin­der Paul from going to Rome The Ro­manes seme to be lesse esteemed of Paule then the other nacions. It is not for the ser­uant to en­quire out the counsels of his ma­ster. backe from his appoynted enterprises: as it appeareth in the 16. chapter of the Actes: an other kinde is the necessity of Churches, which euery day increa­sed new and new: lastly aduersities and persecutions, whiche were stirred vp by Sathan. Chrisostome hath noted, that because Paule hath not expressed the cause why so great a city which ruled then ouer all, should be lesse estemed then many other obscurer cities and prouinces, humaine sence and reason myght therefore be offended. But he represseth thys inquision as curious, and which becommeth not godly myndes. It is sufficient (sayth he) that we know that all thynges are done by the prouidence of God. Neyther ought we to thynke, that any mortall man can better prouide for hys creatures, then God himselfe can. Neyther let vs thinke that the Romanes were therefore the worse estemed and prouided for, because Paule came so late vnto them. And he may be an ex­ample vnto vs, not to be much curious in enquiring after such thinges. He hath left the cause vnspoken of, and paraduenture he enquired not for it. As seene as he sawe that he was letted, strayght way he obayed, without enquiring the Chrysostōe was not of thys opiniō that the Romanes w [...]r first conuerted vnto Christ by Peter. causes: for as much as it is not for seruauntes to search out the counsels of theyr Lord. And when I consider these thynges, I thinke I may thereby ga­ther that Chrisostome was not fully perswaded that the Romanes were fyrst by Peter the Apostle conuerted vnto Christe, before Paule came thether. For then answeare might easely haue bene made. The city of Rome was not vtterly [Page] forsaken of God, whilest Paule was occupied otherwhere: for Peter preached God per­formeth things that are forspo­ken, that is predesti­nate after an other manner & at an other tyme then the sayntes thynke for. the Gospell there. This is further to be noted, that God oftentymes vseth to accomplish those thynges which are alredy appointed, and desired of the saincts to be done, but yet at a farre other tyme, and after an other maner and way, then they decreed wyth themselues to doo it. Iacob when he heard that Ioseph hys sonne should be worshipped of hys brethren and also euen of hys parents, began to thinke that to be a thyng odious, and which coulde not be brought to passe without excéeding great troubles. And therefore he did not gladly geue eare vnto it. And yet did God performe the same: but yet by a far other meanes then he thought. So that Paule should go to Rome, it was both decréed by the prouidence of God, and also he excedingly desired it: but it came to passe farre otherwise, then euer Paule thought. For he when he came to Ierusalem, and was so euill handled there, that he was in daunger of hys lyfe, was compelled to appeale vnto Cesar: and God vsed that occasion to sende hym to Rome, which he afterward shewed vnto hym by a vision, when he suffred shipwracke. For he sayd vnto hym: Euen as thou hast borne witnes vnto me at Ierusalem, so also shalt thou doo at Rome. Wherefore we ought alwayes to be mindefull of that place in Ieremy, the 10. chapter: a mans way is not in hys owne hand, neyther is it in man, to walke, and to direct hys steppes. It is God which boweth vs, whethersoeuer he will. And though he sendeth not forth his angels, which should expressedly teach vs what he will haue vs to do, yet he is wont to vrge vs by a God vseth necessities and occasi­ons in stead of Aungels Why Paul came so late to Rome. certayne necessity, and to bring in occasions, whereby to driue vs to do that which he hath alredy before decreed and appoynted wyth hymselfe. And yet of the cause of thys delay there semeth somewhat to be written in the last chapter saue one of this epistle. For he signifyeth that necessities of other Churches letted hym, and occasions of preaching the Gospell, which were more commo­dious and more necessary, which were offred him in other places. For there when he had written, that he had nowe filled all places with the Gospell, tho­roughout all those regions, & was very desirous to see them, neyther had any more to do in those regions, he promised shortly to take his iorney toward thē.

To haue some fruite among you also.] Origene complayneth here of the darke construction, or confused readinge, which he very obscurely goeth about Origene. Hyperba­ton. to restore. But in my iudgement it is playne and easy inough if all this. (And I was letted euen to this day) be written by interposition or a parenthesis. For then shall the sentence be, that he was oftentymes redy to come, to haue some fruite among them, as he had among other nacions. He sayth not arrogantly that he will bring them fruite: but rather that he will receaue and take fruite of them. Which fruite was, to be strengthened and stablished in Christ. And Whereby faythfull scoolema­sters are knowne Our de­sires should not preuent the iudge­ment of God. this is a certayne token of faythfull scholemasters, if they count the profyte of theyr disciples, their fruite and aduantage. Although there are some enterpre­ters, which expound this sentence of the reward which should be geuen vnto Paule for preaching the Gospell among the Romanes. But the fyrst interpre­tacion is more playne, and more agreeable vnto the wordes of Christ, wherein he sayth: Ye haue not chosen me, but I haue chosen you that ye should go forth and bring fruite. But Paule semeth by hys desire to preuent the will of God: which thing profitable seruauntes ought not to do. For they must wayte for the commaundement of their Lord, neyther must they resist when he commaundeth any thing. For God was almost angry wyth Moses, for that he refused to go vnto Pharao: and so was he with Ionas the Prophet, because he detracted God some­tymes suf­freth the godly to be deceaued concerning his will, but he streyght­way cor­recteth thē. to go vnto Niniuie. Betweene these two daungers the meane ought to be ob­serued. Paule whatsoeuer he saw that he thought would aduaunce the glory of God, the same did he straight way excedingly desire: which is also the nature of other holy men. In the meane tyme God suffreth them to be deceaued: howebeit he forsaketh them not. For strayght way he boweth theyr willes, whe­ther it pleaseth hym, that is, to those thinges, which do in very deede illustrate [Page 13] hys name. And godly men must beware, that they put not lettes agaynst the We must not put im­pediments agaynst the vocation of God. The Apo­stles desire to go to Rome: was besides hys determina­tion. calling of God. They must bow themselues before God like drawing beastes to be gouerned with the bridell of hys will. Neyther is this to be omitted, that thys desire of the Apostle was besides his determinacion. For he had determi­ned (as it is written in the 15. chapter of this epistle) not to build vpon an other mans foundacion: but there rather to preach Christ, where his name had not before bene heard of.

For I am debtter both to the Greekes, and to the Barbarous, to the learned and to the vnlearned.] Now he addeth an other cause of his will. The fyrst was to bestow vpon them some spirituall gift, to strengthen them, and to take some fruit of thē. But now he sheweth, that necessity vrged him hereunto, least he might haue seemed to haue bene a busy fellow. This necessity is taken of the vocation of God: which vocation was of so great force that he wrote in his first epistle vnto the Corrint: Woo vnto me, if I preach not the Gospel. For now was that office cōmitted vnto him. And by this saying he reproueth the Iewes, which cauelled that he did not well, in communicating the preaching of the Gospell vnto the Gentils. But that ought not to be counted as a fault in him, forasmuch as he was compelled thereunto, by the office cōmitted to his charge. And God had geuen him excellent giftes: and among other, to preach vnto all men. He spake all maner of tonges. These thinges ought they to weigh, which Why God geueth gifts vnto men. haue receaued any giftes at Gods hand. For by them they are made debtters to helpe others. For God will haue them to pay that which he hath decreed to geue. And they are to be meruayled at, which will be counted the successors of Peter and Paule, as the bishoppes of Rome and other bishoppes, how they see not, that they are detters to preach Christ. For euen from Gregory the great, no man hath in a manner euer seene that a bishoppe of Rome did preach. In Spayne, in Italy, and in Fraunce they are altogether dumme. Here in Eng­land bishoppes do in deede preach sometime, but yet not so often as they ought. Domme bishops. But let vs returne vnto Paule. In that he sayth, that he is debtour, he meaneth not that he will bring any thing of his owne: but will bestow those thinges which God had committed vnto him to participate vnto others. And it is as if he should haue sayd. What maner of men soeuer ye be, whether ye be wise men, princes, mighty men, or men obscure, base or vnlearned, God hath made me debtour vnto you. And although I seeme abiect, or vnworthy so great a vo­cation, yet that which I will bring vnto you is not vnworthy to be receaued of you. By these woordes he reproueth the Iewes, which thought, that the prea­ching of the Gospell was due to their nacion only. But Paule sheweth here that same is due also vnto other nacions.

To the Greekes and Barbarous.] All they which were not Iewes were cal­led by thys common word [...], that is Gentles. But now they are deuided into Who were Greekes. Who were Barbarous Greekes and Barbarous. By the Greekes he vnderstandeth men that were more ciuil [...], which were gouerned with good and ciuile lawes, and therefore it was an easy matter to be conuersant with them. But the Barbarous are the wilder sort, which were saluage and fierce, so that a man could not so easely deale with them. Neyther were they excluded from the number of the Greekes, which were not inhabiters of Grecia: so that they vsed their lawes and institu­cions. For there were many straunge nacions whiche vsed the lawes of the Greekes. For the Romanes as we reade in Titus Liuius, sent ten men into Grecia, to bring vnto them the lawes of the Athenians: out of which after­ward Thre [...] kindes of men with Paule. they wrote ten tables. Paule therefore seemeth in this place to make three kindes of men, so that after the Iewes he putteth the Grekes, and last of all the Barbarous, wherefore the Grekes were in the middest betwene the Iewes and the Barbarous. But in other places, when he deuideth men into Iewes and Grekes, by the Grekes he vnderstandeth all kinde of men, besides the He­brues: so that vnder that word he comprehendeth the barbarous also. And if [Page] the Gospell extend so amply, that none are excluded from it, then it manifestly appeareth, that it farre excelleth philosophy: for all men are not made for it. It The Gos­ple more common then Phi­losophy, and the law of Moses. excelleth also the law of Moses, which was obserued of one nacion onely. But the Gospell was published euery where. Hereby Chrisostome gathereth, that for the admitting of the Gospel, there is no neede neyther of sillogissimes of pholoso­phers, nor preparacion of humane sciences. And vndoubtedly we see, that olde women, rude men, and old men, are as apt thereunto, as noble men, rich men and Philosophers. And in sum, there is none so noble or excellente, and agayne none so abiect and vnlearned, but that by the Gospell he may attayne to salua­tion. And Chrisostome also in this place to confirme the dignity of the Gospell, Chryso­stome, An example of Plato. bringeth Plato for an example: who being a notable and most excellent philoso­pher, came thrise into Sicilia, to cure thinges that were then troubled, and to perswade the tyranne, to vse equal and iust lawes. Which his perswasions had no successe at all. For Dionisius became euery day worse and worse, so that at the last he was depriued of his kingdome, neyther was that kingdome any thing the better for Plato, although Plato for that cause put his life in danger and being taken of Pirates was brought into bondage. By whiche example appeareth how weake philosophie is to amend things.

So that as much as lyeth in me, I am redy to preach the Gospell to you of Rome also.] when he sayth, as much as is in me, he signifieth vndoubtedly, that there was some thing, which letted him from comming to Rome. And that is the calling of God, which called him away to an other place. Neyther enten­deth he by this kinde of speach to exclude ether grace, or free giftes, or powers geuen him by the holy ghost: as though he would preach the Gospell vnto the Romanes according to that onely which was in himself: euen as some say, that if men before grace or regeneration do that which lieth in them, God will ne­uer forsake them. But Paule speaketh not so: but sayth: In that I differ my comming vnto you, it cōmeth not of myne owne purpose, but of God, which hath otherwise decreed. For if I were left to myne owne iudgement, I had bene with you long ere this, neyther should any dangers haue stayed me. He is happy vndoubtedly, whiche with so chearefull and prompt mynde is redy to He is hap­py, which promptly followeth the callinge of God. follow the calling of God: as Paule here affirmeth that he is. The thyng which he had in hand made hym prompt: namely, the Gospell: farther the noblenes of the city, through which, if they were once conuerted vnto Christ, he saw that it would easely come to passe, that other partes of the world would be the better wonne. Among those thinges which commonly discourage men from What things are wont to feare men from any enterprise. taking any enterprise in hand, is the ignorance of the euent, also daungers which oppose themselues, paynes that are to be taken therein, and because we haue not power and ability inough to execute that which is taken in hand. But Paule, agaynst the ignorance of the euent, obiected the certenty of the promise, whereby he knew that the heathen should be conuerted vnto Christ: agaynst the dangers, which honge ouer him, he obiected the great aboundance of the gayne: for that he should winne vnto Christ infinite numbers of men. And of what force this is to shake of sluggishenes and slouthfulnes, marchantes do de­clare, who setting gayne before their eyes, passe nothing for the dangers of tempestes, difficulties of iorneyes, and inuasions of theeues. Loue and chari­ty wherewith hys hart was kindled and inflamed, mitigated the paynes that he should take. And as for hys ability and strēgth he was nothing carefull: for that he did put no confidence in those thinges: but depended wholy of Christ, who sufficiently adorned him with free and gracious giftes of the holy ghost, as time and place should require. We may adde the fift cause wherby men ar ac­customed to be called away, ether from the profession of Christ, or from prea­ching: and that is shame: because our flesh iudgeth the Gospell a thing to be ashamed of. And this impediment the Apostle putteth away, when he sayth:

For I am not ashamed of the Gospell of Christ: because it is the power of God to saluation vnto all that beleue, namely to the Iewe first and also to the Greke. For the righteousnes of God is reuealed in it from fayth to fayth, as it is written: The iust shall liue by fayth.

For I am not ashamed of the Gospell.] And hereof he geueth a reason, namely: Because it is the power of God to saluation to euery one that beleueth. In that he writeth, that he is not ashamed of the Gospell, although he spake that vnder his owne person, yet meaneth he thereby to admonish the Romanes, vnto whome he writeth, that they also (though they were highly exalted) ought not to be ashamed of the Gospell. And he vseth the figure Liptote. For he spea­keth not so much as he meaneth. Not to be ashamed, is in this place as much as if he had sayd, I very much glory. And this spake he playnly and without any figure to the Galathyans, saying: God forbid that I should glory in any thing, but in the crosse of our Lord Iesus Christ. But there are many at this day, which We may [...] glory of the Gospell if we receaue it truly and from the harte. boast that they ar Christians & haue receaued the Gospel, which thing I would to God they did truely and frō the hart. For there are to many of them, which if they were well examined as touching maners, are most farre from Christ, and as touchinge rules of religion, if a man beginne to examine them but euen in the Cathechisme, he shall fynde that they neuer vnderstoode any thyng of Christ. That commonly is counted a thing to be ashamed of, which is had in contempt of the world: and that is counted honorable, which the world hath in estimacion, but in triall of the Gospell, our flesh is excedingly deceaued. For How our flesh is de­ceaued whō it iudgeth of the Gos­pel. it thinketh it a thing to be ashamed of as touching vnderstanding, as touching good thinges of the mynde, as touching good thinges of fortune, and also as touching the good thinges of the body. For as touching the minde and vnder­standing it counteth it a thing foolishe, to perswade it selfe of those thinges, whereof it can not render a reason. As touching the good thinges of the mynde, because we can not be iustified by our owne vertues, and excellent déedes. And it thinketh it a very foolishe thyng to cast away the goodes of the body, and so to crucifye our fleshe withall the lustes thereof: and concerning the goodes of for­tune, to take vp our crosse, and by contumelyes and reproches to followe Christ. All these seeme vnto the fleshe thinges to be ashamed of: agaynst which we must continually set this which Paule here sayth: We are not ashamed of the Gospell. This doctrine hath with out doubt many enemyes. And fyrst are Who they are that are ashamed of the Gospel. the Epicures, or rather [...], that is men without God, who thinke that thys Gospell is vtterly a trifle and a fayned thing: and do much meruayle at vs, and deride vs for that we are so carefull and diligent touching it. There are other ciuile men which are gouerners ouer the publike wealth. And these men thinke this doctrine to be vtterly sedicious: and they count it a thyng vnmeete, that preachers, vnder the pretence of publishing of repentance and preaching, should be permitted to reproue the vices of magistrates and princes, and after a sort to accuse them vnto the people. And thys say they is nothyng els then to rent in sonder publike welthes. There are also hipocrites, monkes, and other religious persons which cry out that by our Gospell the lawes of God are ouerthrowen, holy ceremonies are contemned, good workes despised, holy Images taken a­way, and (as they say) all deuocions vtterly abolished. With these selfe same aduersaryes was Paule troubled, for the scribes, phariseyes and high priestes, cried out that by thys Gospell whiche the Apostles preached, the lawe of God was abrogated: ceremonies, which the Patriarches and Prophetes had kept, were set at nought: the tribe of Leui spoyled of hys honour: the dignitye of the priesthode made equall wyth the prophane estate: and the publike welth of the Iewes vtterly extinguished. Agaynst whiche sharpe saying thys remedy was to be vsed, namely these wordes: I am not ashamed of the Gospell, whatsoeuer ye [Page] say, or imagine agaynst it. It happened also in the tyme of Augustine and Chri­sostome What manner of things hap­pened in the time of Augustine & Chriso­stome. The Eth­nikes vp­brayde the Gospell vnto those that are cō ­uerted vn­to Christ. Heretikes vpbrayde the Gospell vnto the Catholikes (when that whole cities had not as yet receaued Christ, but that there were in one and the selfe same city both Christians and also idolatrers) that if at any time a noble or welthy man had taken vpon him the name of a Christian, his affinity, kinsefolkes and frendes would come vnto hym and say: doost thou beleue in one that was crucified? Art thou not ashamed to commite thy salua­tion to hym which was afflicted with extreme punishement? neyther was he a­ble to saue himselfe? What madnes is this of thee? doost thou beleue in one that was nayled vnto a crosse? Vnto whom he should haue answered (as they say) I beleue in hym that was crucifyed: and not in a whoremonger, in an adulte­rer, an vnchast person, a parrycide, or slayer of his owne children, such as is your Iupiter, Saturne, and other Gods whome ye worshippe. Wherefore I am not ashamed neyther of Christ, nor yet of the Gospell. So also must we auns­were the heretikes, when they say, that it is a thyng foolishe and to be ashamed of, to beleue that the sonne of God suffred in very deede, or that he tooke vpon him very humane flesh of the wombe of the virgine: forasmuch as these things are found in the Gospel, we do wholy beleue them: neyther are we ashamed of the Gospell of Christ. At thys day also, the auncient men do vpbrayde godly The Pa­pistes ob­iecte vnto vs the Go­spell. younge menne, whyche are studious of the Gospel, yea euen theyr own senses and humane reason cryeth agaynst them saying: are ye not ashamed of thys new doctrine? Are ye so blynde, that ye see not that by thys meanes good workes are condemned, the worshipping of God perisheth, the minstery of the church is troden vnder foote, the dignity of priesthode is abiected, ecclesiasti­call riches are vtterly spoyled? what patrones or supporters of learned men, shall ye haue hereafter? Did your elders, which went before you both in thys Mecoena­te [...]. vniuersity and in others, being both doctors & notable men, follow these steps? Vnto these men also ought we to aunswere: we are not ashamed of the Gospell, howsoeuer you speake ill of it. If so be they wil say: we haue the Gospell: yours A collatio [...] of the doc­trine of the Papistes & of the Gos­pell. is a new doctrine. Let vs answere them agayne: In such sort is that the Gospel which ye haue, as that is the Gospell, to set forth fayned worshippinges of god casting away and dispising the sincere worshipping, described vnto vs of God: as it is to worshippe stockes and images: as is to obtrude vowes, whereby such men are drawen away from matrimony, which aboue others haue most neede therof: as is to go on pilgrimages vnto Images, to worshippe the bones of Saynctes, to inuocate the dead: and an infinite number of such other like Wherefore ye ought to be ashamed of your doctrine, and not we of the Gospell of Christ. Let it be diligētly examined, what we by the same gospel iudge of the What ma­ner of doc­trine ours is. honour of god. We attribute all thinges vnto hym only: we wil in all thinges depend of hym only. Farther see what our iudgement is concerning the wor­shippyng of hym. We desire to retayne the same pure and holy, as it is delyue­red vs in the holy scriptures. What do we thinke of good works? we vrge them continually, and requyre to haue them done of vs so perfectly, that we thinke alwayes that something remayneth not perfectly done of vs, vnto whiche we should leuel, and whereunto we ought to direct all our endeuors. What iudge we as concerning the holy ministery? we trauayle to haue it to be in great esti­mation, as by which God worketh our saluacion. What of Sacraments? That they should be kept pure and vndefyled, and be reduced vnto that vse, where­unto Christ instituted them. What iudge we of magistrates? that they should be obeyed, and that we should be subiecte vnto them in all thinges: so that they commaund nothing agaynst the word of God. What of poore and miserable men? that we should helpe, and relieue them. What of publike peace and tran­quillity? That it be kept, yea euen with the los of our goods. What of sciences, and good learning? That they should be mayntained and aduaunced. Why do ye obiect auncientnes vnto vs? There is nothing that we more desire then to haue thynges brought to their olde estate. Ye haue brought in new thinges: [Page 15] we require againe the estate of the primitiue Church, and desire to haue againe the institucions of the Apostles. Wherefore there is no cause why we should be ashamed of the gospel: of which such as complain, do rather lament the losse of theyr commodities, then that they can accuse our doctrine. And if anye Troubles and discom­modities are not to be ascribe [...] vnto the Gospel. troubles or discommodities happen, they are not to be ascribed vnto the doc­trine, but vnto those which vnder the pretence of Christ and of the gospell doo seeke those thinges which are their owne, and not the thinges which are Iesus Christes. But now let vs see Paules reason, why he is not ashamed of the gospell of Christ.

Because it is the power of God to saluacion to euery on that beleueth.] It is the power, that is, the organe and instrument, wherby God sheweth forth hys power to saluation. For together with the woord of God and the gospell, are instilled grace and the holy ghost, and especially remission of sinnes: by whiche we are renewed and made safe. And yet this knittinge together of mans sal­uation, wyth the gospell is not naturall, that is of necessitye, so that the gospell The Gos­pell is not a naturall in­strument, but at the pleasure of God. This diffi­nicion hath the cause efficient, end, and in­strument of receauinge the Gospel. A simili­tube of the Sacra­ments. The sum of the whol controuersy concerning iustificatiō. Why in iu­stification mencion is made chief­ly of the po­wer of god. The diffe­rence be­twene the righteous­nes of the law and of the Gospel. This phrase of speach, to take holde by fayth is not strange nor rare in in the holye scriptures. beyng geuen and set forth, saluation should streight way follow of necessitye. For it is needefull that God doo also inwardly moue the harts of the hearers: as in the Actes of the Apostles we reade it was doone vnto the woman that sold silke. Wherfore the gospel is to be counted an instrument arbitrary, which God vseth according to hys will. Many thynke, that thys definition is taken of the cause efficient. For in it is expressed the power of God, whiche maketh vs safe. Then is added the fynall cause, namely that thys power of God is to saluation: neyther is that lest vnspoken of, whereby we are made able to take hold of so greate a benefyte: and the same is fayth. For it is added to euery be­leuer. For they which come to heare the Gospell, and wante fayth, receaue no­thyng but wordes: and the Gospell to them is no Gospell. Euen as in the Sa­craments, they which are without fayth do in deede receaue the simboles or signes, but they haue not the fruyte and thing of the sacraments. Here is now touched the chief poynt of all the controuersy. For in that it is sayd, that salua­cion cometh of the Gospell vnto euery one that beleueth, is sufficientlye decla­red that we are iustifyed by fayth: and not by works nor by our owne strength nor by philosophy, nor by ceremonies of the law. Neither did he without cause make mencion of the power of God. For that before we can be saued, our ene­myes ought to be vanquished: that is, the deuill, death, hell and in especiall sinne. Hereby playnly appeareth also the difference betweene the righteousnes of the lawe and the righteousnes of the gospell. The righteousnes of the lawe is, to do and to worke. He that shall do these thinges, shall liue in them, sayd Moyses, as it is alleaged to the Galathyans: and shall in this Epistle be after­ward intreated of in hys place. But contrarywyse the ryghteousnes and sal­uation of the Gospell is by fayth vnto all thē that beleue. For it is fayth which taketh hold of the mercye and promes of God: although there haue bene some, which durst affirme, that this kind of speach, to take hold by fayth, is straung, that is, not vsed in the holy scriptures. But they are excedingly deceaued: It is in deede not vsed among the sophisters, but it is read in the scriptures. For to to the Galathians it is wrytten, That we myghte receaue the promyse of the spy­rite through fayth. And he vseth the verbe [...], whiche signifyeth nothynge els then to apprehend, take hold, and to receaue. Also in the Actes of the Apostles Paul speeketh vnto Agrippa the kynge, that he was sente for thys cause, that menne shoulde receaue remission of sinnes, and lotte amonge the Sayntes throughe fayth. Where he also vseth the same verbe. And vnto the Romaynes the 9. chap.

The Gentyles whyche followed not righteousnesse tooke holde of ryghteousnesse: euen that righteousnesse whiche is of fayth. The greeke woord in this place is [...]. Wherfore it followeth, that we speake after the maner of the Scriptures. Neyther is thys to be left vnspoken of, that there are some whiche thinke that this definition of the Gospell is takē of the matter: as though it should be thus [Page] expounded, that the Gospell is the power of God to saluacion, for that in it is set forth and intreated of the power of God, wherby he saueth mankind. And that power is Christ the sonne of God, which was made of the seed of Dauid, ac­cording to the flesh, euen as it is before sayd. So the first definiciō and this lat­ter differ nothing as touching the kynd of the cause. And in deede I dislyke not thys interpretacion, for Paul in the fyrst to the Corinth. calleth Christ the pow­er of God, and the wysedome of God: howbeyt I do more willyngly allow the fyrst interpretacion. Paraduenture some will say, for asmuch as the Gospell is preached vnto many vnto iudgement and condemnacion, and we are (as Paul sayde) vnto manye the sauor of death vnto death, howe then is it called saluacion, or power vnto saluacion? And to the Corint. it is writen, We preache Christe cru­cyfyed, Why the gospel is sometymes vnto con­demnation. vnto the Iewes, in deede an offence: and to the Greekes foolishnes. Hereto we aunswere, that the Gospell is hurtfull vnto them, which trust in theyr owne strengthes, theyr proper workes, and theyr owne reason. But in the same place to the Cor. Paul wryteth: Vnto the called of God is Christe preached, the power of God, and the wysedome of God. Whiche place serueth verye muche vnto the in­terpretation of this sentence. For things ought to haue their name geuen them Thinges must be na­med bi their wne na­ture and not by that which chanseth by hap vnto them. Christ is rightly cal­led a sauior althoughe to many he turne to of­fence and ruine. of that thynge, whyche they haue obteyned of theyr owne disposicion and na­ture, and not of that, which is otherwyse annected vnto them by happe, and (as they speake) per accidens, that is by chaunce. The Gospell hath of hys owne in­stitucion, and by the counsell of God, the propriety to saue. But in that it hur­teth, the same happeneth from without, that is of the infidelity of the receauers: otherwyse Christ hymself could not be called a Sauiour: because he was put for the fall and offence of many. Wherefore when he spake of the Scribes & Pha­riseis, he sayde: If I had not come and spoken vnto them, they shoulde haue had no sinne. But for that he was not to this ende sent, but these euils happened of an other cause, therfore he is called a Sauiour. Notwithstanding many by oc­casion of hys comming perished. For as touchyng hymselfe, he had the wordes of eternall lyfe. And he hymself sayth: The wordes which I speake vnto you, are spi­ryte and lyfe. But manye of them whyche stande here beleue not. Wherefore those thinges disagree not, but aptly agree which these whiche Paul nowe wryteth. What kind of saluatiō we haue by the gospell. Further we must diligently examine, what maner of saluation this is, whiche is brought vnto vs by the Gospell. For politicall or ciuill men do also promise health or sauety by good lawes, and seuerity of discipline. But that is singular, and very contract: for it is only that safety, wherby we are made safe from the iniuryes of men. Phisicions also promise health: but that pertaineth only to the body, that it may be in good case. Souldiers boast also, that they are appointed to the sauetye of men: but that safety belongeth only agaynst the inuasions of enemyes. Yea and handycraftes men say that theyr workmanships are health­full vnto men: but these men also bryng only porcions of sauety. They whiche build houses, do defend vs from the iuiuries of the aire and wether: they which make clothes and garments, do after a sort defend our bodys from colde: but this sauety which is of the gospell comprehendeth all: and contayneth in it the vniuersal summe and head of our conuersation, that is, felicity it selfe and bles­sednes. Felicitye & blessednes come vnto vs of the gospell. By Christe and the gospell we are deliuered from sinne from whēce come all euils, What is the vulgare definition of felicity. This is that saluacion, whiche was shadowed in the old Testament, as often as the publike wealth of the Israelites was defended from oppressers by Iephthe, Samson, Gedeon, and Debora. And that this saluacion, which is now intre­ted of oughte to be taken generally, is proued by a sure reason: for that all these defectes, vnto which the porcions of sauety which we haue now rehersed, were a helpe, happened vnto vs by reason of synne. But by Christ and hys gospell, we ar deliuered from synne: which thyng the Aungell testifyeth, when he sayd vnto Ioseph. For he shall saue hys people from theyr synnes: and thys is to restore vs to true felicity. For felicity (as it is commonly sayd) is to lyue agreably vnto nature. And oure nature is instituted of God, that we shoulde be according to hys Image. And thys particle, to saluation, is necessarily added, because other­wise [Page 16] the power of God is also to take vengeance, to reuenge and to condemne. The power of God is both to sal­uation and to ven­geaunce. A simili­tude But the Gospell is not properly instituted to that ende, but to saluacion. Now if we were once fully perswaded of thys, that in Christ and in the gospell we should haue perfect saluation, we would not so much fixe our mynde on tem­porall thynges, but would alwayes contende thither, where we hope we should haue felicity and blessednes. Euen as princes and noble men do seldome go a­brode into the market place, streates or lanes, neyther do they much passe for the spectacles of the common sort of men: for that they haue at home theyr de­lightes, pleasures, paradises and passing good thinges: therefore they willing­ly tary at home, and if they be abrode, they quickely get them home. So ought we also to vse the good thinges of this world only for the necessities of the body: but we ought contynually to be conuersant in Christ, and in hys gospell, as in our saluation and felicity.

To the Iewe first and to the Greeke.] Here is declared that the Gospell is The Gos­ple is set­forth to all men indifferently. How the Iewes are preferred before the Gentils. set forth vnto all in generall: neyther doth the preaching thereof exempt any kinde of men. The Grecians he taketh here generally, and vnder that worde comprehendeth all nacions besides the Iewes. And in that he sayth, First, he signifieth order, but not greater aboundance of fruite: as though the Iewes should haue more commodity or vtility by the Gospell then the Ethnikes. Of which thyng Chrisostome hath a trimme similitude, when they of full age which were conuerted vnto Christ were baptised at the tyme of Easter or Whitson­tyde, they could not be baptised all together: yet they which were fyrst washed did not more put on Christ, neyther receaued they more grace then they which wer last. Wherfore there is here signified an Analogy or proportion of order: & An analogy of order as touchyng tyme be­twene the Iewes and the Grekes The cal­ling of the Iewes was first. Paule pre­ched first vnto the Iewes be­fore he pre­ched vnto y ^• Gentila. The defini­cion geuen is proued by the effecte. The effect of the Gos­ple is that we shoulde be iustefied The end of the Exor­dium and of the entent of hys treatise The propositiō which shalbe pro­ued euen to the 12. chap. A soft tran­sition. the Iewes, are put in the first place. For Christ was the Apostle of the Iewes, and minister of Circumcision. For he sayd that he was not sent, but vnto the lost sheepe of the house of Israell. And when he fyrst sent hys Apostles, he com­maunded them y ^e they should not go vnto the Gentils, nor enter into the cityes of the Samarytans. But in hys last ambassadge, when he was redy to ascend vp into heauen, he commaunded that they should be witnesses vnto hym in Ierusalem, in all Iewry and Samarya, and then he added euen vnto the vt­termost borders of the earth. Yea and Paule also obserued this order. For first when he entred into any cities, he preached in the Synagoges. And together with Sylas and Barnabas he sayde vnto the Iewes, vnto you oughte Christ first to be preached, whome because ye haue refufed, beholde we turne vnto the Gentiles. The Iewes oughte to haue beene the fyrste whiche shoulde be called, because they had the prophesyes, and Prophetes, and tables in a manner sealed wyth the promise of Christ. Wherefore fayth was fyrst required of them. He proueth thys defynicion now set, not indeede by things before or by the cause (for that is vnpossible) but by the effect, and (as they say) by the latter, when he sayth:

For the righteousnes of God is reuealed in it from fayth to fayth.] That is, the effect of the Gospell and of fayth is, that we should be iustified. Now the A­postle endeth hys Exordium, and commeth to the entreatyng of hys disputaci­on, and thys is the principall proposition, which in sum containeth that which he goeth about to proue through eleuen chapters, that is, that a man is iustifi­ed by fayth. Wherefore this proposition serueth for two thinges, for first it is broughte in as a reason of the difinicion set: And agayne, as the principall proposition of the whole disputacion. And so the Apostle by a soft, pleasant and couert transition leadeth the attentyue hearer from the exordium, vnto the confirmacions and confutacions which follow.

When we heare the righteousnes of God named in this place, let vs not thinke that he entendeth here to speake of the seuerity of Gods iugdements, for that seuerity is not called of the Hebrues Nedech, but rather Tischpat, that is, iudgement: and Tsedtreth, which our men turne, righteousnes, signifyeth goodnes, clemency and mercy, whereby God declareth hymselfe good vnto vs. [Page] And because he doth this chiefely in geuing vs righteousnes: therefore I thinke How this word righ­teousnes is to be vn­derstand. that that word was so commonly turned, and that word in this place (if a man marke it wel) aunswereth vnto saluation, which he sayd before commeth vnto vs by the gospell. And the Prophetes many tymes craue the righteousnes of god: which can not easely be taken euery where of the seuerity of hys iudge­ment. For there is none that is wyse, woulde haue god to deale wyth hym ac­cording to that. Ye rather the saynctes crye. Enter not into iudgement with thy seruaunt. And god declareth thys his righteousnes or goodnes towardes vs, by The mea­nes where­by God de­clareth hys goodnes to wards vs. three thinges chiefely. First he receaueth vs into fauour, forgeueth vs our sins imputeth not vnto death those sins which we commit: but contrarily imputeth rather vnto vs the obedience and holynes of Christ. Secondly he kindleth in our myndes an endeuor to lyue vprightly, reneweth our will, illustrateth our rea­son, and maketh vs all whole prone to lyue vertuously, when as before we abhorred from that which is iust and honest. Thyrdly he geueth vs pure and chast maners, good actions, and a sincere lyfe. All these thinges doth that righ­teousnes comprehend, which is reueled in the Gospell. But the first of these thrée is the head and chiefe, because it comprehendeth the other, and it is sayd to be the righteousnes of God, because it commeth from him to vs. For we attayne not vnto it by humane strengthes. Wherefore Chrisostome here calleth it righte­ousnes [...], that is from aboue, because it is geuen vnto vs (as he speaketh) without our sweate and labours. Howbeit he addeth one thyng whiche must be warely red: namely that we ought to bring [...]. that is, from home, and from our selues, fayth, whereby to receaue thys righteousnes. In which sen­tence, if he vnderstande, that fayth hath hys ofspring of our owne strengthes and nature, we ought not to geue eare vnto hym, forasmuch as the holy scrip­tures apertly testifye, that it is the gift of God, and commeth not of vs, which thinge is expressedly read in the epistle to the Ephesians. But I thinke not that this father was so farre out of the way: wherefore I interprete hym after this The inter­pretation of Chrysostōe [...]nefied. maner: when he saw that this imputacion of god is after a sort set without vs, hys mynde was to declare, that if we will apply the same vnto vs, it behoueth that we haue fayth in vs, whereby we may drawe it vnto vs. But he conten­deth not by that sayinge, that fayth springeth of our selues as of the first roote.

Is reuealed in it.] Some haue vnderstanded, that these giftes of the good­nes of god which we haue rehearsed are reuealed in the gospell, because they are reade and contayned in it: which thyng I deny not: but I thinke that there ought to be added after the Hebrew maner, that (In it) is all one with Paule, as if he had sayd (by it). So that the sense is, in that the participation of thys righ­teousnes and goodnes of god is exhibited or geuen vnto vs, the same commeth by the gospell, so that we receaue it with fayth. Wherefore in this word Re­uealed: let vs marke two maner of comparisons: one is as touching the godly, Twokinds of reuelaciō of the Gos­ple. which receaue these thinges of god, that they myght by that meanes acknow­ledge, feele, and by suxe experience vnderstand those thynges as touching all the three partes of righteousnes, of which before we spake distinctly. For they are not so moued of God, as though they felt not, nor knew by experience, such thinges as are done. But they which are only lookers one, and not doers of the matter, neyther see the fyrst part of righteousnes, nor yet the second: for that they are but naturall men, and the god of this world, hath blynded their myndes, that they shoulde not be able to attayne to these spirituall thynges. But the third portion of righteousnes, which bursteth forth into act, and is set in outwarde woorkes, will them or nill them, is seene of them and they are euen agaynste theyr will compelled to beare witnesse vnto it: as we reade that Pline the yonger wrote vnto Traiane of the innocent life of the Christians. Pliny wrote vnto Trayane in the chri­stians be­halfe. For holy men shewed examples inough, whereby the vngodly, if they had bene wyse, mought haue considered that they were altogether renewed in mynd, and that this kinde of menne is more acceptable vnto god, then other men are. But in these thynges humane wisedome is wonderfully blynded, whiche can [Page 17] geue no iudgement of spirituall thinges: and yet these partes of righteousnes are of their owne nature so ioyned together, that the one depēdeth of the other. In thys sense Paule writeth afterward of the righteousnes of God: If our vn­righteousnesse commendeth the ryghteousnesse of God: where we manifestlye see that the righteousnes of God signifyeth his goodnes and clemency. But now let vs consider thys addition:

From fayth to fayth.] There be so many expositions vpon these words, that if I should rehearse them all, time would not serue me. I will touch only a few of them, and wyll iudge whyche of them seemeth to me more probable, and nyer vnto the truth. Some vnderstand, from the fayth of the elders to the faith of their posterity. Others, frō a weaker faith, to a strōger fayth: Others, from the fayth of one article to the fayth of an other. And to make an end of rehear­sing opinions, I wil come to that which in my iudgement is best to be allowed. A double significati [...] of fayth. It appeareth that Paule taketh fayth two maner of wayes. One waye for that assent which we geue vnto God, when he promiseth vs any thing: an other way for the constancy of wordes and promises. And after that maner the fayth of God is commended, as we reade afterward in the 3. chapter: What if some of them haue not beleued? Shall their incredulytie make frustrate the fayth of God? By which woordes he signifyeth, that God faythfully performed that which he had promised. According to this distinction we may say, that this reuelation or exhibition of the righteousnes of God towardes vs, is brought to passe by faith, namely, our fayth, whereby we geue credite vnto God making promise to vs: and that our fayth is both strenghthened, and also confyrmed by the fayth of god: namely, because we see that he hath cōstantly performed the things which he had promised. And this interpretacion Ambrose toucheth in this commenta­ryes: and in my iudgement it semeth very agreeable. It followeth:

As it is written: The iust shall lyue by fayth.] Paule laboreth to proue that we Chrisostom sayth that we are iu­stefied by faith onely. are iustified by fayth: and Chrisostome when he interpreteth this place, testefyeth, that by it only we obtayne remission of sinnes. For he sayth, we way not hope for it [...]. that is, from any other where. If thou aske, why scripture is in thys place cited of the Apostle, the same Chrisostome aunswereth: for that vnto humane reason it seemeth a thing vnlikely to be true, that he whiche was euen now an adulterer, a murtherer, and a committer of sacriledge, should straight way be counted iust, so that he beleue and receaue the Gospell of Christ. These An history of Consta [...] tine. seeme to be thinges passing cōmon capacity, neither can they easely be beleued. For we reade in the Tripartite historie the first booke & 6. chapter, that Constan­tyne the great, which was the fyrst emperour that publikely receaued the Gos­pell, slew many that were of his affinity and kinred, and was the author and procurer, that his owne sonne whiche was called Chrispus, was murthered. Of which wicked actes when he began to repent to hym, he asked aduise of So­pater, the philosopher, who in teching succeded Plotynus, whether there might be any expiacion or satisfaction made for these greate haynous crimes? Vnto whom the Philosopher aunswered, that there could be none. Afterward he as­ked counsell of Christian Bishops: and they aunswered, that all those sinnes might be expiated, so that he would beleue in Christ, and with a syncere fayth receaue his Gospel. Hereby it came to passe, that that Emperour embraced our religion. The author of this history reiecteth this narration as a thyng fayned: and by diuerse argumentes proueth that it was inuented of malicious men, which fauoured not Christian religion. But what soeuer it were, this thynge onely haue I a respect vnto, that they tooke thys occasion to fayne this lye, for that both Philosophers, and also ciuile men iudged it absurde, that a man be­ing vnpure and laden with sinnes, should streight way be counted pure & iust before God, so soone as he receaueth the fayth of Christ. Paul therfore, lest he should seme to be the author of this wonderfull doctrine, from which humayne reason so much abhorreth, citeth a place out of the holy Scriptures, and by it [Page] plainly proueth, that it is euē so. The testimony which he bringeth is taken out Chriso­stome & Ambrose sayling in memory. of Abacuk the prophet the 2. chapter: althoughe Chrisostomes interpretation, as it is in the Greke, citeth the name of Sophonias. But that is not to be merueyled at: because paraduenture his memory failed him. For the fathers as they were men, might sometymes erre. For Ambrose also, when he entreated of this place a little before put (To the Iew first and to the Greeke) sayth that the Iewes were so first named of Iudas Machabeus, which did set at liberty his nacion, when they were by the Grecians brought into bondage. Which saying how vntrue it is, the second booke of kinges testefyeth in the 25. chapter: and also Ieremy in hys 40. chapter: and Hester in the 3. chapter: and Esdras, Nehemias, Daniell, Zachary and other such like places, wherein the surnames of the Iewes is most mani­festly rede, long tyme before Iudas Machabeus was ruler ouer them. Neyther do I therefore speake this, that I would malepartly contemne the authority of the We must not attri­bute to much vnto the fathers fathers. But that we should vnderstand, that forasmuch as they do often fall, we should not atttribute so much credite vnto their writinges, but that we may examine them by the rule of the scriptures. But as touching this place of Abacuk, we must vnderstand, that this prophet in the first chapter of his boke, with ouer much boldnes prouoked God to reason of thinges which are done in this world: so that in a maner he reproued him, as though he had little proui­dence ouer them. For he complayneth, that iust men are miserably oppressed of the vngodly, and that wicked men haue wonderfull and happy successes in all thinges. But after many complayntes at the length in the 2. chapter: he com­meth to hymselfe and sayth: I will stand vpon my watch: that is, I will pro­nounce nothing rashely concerning thys matter: But will wayte to see what God speaketh in me. Thys do the Sainctes, sometymes to put forth in theyr writyng humayne tentacions and affections, and diligently to expresse those thynges wherewith we are sometymes tossed. For they were menne, and The Pro­phets do sometymes expresse the cogitations wherewith they are tossed. were oftentymes subiect vnto these troublesome cogitations. At the length the Lord aunswereth hym: and in sōme thus he sayth: That men ought not streightway to geue sentēce of hys iudgemēts, but to wait farther. By which words, humane rashnes is reproued, whyche wil streight way geue sentence as sone as it seeth, that God hath done any thyng: when yet notwithstandyng we are admonished, not to iudge of Comedies, vntyl we haue sene the last Acte. If we could wayt lon­ger, we should see that the iudgemēts of God haue good successe, & that al those thyngs which he doth, are most wysely ordred. In the meane tyme whylest the ende is in comming, we must patiently wayte. And it behoueth that in waiting we vphold our selues by faith: by which fayth the iust shal lyue: and the vngod­ly forasmuch as he is destitute of it, wanteth all righteousnes and vprighmes. The wordes of the Prophet as they are in the Hebrew, are these: Lohinah ceg­peluh iesohah nibbaschoh boh vetsaddim beemunatho ijmiah. The latine translation hath it thus, He that beleeueth not, hys soule shall not be vprighte in hymselfe. The seuenty thus turne it: If he wythdrawe hymselfe, my soule shall not delyghte in hym. But as touchyng the propriety of the Hebrewe: Thys woord Apelah is deryued of Aophel, which signifyeth defense. Whereof is afterward deryued a derbe which signifyeth to defend himself. Hereof is gathered a double expositi­on. The first is, that by defence we vnderstand those which defend theyr mynde, and harden theyr hart not to beleue. These haue neyther vpryghtnes nor righ­teousnes. Or agayne, it signifyeth those, whiche beynge puffed vp with pryde thinke themselues to haue abundante strength and power: and, as though they neded not the helpe and ayde of God, beleue not. Wherfore theyr soule also wā ­teth vprightenes, & righteousnes. This exposition of the proud and hygh mynd is gathered out of Rabbi Dauid Chimhi. And this defēce, in either of these two interpretations is taken metaphorically. But if we take that worde properly, Rabbi Moses teacheth, that they whiche are not of an vpright mynde and doo want fayth, flye vnto defences: and there they defend them selues, and thinks [Page 18] that they are very safe. But he which is iust, and endewed with a sincere fayth, and of a modeste and lowly mynde, the same man shall lyue by fayth, neither will he depend either vpon armor, or vpon mans power, or vpon fenced castles. And it had ben sufficient for the Prophet, to haue rehearsed this first part of the oracle. For when he had affirmed, that a man wantyng fayth hath not righte­ousnes and vprightnes: it foloweth of contraryes, that a faythfull man by fayth obteyneth both righteousnes and lyfe. But bycause we should not labour or stagger in gatheryng of it, the Prophet hym selfe concludeth: But the iust man shall lyue by fayth. Neither is this to be left vnspoken of, that Paul in this place, hath omitted the pronowne possessiue. For in the Hebrue it is written, He shall lyue by hys fayth. And the Seuenty haue, By my fayth. And Symmachus manifest­ly agreeth with the Hebrue veritie: for he writeth [...]. that is, by hys owne fayth. But the variety of these translations commeth of a certayne simi­litude, which these two letters Vau and Iod haue one with the other. For they differ but in length and shortnes. Some reade Emunatho, and other some Emu­nathi. But eyther reading agreeth with the truth. For fayth may as well be Fayth is ours and also Gods. The Apo­stle vseth oftentymes this testi­mony of Abacuck. Paule abuseth not this testi­mony. called our fayth, as the fayth of God. It hath indeede his ofspring of God, but it sticketh in our myndes, otherwise we could not vse it to receaue the Gospell. I thought it good the larglier thus to entreate of the testemony of thys Pro­phete, for that the Apostle vseth it oftentymes: namely, to the Hebrues the 10. chapter: and to the Galathyans, and also in this place. Wherfore it is very ne­cessary and profitable, to vnderstand these wordes a right. But in this place we haue to aunswere vnto a cauillation, wherewyth the vngodly vse to accuse the Apostle, as though he peruersly abused the testemonyes of the olde scripture. And they accuse him especially in thys place, for that Paule dareth drawe this Prophet, which promiseth the returne from the captiuity of Babylon, to thys purpose: as though his sentence should pertayne vnto iustification, and absolu­tion from sinnes. Vnto them we aunswere, that in all the promises of the olde Vnderstā [...]e also by pro­mises, yea of temporall things, to be of Christ. lawe were namely for the most part expressed temporall good thinges: which yet were the wrappers, and foundacions, and heade of this promise chiefely, whereof we now intreat: of the deliuery (I say) through Christ. To the vnwrapping of which promise out of these olde promises, this reason is of no smale force, to search out, how God would graunt vnto the fathers those temporall good thinges, which at that tyme he promised: whether being wel pleased and mercifull, or being yet angry and displeased with them. Vndoubtedly we can not say, that he would geue these thinges being angry and displeased. For they would not in such maner haue accepted them. For those things which are ge­uen to that purpose, do at the length dryue to damnation and destruction. But if he promised, that he would geue these thinges, because he was pacefyed and reconciled towardes them, then let vs search out, by what thynges he was pa­cefyed towards them. Which thyng without doubt could not be brought to Christ is the heade & foundatiō of the pro­mises of God in the olde Testa­ment. The finall cause of Gods benefites to­wards the people of God, was Christe. passe, but by Iesus Christ only, who is the only mediator of mankind, where­fore whatsoeuer thing was promised, though it were neuer so much abiect and of no reputacion, yet was it taken to be geuen for Christes sake. And therefore in all the promises of the olde Testament, the myndes of the godly ranne vnto this foundation and ground. Then let vs consider the finall cause. Wherefore would God haue the publike wealth of the Iewes preserued to the ende, but only, that Christ should be born therehence? Why prouided he that the stock of Dauid should contynue safe euen to the ende, but onely, that the sonne of God should of it take humane fleshe? Why brought he agayne hys people from cap­tiuity, but only, that the Messias should at length be borne at the tyme promi­sed, in the place appointed and of a stocke assigned? This vndoubtedly was the cause of all those promises vpon this cause did all the fathers bend their minds, as many as vnderstood a right. Wherfore Paule wresteth not the testemonyes of the prophetes, neyther doth he rashely abuse them. And let this be vnto vs a [Page] sure and faythfull rule for the perfect vnderstanding of the promises of the olde What it is to lyue by fayth. testament, whereas he sayth that the iust man shall lyue by fayth, he meaneth, that he shalbe able to moue hymselfe to all good thynges, as to beleue, to hope, to contynue in hope, and to loue of charity: vnto which thynges by the power and strength of our owne nature we canne by no meanes attayne. And that by faith we obtaine eternall life, it very well agreeth with those thinges, which The know­ledge whiche commeth by fayth, and the eternall lyfe which shalbe in heauen are one and the selfe same thyng as touching the matter. Wherein the righte­ousnes which is receaued by fayth consi­steth. We are not firste iuste and then af­terward lyue by fayth. Differen­ces betwen the righte­ousnes of the Gospel, and of the lawe. Christ spake. This is the life eternall, that they should acknowledge thee to be the only true God, and him whome thou hast sent Iesus Christ. These thinges shall we playnly and openly knowe in heauen our countrey, and that with a cleare and manifest sight. But now haue we these selfe same thinges with a ve­ry obscure knowledge, that is, through fayth. This is not an other lyfe from that. But then shall that be made perfecte, which we haue now but only begon. And the righteousnes which by this fayth maketh it selfe open consisteth here­in especially, that from the tyme we are reconciled vnto God, we leade our life in such sorte that both we render vnto hym his due worshipe, and also vnto our neighbour our bounden due offices or dueties. And whereas the Prophete wri­teth, that the iust man lyueth by fayth, his wordes must not so be taken, as though he should affirme that we are fyrst iust, and that then afterward we liue by fayth. But this thyng he teacheth, that by fayth do come vnto vs two commodityes, both that we should be iust, and also that we should obtayne life, we see here also set forth vnto vs the difference betweene the righteousnes of the law and of the Gospell. The righteousnes of the law: is a perfecte obedience of the commaundementes of God. But the righteousnes of the Gospell is an imputacion thereof. The righteousnes of gospell, God geueth vnto vs, but the righteousnes of the law we geue vnto God. The righteousnes of the law lea­neth vnto workes. For it is written. The man which doth these thinges shall liue in them: and cursed be he, whiche abideth not in all the thinges whiche are written in the booke of the lawe: also, If thou wilte enter into lyfe keepe the Commaundementes. Also, doo thys and thou shalte lyue. But here it is sayd, The iuste manne shall lyue by fayth. Wherfore looke what difference there is betwene, to do, and to beleue, so much seeme these places to be repugnaunt one to the other. But these thinges A conciliation of places repugnant. shall easely be made to agree, by making a distinction of righteousnes. For forasmuch as the righteousnes of the Gospell is one, and the righteousnes of the lawe is an other, some testimonyes speake of the one righteousnes, and some teach of the other.

Now by that which hath bene spoken, the Apostle setteth forth three good By fayth we obtayne saluation, righteous­nes, and life. thinges, and those most principall, which by fayth we obtayne, namely, salua­tion, righteousnes, and life. For thē Gospell is the power of God, to saluation to euery one that beleueth: agayne, the righteousnes of God is reuealed by it from fayth: also, the iust man shall liue by fayth. If there be anye, that requyre more then these good thinges, then is he ouer curious. Further euen in the very first entrance into the cause, we see how strongly he affirmeth by these three sentences now reher­sed, that by fayth these good thinges happen vnto vs.

Here also maye be noted, in what estimation Paul hath the holy scripture, for vnto it he ascribeth the chiefest authority to proue the question takē in hand: namely, that the righteousnes of god is reuealed by fayth. And if both the A­postle and also the Prophet do so manifestlye pronounce, that we are iustified by fayth, then is it not meete, that our aduersaryes should so crye out agaynst vs, for that we affirme the very selfe same. Wherefore if they be herewith of­fended, then let them grudge agaynst the scriptures, agaynst Paule, and a­gaynst What re­medy we must vse when it is sayd that we reiect good woorkes. the Prophet, and not agaynste vs. And agaynst them, which crye out, that we spoyle good workes of theyr dignity and honour, there is no presenter remedy, then to lyue vprightly and holyly, that thereby we may aboundantly haue testemonyes of good workes, and say to our aduersaries: if any confy­dence [Page 19] were to be put in good workes, then should we in no case geue place vn­to you, forasmuch as in them we farre excell you. And all that whiche we say and teach of iustification, which commeth through fayth, tendeth only to this: that the truth should by the word of God: be defended. This was Paules mea­ning, when he sayde vnto the Phillippians: If any man may put confidence in the fleshe, I also may much more: and by many thinges he declareth, how much in this kinde of glory he excelled others. But he afterward addeth, that all these things he counted as dongue and losse, that he might wyn Christ: and that he mought be found in him, not hauing his own righteousnes, namely, which is of works, but that which is by the fayth of Iesus Christ. This excellent example of the Apostle ought we to imitate: that although we attribute not iustification vnto workes, yet ought we plentifully to abound in them aboue other men. For if we leade an vnpure lyfe, and on the other syde boaste of iustification through fayth, then shall we be laughed to scorne of our aduersaryes, as though we for that cause professed this doctrine, to lyue without punishement, [...]ly, and without all order.

For the wrath of God appeareth from heauen agaynst an vn­godlines and vnrighteousnes of men, whiche withhold t [...]e truth in vnrighteousnes, seing that it, which maye be knowen of God is manifest among them, because God hath shewed it vnto them. For hys inuisible thinges, that is to say, his eternall power and godhed, are seene: forasmuch as they are vnderstand by the workes from the creation of the world. For the wrath of God is reuealed from heauen.] To the ende he would cōfirme The first reason whereby is proued that we are iu­stified by the sayth of the Gospel. Take away the Gospel [...] and then re­mayneth the wrath of God, and most vn­pure sinnes do raunge abroad. the proposition nowe proposed, namely, that by the fayth of the Gospell we are iustefied, he bringeth many reasons: The firste is when the Gospell is receaued by fayth, there springeth forth righteousnes. But take away the Gospell, and fayth, and then the wrath of God waxeth hotte, and men are defiled with most vnpure vices and sinnes. Wherefore it is manifest, that the cause of our righte­ousnes is the Gospel, taken hold of by fayth. The minor or second proposition, that where the Gospell is away, there are both wicked actes, and the wrath of God, he proueth by a diuision, as well towardes the Iewes as towardes the Gentiles. Of the Iewes he will speake in the next chapiter now he entreateth of the Gentiles. And that the wrath of God is powred vpon them he proueth by the horrible and filthy vices, which he numbreth: and declareth that those men deserued so to be forsaken of God, and hedlonge to be thrust into those sinnes: because when they knew him, they dishonoured hym, and gaue his honour vn­to creatures. And that they knew God, he proueth: for that his creatures en­structed them thereof. And he maketh mencion of so grosse and filthy vices, that they were not able to deny theyr owne peruersenes.

For if he had spoken of those enormious sinnes whiche pertayne vnto the mynde, for that in them there is not so much shame, it would not so much haue moued the readers. But after this maner may the reason of the Apostle be re­solued. A resolutiō of the Apo­stle his rea­son. They were thus filthyly contamynated, therefore were they not refor­med within, neyther renewed through the spirite and grace. Wherefore they were neyther acceptable vnto god, nor yet reconciled vnto him. And we sée that Paule by this reason hath not only confirmed that which he entended, but also by the selfe same, laboreth & instituteth a most holesome exhortation, which This is a good exhor­taciō where is preached repentance. he began of repentance. For he setteth before their eyes their most haynous wicked actes, and sheweth them that eternall punishementes are at hand vnto them, and that they suffer these thinges through the anger of god towardes them. And to the ende he would make them the more afrayd, he taketh away from them all maner of excuse, affirming that they knew right well, after A place of Iohn declared. what sorte they should leade theyr life. And the summe of this reason is red in the gospell of Iohn the 3. chapter: He which beleueth in the sonne, hath eternall life: [Page] but he which beleueth not, shall not see eternall life: and the wrath of God abideth ouer him. There it manifestly appeareth that by fayth which is geuen vs in Christ we do obtayne righteousnes and life: and contrariwise, it being taken away, righteousnes is also taken away, and the wrath of god remaynteh kindled. Take away the gospell and fayth from philosophy and good artes, and what Take a­waye fayth and the gos­pell from Philosophy and then in it shalbe left nothynge that is found. Why god in such manner forsooke the Ethnikes. sound thing shalt thou sée then in those mē, which so chalenge them vnto them­selues. Vndoubtedly all things shalbe contamynated, as Paule paynteth them out in colours. Here paraduenture a man will aske, why god so forsooke men, that they should be wrapped in so greate wicked actes. Hereto may be answe­red, he did it both for that they deserued this thing by reason of the idolatrye which they committed, when as they had the knowledge of the true god: and also chiefely, to the ende we should vnderstand the necessary helpe had of the comming of Christ. For if men had bene but in a tollerable case, they woulde scarfely haue iudged, that they had any neede of the Mediator Christ. But where sinne aboue measure abounded, there also was grace made more illu­strous, of so greate force I say, that it was able to breake in sonder the most greuous yoke of sinne.

The wrath of God from heauen.] By wrath he fyguratiuely vnderstan­deth vengeance. Augustine writeth to Optatus in his 157. Epistle, that wrath What is wrath in God. is not in god a perturbation of the mynde, as it is in men: but only a iust and fyxed vengeance. Which selfe same thing he writeth in his booke de Trinitate. Wherefore it is a fygure much vsed in the holy scriptures, that for the ven­geance of God we rede, anger, or wrath. And Aristotle in his Rethorikes, defi­neth it to be an appetite of vengeaunce for negligence or contempt. For when a The defy­nition of wrath ac­cording to Aristotle. man seeth himselfe to be contēned, his desire is straight way inflamed, to seeke to auenge. Wherefore the Apostles meaning is, that these most wicked vices, were a reuenge proceding from god being angry.

From heauen.] These wordes haue a greate Emphasis or force. For they signify, that this vengeance is manifest, largely spred abroad, and most migh­ty: as are showers of rayne and tempestes, which fall from heauen vpon the earth. And it is as much, as if he should say, that this wrath or vengeance of God was inflicted, by his deuine might or power. For we are sayd to receaue those thinges from heauen, which seeme to be sent by the power of God, as in Satyra the Poete sayd: Tertius è coelo cecidit Cato, et tanquam Sacculus è coe­lo discendit: [...]. Which is in English: The third Cato discended from heauen, and as a sacke fell this sentence from heauen, Knowe thy selfe. And Cicero also sayth of Pompey, that the prouince saw him, not as one sent from a city: but as one fallen from heauen. So Paule fayth, that this vengeance may in no case be counted as a thing naturall, but as a plague inflicted of God. For as it shall afterward be declared, God deliuered them into a reprobate mynde. And although the corporall calamityes, wherewith God striketh vs, are gre­uous, yet far more greuous is this, when we are deliuered into a reprobate mynde. For in that case men seeke destrucion vnto themselues, and are euen their owne slaughtermen. Neyther contrarywise can we obtayne any good thyng more to be wished for, then to attayn vnto an holy mynd and a right vn­derstanding. For euen as this is a singular gifte: so is the other a most seuere vengeaunce.

Agaynst all vngodlynes and vnrighteousnes of men.] He sayth not against men: because God hateth not them, but taketh vengeaunce on their wicked actes. And those comprehendeth he vnder the name of impietie and vnrighte­ousnes: for wicked actes are partlye committed agaynst God, and partly a­gaynst men.

VVhich vvithholde the truth in vnrighteousnes.] They attayned vnto so much truth, that therby they vnderstode, how they ought to behaue them selues towardes God, and towardes their neighbours. And yet withhelde they the truth in vnrighteousnes. Which selfe same thyng dyd the Hebrewes committe [Page 20] concerning the truth which God had reueled vnto them by the law. Seing ther­fore both these Hebrues and those Gentiles were so greuously punished, what ought men which professe themselues to be Christians to hope for, which wyth holde to themselues so great a lyght of the Gospell without fruite. Vndoubted­ly, they shall at the length become most wicked, and euen experiēce teacheth, that those whych boast of Christ, and do liue filthely, do at the length in naughtynes and filthinesse passe all men, though they be neuer so wicked. The truth is after Who they be that withholde the truth captiue. With what bondes the truth is bound. The truth suffreth no­thing in it selfe. Aristotle in hys Ethikes. a sorte with hold captine in them, whych vnderstand it, and yet expresse it not in workes & life. And it is ouercome & restrayned with the chaynes of euell lustes: which breathing vp out of the inferior parts of our mind, do obfuscate the vnderstanding, and as it were in a darke prison close in the truth knowen. God kind­leth the truthe in our myndes, but by our lustes it is wonderfully darkened. There is no cause why we should thinke (as Chrisostome admonisheth vs) y ^e the truth of hys owne nature can suffer any thyng. For it of hys owne nature is vn­changeable. But what soeuer euill happeneth, the same is hurtefull to our mynd and soule. Paul toucheth in two wordes those thynges, whiche Arist [...] in hys Ethikes (when hee disputeth of the incontinent person) prosecuteth [...] many woordes. For he demaundeth, by what meanes the incontinente person declineth to vices, sithen that he hath in hys mynde a right opinion. And hée aun­swereth, that that thing happeneth, by reason he is to much puffed vp wit [...]me singular profite, which presētly is offred vnto this senses: by the wayght wherof the better part also is oppressed, so that it geueth place to the lusts, neither exce­cuteth it hys office, with efficacie to consider and peyse the truth, whiche before it knew. Whiche thyng also the Poete affirmeth of Medea: Video meliora, pro­bó (que), Ouide of Medea. deteriora sequor, whiche is in Englishe, I sée what thynges are best, and I al­low them, but I folow the worst. All this doth Paul teache vs, when hee sayth, That the vngodly wythholde the truth in vnrighteousnesse, That truth laboureth as muche as is possible to burst forth into acte: but it is letted of concupiscence or luste. And this is that, whiche is written in the first of the Ethikes. That the more The noblest part of the soule exhor­teth to the best things. The power of the con­science. excellent part of the mynde alwayes exhorteth and prouoketh to thynges which are of the best sorte. For so hath God and nature framed vs, that the thyng which we know, we desire to expresse in Acte, which thyng when we do not, we are re­proued euen by our own iudgement. And hereof come those wonderfull forces of the conscience, whiche in sinnes of great wayght can neuer be perfectly quieted To with holde the truth in vnrighteousnes, is properly to refuse the callyng of God, which continually by hys truth calleth vs vnto hym self. Wherfore it shall be very profitable for vs, if whē soeuer we haue attained to any thing that is true either by our owne study or els by the obseruation of thinges, we streighte way weigh with our selues, where vnto God calleth vs through that truth, which he layth before our myndes. By vnrighteousnes the Apostle vnderstandeth gene­rally, what soeuer we sinne either agaynst God, or agaynste men. Wherefore Paul speaketh of that truth which is naturally grafted in vs: and also of it which we attayne vnto by our own study. For either of thē instructeth vs of most excel­lent thynges touchyng God: so that the vnrighteousnes whiche we commit, is not able to blot it out of our hartes. Whiche thing yet the Accademians attemp­ted An error of the Accade­mians. to teache when as they contended, that nothing can certainely be knowne of vs. And so they can not abyde, that we should embrace any thyng, as beyng sure that it is true: but they will haue vs to count all thinges as vncertayne & doubt­full. An error of the Epi­cures. And in lyke maner do the Epicures goe about to blot out of mens myndes those thinges which by naturall anticipation are imprinted into our myndes concerning God. And yet notwithstanding neither of these were able to brynge to passe that which they endeuoured themselues to doo. For will they, or nill they, Whither truth be stronger when it is receaued by fayth then being natu­rally graf­ted in vs. these truthes continue still in the myndes of men. But (which is muche to be la­mented) they are withholden in vnrighteousnes. Peraduenture thou wilte aske how it commeth that the truth which we haue by faythe, is of more strengthe to burst forth into acte, then is the truth which is naturally attayned vnto? Vndou­tedly, this commeth not therof, for that one truthe beyng taken by it selfe and set [Page] aparte is stronger then an other. For eyther truth hath one and the selfe same The diuer­sity is not in the truth but in the meane whereby it is taken hold of. nature, but the difference commeth of the meane and instrument, whereby it is receiued: The strengthes of nature are corrupt, weake, and vitiate throughe sin. And therfore the truth which they take hold of, is of no gret force. But faith hath ioyned with it the inspiration of God, and the power of the holy ghost. And therfore it doth with great force take holde of the truth. Wherfore, the diuersi­tie is not in the truth it selfe, but in the meane and instrument, whereby weem­brace it. This is the cause why there we are changed, but here we remayne the selfe same men which we were before: Of which thyng we haue a manifest te­stimony in the Gospell. Christ did set forth vnto the yong man, what he should do to obteyne saluation, which when he had heard, yet was he not moued to geue place, but went away with heauines. He trusted vnto naturall strengthes, and therfore he demaunded of the Lord, what he mightes to attayne vnto eternall Example of diuers apprehen­sions of the truth. lyfe. But contrariwise, Mathew, as soone as euer he heard his vocation, did with so great fayth take hold of it, that forsakyng money and hys office, he streyghte way followed Christ. And Zachens, who otherwyse was most couetous of gaine; when he had heard of the Lord, that he woulde turne into hym, dyd not onely wyth a cherefull mynd receiue hym into hys house, but also straight way offred himselfe to distribute vnto the poore the halfe of his goodes, and to render foure folde vnto those whom before he had defrauded. Wherfore, the whole difference A great ma­ny mothynges are reueled vn­to vs by the scriptures, than we knowe by nature. cōnsisteth in the power, wherby the truth is taken holde of: which thyng yet we ought not so to take, as though we affirme that many moe thynges are not re­ueled vnto vs by the scriptures, as well the new as the olde, then we knowe by nature. Onely we make a certayne comparison betwene one and the selfe same truth, when it is naturally knowen, and when it is receiued by fayth.

For that which is knowen of God is manifest among them.] In the Greke is red, [...], as if a man should say: That which may be knowen of God. Which is therefore spoken, for y ^e there are many deuine misteryes, vnto which we can not by nature attayne: as is this, that God would fréely instifye vs: and through Christ crucifyed pardon our sinnes: and restore these selfe same bodies of ours vnto eternal felicity. These & other such like, the nature of things We cannot by nature vnderstande the miste­ries of God teacheth vs not. Therefore Paul sayth, that which may be knowen of God, was made manifest vnto them. In this place he declareth, what maner of truth it was which they withheld in vnrighteousnes. It was the knowldege of things pertayning vnto God, which they attayned vnto by the light of nature. And Paule reduceth all that which they knew vnto two chiefe poyntes: namely, vnto There are two princi­pall things which may naturally be knowne of God. The maie­sty of God wherein it consisteth A similitude the euerlasting power of God, and vnto hys diuinity. For by the composition of this world, they know God to be most mighty: Farther, it could not be hidden from them, but that they knewe by the beautifulnes, forme, and distinction of naturall thinges, so great a power is gouerned by a prouidence and singuler wisedome. And the commodity & vtility of things created taught thē the ma­iesty of God, which in this thing principally consisteth, to do good vnto al men. These are the thinges which God bestowed vpon the Ethnikes: but they abused the giftes of God. Wherefore right wel agreeth with them the similitude which Chrisostome vseth. For thus he sayth: If a king should geue vnto vnto one of his seruauntes a summe of money, with it to adorne his famely, and to encrease his honour, in such maner, that his dignity and maiestye might be the more fa­mous: and the noughty leude seruaunt should go and bestow it all vpon baudes and harlottes: doth not (sayth he) this seruaunt seeme worthyly and iustly to haue deserued punishment? In such sorte did the Ethnike wise men behaue thē ­selues: they receaued of God a most excellent knowledge of thinges: wherewith when as they ought to haue worshipped and adorned him, they transferred it to the worshipping of images made of stockes and stones. Wherefore not vn­worthely waxed the wrath of God whotte agaynst them. And when it is writ­ten, It was made man if este vnto them: He sayth not: vnto them all, for the [Page 21] scripture putteth a difference betweene the wise men and Philosophers, and be­tweene the Barbarous and vnlearned common people. For thinges were not to all men a like knowen: which yet happened through the default of these phi­losophers. For they ought to haue preached and beaten into the eares of the The Phi­losophers preached not to the common people these thynges whych they knew of God. Aristotle to Alexā ­der. The Phi­losophers with their reasonings contamina­ted those things which by the benefite of nature they knewe purely. common people these thinges which they knew. But so did they not, as did the Prophetes, and the Apostles, but, being puffed vp in their mindes, they kept these thinges to themselues: yea rather they after a sort hid them, that all men should not come to the knowledge of them. As there is abroade a certayne Epi­stle of Aristotle to Alexander the king, wherein he sayth that hys bookes of na­tural philosophy were so set forth of hym, as though they had not bene set forth at all. For those thinges which they wrote, they seemed of purpose to darken, that other mē should not vnderstand thē. Farther through their disputaciōs they blotted those pure and good thinges which they knew. When they vnder­stood that there was but one God, and iudged that he only ought to be wor­shipped, afterward of themselues they thus gathered: forasmuch as the com­mon people are not apt to worship the highe and principall diuinity diffused a­broade in all thinges (for they can not in such sort attayne to the vnderstanding of it) it shalbe good, that it were deuided, and annexed vnto Images, celestiall signes, and other creatures. And the selfe same men, when they knew that the nature of God is a thing seperate from all corporall matter, that is, that he is a spirite, and therefore ought to be worshipped in spirite and mynd, they I say thinking that the people were in comparison of them so rude that they coulde not attayne to this, brought in outward rites and ceremonyes, which of their owne head they had inuented: which when men had done, they should thinke, that they had fully done their duety as touching the honour of God. And so by their deepe disputacions and reasonings, they defyled that pure thinge whiche they attained vnto by the creatures, neyther beleued they the truth which they knew, which yet they ought to haue done. Otherwise they would haue submit­ted The Philosophers suf­fred not themselues to be goue [...] ned by the prouidence of God. them selues vnto that chiefe power which they knew: and haue suffred thē ­selues to be gouerned by the prouidēce of God, & would haue put their trust in it in all aduersityes, which yet they did not: yea rather they filthyly fell into desperation. Cicero crieth out in his latter tyme in his Epistle to Octauius: Oh vnto me who neuer was wise. And he bringeth in Cotta in his booke of the na­ture of the Gods, who, although he were a highe prieste, yet desired he that it might be proued vnto hym for truth, that there were any Gods at all. And for­asmuch as they beleued not those thinges which they naturally knew of God, they were not only vngodly towardes hym, but also iniurious towardes theyr The filthye lyfe of Phi­losophers. neighbours. And oftentymes, the excellenter philosophers they were the more filthylife they liued. As the Poete reproued thē, Qui Curios simulāt, & Bachinalia viuunt, that is, which fayne themselues sad and sober, as though they were Cu­ry, A similitude but lyue most ryotously, because the wrath of God waxed hote agaynst thē. For euen as a scholemaister, if he should continually instructe hys scholer, and yet he in the meane tyme should be in hand wyth other matters, and haue hys mynde runnyng vpon other thyngs, could not suffer so great negligence: so dea­leth God wyth vs. For he continually setteth before our eyes an open booke of the thynges created, he alwayes illustrateth and calleth vs, but we euermore turne away our mynde from his doctrine, and are in hand with other matters. Therfore wyll God cast vs away as naughty scholexs, neither wyll he suffer so great iniury vnreuenged.

For God hath shewed it vnto them.] Hereby is gathered, that all truth is of God. For it springeth not of our selues. But how it is of God, there are two opi­nions. How all truth is of God. Some say y ^e it is therfore of God, because God hath created those things by which we may vnderstande these truthes. But others say (whome I best al­lowe) that God hath grafted in our myndes [...], that is, anticipations, and fore instructions, by which we are driuen to conceaue excelent and wonderfull [Page] thinges of the nature of God. And these knowledges of God naturally grafted in vs, are, by the obseruation of thinges that are created, daily more and more confirmed and polished. Some folishly and also no lesse vngodly say, that they haue learned these truthes of Aristotle, or of Plato, so that they geue no thankes Schole masters are the instru­ments of God. A simili­tude. at all vnto God for them. These men in dede were Organes and instrumentes, but yet not authors. And these mens sayinges are, as if an Israelite should say, that he knew the truthes of the law, not by God, but by Moyses: whē yet he was but onely the mediator and messenger of God, and which declared these things vnto the people, God beyng the author of them. And it is to be noted, that wher as God, of his nature, is so separated from all matter, that he cannot be percei­ued by our sences, he is therfore wont to declare himself by signes, and certaine wordes subiect vnto our sences. And these signes, whiche doe at the beginnyng Creatures are signes which set forth God. set forth God vnto vs, are creatures: whiche when naturall Philosophers dili­gently weighed, as touching the proprieties and wonderful qualities of nature, they were brought vnto the knowledge of God. For they knewe the order of causes, and the coniunction of them wyth theyr effectes: and when as they ea­sely perceaued, y ^t there could be nothyng founde infinite, they concluded at the length, that theyr reasonyng must nedes come to some one first thing, that was before al other, and so concluded they, that there is a God.

These thinges both Plato, Aristotle, and Galene, haue most learnedly taught. But lest we should neglect the holy Scriptures, they also haue shewed vnto vs The holy scriptures do send vs to learne of creatures. this selfe same way to learne by. Christ sendeth vs to the birdes of heauen, and lillies of the field, and to the grasse, therby to know the singuler prouidence of God in the preseruation of those thinges, which he hath brought forth. And Sa­lomon setteth before vs the Ante to imitate for his prudēcy, wherby in the Sommer he prepareth for himselfe those things, which shall bee nedefull for hym in the Winter. Esay sayth, that the Asse knewe the manger of hys Lorde, and the Oxe hys maister, but Israell knewe not his Lorde. Hereby appeareth, that we may be taught many thinges by creatures. Dauid wrote a Psalme wherein is declared this selfe same thing: The heauens set forth the glory of God. But amongst other bookes of the holy scripture, which most excellently set forth this thyng, is The booke of Iob dis­puteth many thyngs of God by creatures. the dialogue of the booke of Iob. For the interlocutors whiche he bringeth in, were Ethnikes: and therfore the matter is there handled onely by naturall rea­sons. There, are reasoned many thinges of the reuolutions of heauen, of stars, of the earth, sea, lyghtes, wyndes, raynes, thunders, lyghtnyngs, snow, yse, also of beastes, as of Lyons, Goates, Hartes, Horses, and Behemoth, which manye thinke to be an Elephant, and lastly of Leuiathan the most huge beast of the sea All these thinges are there in such maner entreated of, that they set forthe vnto vs the eternall power and diuinitie of God. But amongst other thynges, which The nature of man most of all resembleth the deuinity of God. do chiefely set forth God vnto vs, is euen our owne nature, for we are made af­ter the image and lykenes of hym. Wherfore, we most of all resemble him, and chiefely as touchynge the soule. Wherein, shyneth the prouidence of thynges to come, also iustice, wisedome, and manye other most noble habites, or quali­ties: and also the knowledge of vprightnes, honestye, noughtines, and filthines. And forasmuch as man and hys soule is not sprong of himselfe, but dependeth of God: then followeth it that we ought not in any case to deny these selfe same thynges vnto God, but ought to attribute them vnto hym, as to the principall and chiefe author: so that hereby we may gather, that God hath his prouidence ouer those thinges whiche are done, and that he is y ^t iudge of our actions, vnto whome, as honest thyngs are pleasaunt, so are filthye thinges displeasaunt. I knowe that Cicero in hys booke De Natura Deorum, laboureth to ouerthrowe thys reason, whereby we affirme, that those thyngs which in vs are most noble ought to bee ascribed vnto god. But let hym alone, howe so euer he reasoneth, vnto vs it sufficeth, that we are by the holy Scriptures confirmed in thys mat­ter. In the 94. Psalme it is written: He which planted the eare, shall he not heare? [Page 22] He which made the eye, shall hee not see? Wherby we are taught, that those things which are perfecte and absolute in vs, ought not to bee taken away from the na­ture The perfections which are in vs cannot be taken away from God. of God. Moreouer, we sée that our consciences do naturally abhorre from wicked actes, which we haue committed: and contrariwyse doe reioyce and are glad in good déedes. Which thyng, forasmuche as it is naturally grafted in vs, teacheth vs, that the iudgement of God remayneth, whose condemnation our mindes aboue all thynges are afrayde of, so that sometymes they séeme to bée tossed with suryes: and contrariwyse they reioyce, when they hope that from that iudgement seate they shall carye away cōmendation and rewardes. I could rehearse a great many other such lyke thynges: but they may easilye be gathe­red both out of the holy Scriptures, and also out of the bookes of Philosophers. Wherefore I will cease to adde any moe, and counte it sufficient to haue sayd, There is nothinge so vile in the world which bea­teth not a testimony of god. that there is nothyng in the worlde so abiecte and vile, which beareth not wit­nes of God. All thynges (sayd the Poete) are full of Jupiter: For what so euer is in the world, so long as it is preserued, so long hath it the power of God hidden vnder it: which, if by searching out, and naturall knowledge it bee vncouered, then will it resemble God vnto vs. To this sentence of the Apostle, other places of the Scripture appeare to be repugnaunt, in which from the wicked is taken away the knowledge of God. We read in the Psalmes: The foolishe man sayd in hys hart, there is no God: And agayne it is written: In earth there is none that vn­derstandeth, or that seeketh after God. And not to rehearse many places, in Esaie the first chap. it is written: But Israell hath not knowen me. But thys contrarie­tie is after thys sorte conciliated: The vngodly doe in déede confesse (as Paule sayth) being conuinced by creatures, that there is a God: but afterward, they so How the knowledge of god is attributed vnto the vngodlye, and how it is taken away from them. define of hys nature and proprietie, that therby a man may well conclude, that there is no God. For Epicurus sayd, that there were Gods in déede: but he tooke from thē al maner of doing, care, & prouidēce, so that he ascribed a felicity vtterly idle. Also for that they say, that there is a God, but yet such a one as hath not pro­uidence ouer humane thynges, neither punisheth, nor heareth such as call vpon hym, and such other like: therby is concluded, that they were of thys opinion, that they thought there was a God, but onely in name. And therfore the Scrip­ture denyeth that they knewe God. For the true God is not such, as they fay­ned hym to bee: and as touching them selues, and their life, as to be holpen, or to haue the fruition of Gods ayde, it was all one as if there had bene no God at all: forasmuch as they fledde not vnto hym, to call vpon hym, neither dyd they at hys Some haue gone aboute to perswade themselues that there is no god. The knowledge of god two maner of wayes. handes looke for either helpe or ayde. And besides that, there haue bene some so vngodly, that they haue gone about to perswade thē selues, that there is no God in déede: and although they were not able to bring thys to passe, their owne minde resisting it, and their conscience striuing agaynst it, yet doth the Scripture pronounce of them, according to their endeuours: and after this sorte sayth, that they knewe not God. Lastly, this is to be knowen, that the knowledge of God is in two sortes: one is of efficacie, wherby we are chaunged, so that we labour to expresse in workes, those thinges which we knowe, and this knowledge of God the holy Scriptures ascribe onely vnto the godly: but the other is a colde know­ledge, wherby we are made nothing the better: for we shewe not forth in déedes, that we knowe those thinges, which in very déede we knowe. And of thys kinde of knowledge Paule afterward speaketh, when he sayth: And as they regarded not to knowe God. &c. Christ also shall say vnto many which boasted of hys giftes and knowledge, I knowe you not. But so to knowe God, forasmuch as it nothyng profiteth, the holy Scripture oftentimes so reiecteth, that it vouchsafeth not to call it by the name of the knowledge of God, and saith, that the vngodlye, foras­much as there were such, know not God.

So that they are without excuse: Because that when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were they thāk­ful, but waxed ful of vanities in their imaginations, and their foo­lishe hart was blinded. And when they counted them selues wise [Page] they became fooles, & turned the glorye of the immortall God vnto an image: made not only after the similitude of a mortall man, but also of byrdes, and foure footed beastes, and of creeping beastes.

So that they are inexcusable.] In y ^e Greke it is, [...]. God reuea­leth not himself, that we should be inexcusable, but that fo­loweth through eur default. If by our strengths we cannot performe the law thē are we vn­excusable. Here is en­treated of the excuse which is of ignorance. The Eth­nikes sayde not for an excuse the want of strength. If the Ethnikes had pretended ignorance at had bene an easy mat to haue brought them to Christ. The excuse also of weaknes is not to be admitted. God reuealed not those naturall knowledges to thys end: but the same happened through our defaulte. Howbeit, that which Paule sayth in thys place, séemeth to be repugnaunte vnto those thynges which are often spoken, where mencion is made of workes & grace. For if it be true, that by our own strēgthes, and frée will, we can not performe the lawe of God, which we knowe, howe can these men be sayd to be inexcusable? For if that which we say, be true, they might easilie be excused, that they in déede by the light of nature knew this law: but yet they wanted strength wherby to performe so much as they knewe. And there­fore they séeme not to be inexcusable. But here Paule entreateth of that excuse onely, which might be alleaged of ignoraunce. For, that which is now sayd as touching infirmitie, the Ethnickes layde not for an excuse: for they attributed all thinges to frée will. Therefore they would not haue sayd, that they wanted strength to performe it: onely this remained, to excuse thē selues by ignoraunce. Which Apologie or refuge, seing Paule hath cutte of from them, there resteth onely, that euen by their owne iudgement, they should bée sayd to be without ex­cuse. If they had sayd, that they were weake, although they knewe, what they ought to doe: that was it which Paule traueileth to bring them vnto: namely, that therefore the knowledge of the lawe of nature, could not make them better, be­cause the lawe, although they knewe it, yet coulde it not alter them, nor geue strength vnto them to liue vprightly: wherefore it was necessarye for them to flye vnto Christ. But because he knew, that the Gentiles fledde not to that excuse, therefore he repelleth that which he saw might easilie haue bene obiected: which thyng was ignoraunce. Although the other excuse also of the infirmitie of strengthes, was not worthye to bee admitted. For the same debilitie happeneth through our owne default, that is, through sinne. Further, they were without excuse, because that litle which was in their power, namely, as touching out­ward actions, they performed not according to their knowledge. For we are not so destitute of strength by reason of sinne, but that in outward workes we are a­ble to performe many thinges: in whiche they declared them selues to be moste wicked. Wherefore it followeth, that they were vtterly without excuse. Neither could they alleage thys for a cause, namely, that those thynges wherin they sin­ned, were done agaynst their will. Wherfore, seing wittingly and willingly they dyd euill, they had no excuse at all. Neyther is it to be thought, that God graun­ted vnto them this excellent knowledge, to the end they should be without excuse. For, that happened through their owne default: when as otherwyse the proui­dence of God vsed theyr wickednes to hys glorye, and to set forth hys iustice. God vsed theyr wic­kednes to hys glory. We must not desist frō teching though men seeme not to pro­fyte therby. The true doctrine is herein pro­fytable in the vngod­ly, namely, they should be condem­ned them­selues. Thus much they profited through their sinnes: that the doctrine and knowledge which they obtayned, furthered them to iudgement and condemnation. Wher­fore we ought not to be feared away from teaching, though we sée that men be­come nothing the better: forasmuch as the selfe same thyng happeneth vnto that doctrine, which God hym selfe ministreth vnto vs. At the least way, thys commo­ditie shall therby aryse: if men bee not of God conuerted, yet shall they by theyr owne iudgement and testimonie be condemned. And thys thyng chieflye sée­meth God to will, namely, then to appeare righteous, when he punisheth or con­demneth. The profite that Iudas the betrayer receaued by the doctrine of Christ, was at the length to condemne hym selfe, saying: I haue sinned, in deliuering the iuste bloude. For to that poynt are the vngodly driuen, at the length by their own iudgement to be condemned. And such which ought to haue taken profite by the doctrine, are by the same greuously hurt: which thyng we read in Esaie the Pro­phet, when it is sayd: Make blinde the harte of thys people: Stoppe their eares, and shutte their eyes: Least peraduenture they shoulde see, heare, and vnderstand, and bee conuerted, and I shoulde heale them. So also by the wordes of Moyses was y ^e hart [Page 23] of Pharao alwayes more and more hardened.

Because when they knew God, they glorisied him not as God, neither were they thankefull.] Here is added a reason, why they were without excuse. And The Me­thode of Paule. not to go confusedly to worke, this is the methode which Paule vseth. He made mencion of the naturall knowledge, which ought to haue bene to the Ethnikes a most profitable lawe, how to leade their life: namely, to expresse in maners, that which by knowledge they vnderstoode. Now he accuseth thē of the trans­gression of this lawe. And his accusation contayneth two principall poyntes. First he layeth to their charge the contempt of the worshipping of God, and The princi­pall poynts of the accu­sation. ingratitude towardes hym: which thynges pertayne vnto the mynde: then he accuseth them, for that they attributed vnto Images (which they themselues had made) and vnto creatures, that honour whiche was due vnto God only. And to the ende he would exaggerate or amplyfye these sinnes, he sheweth how Sinnes are aggrauated by the gre­uousnes of punish­ments. they escaped not vnreuenged. For fyrst God tooke vengeance vpon their wic­kednes with thys punishment, that he blynded theyr hart, and theyr mynde waxed foolishe: so that they which aboue other professed learning and wisdom, appeared most fooles of all: and theyr reasones whiche they counted wittye, were made frustrate and became vtterly vayne. The punishement of the other sinne, namely, of the inuention of Idoles was, that they should contaminate themselues with most fylthy vices. By this order of accusation is gathered, Idolatry springeth not but frō a corrupted minde. A place of Ieremy. that idolatry taketh not place, vnles error, or (to speake more playnly) sinne first haue place in the mind. And those things which are here spokē of these two principall vices, are bewayled of Ieremy in the 2. chap. when he sayth: Be astoni­shed O ye heauens, be afrayde and excedingly abashed: For my people hath committed two greuous thinges: They haue forsaken me the fountayne of the water of life, and haue digged for themselues cesternes, which are not able to hold water. To forsake God is, to take away the worshipping due vnto him, and true geuing of thankes. And to make and worship Images, is to make cesternes, out of whiche can not be The Me­thode of the two fyrst commaundements. drawen the waters of helpe and grace. The selfe same order we fynde in the first table of the tenne commaundementes. For God first commaundeth, that he be worshipped alone: then in the second precept he commaundeth, that we take not vnto our selues any other Gods. And vndoubtedly if we depart from the true God, it is not possible, but that straight waye shoulde spring forth idolatrye. Because, will we or nyll we, we can not be without a God. Where­fore take away him, which is the true God, out of our hartes, and of necessitye We cannot be without some God. an other fayned God must be substituted in his place. And Chrisostome hath pro­fitably noted, that euen as they which walke or sayle by night without light, do oftentymes hit agaynst some rocke or stumblyng blocke and miserablye pe­rishe, fo farre is it of that that they come to the place they determined to come vnto: so they, which depart from the light of the doctrine set forth vnto vs by The naturall knowlege whych we haue of God is weake. God, must needes of necessitie fall into most greuous euils. By these thinges which the Apostle now speaketh, is easely perceaued, that this was a weake knowledge, which the Ethnikes had naturally touching God: for asmuch as it altered thē not, but rather was ouercome with lustes, which darkened y ^t minde.

They glorified him not as God, neyther vvere they thankfull.] By these wordes he describeth the worshipping, which they ought to haue performed in Foure principal points of the true worshipping of God. mynde, and in spirite: whereof we haue before written at large, and haue re­duced the whole matter vnto fower principall poyntes: namely, vnto prayers, hope, thankes geuing, and the feare or obeysance, which good children haue towardes their parentes. For then we worshippe God truly, when we wholy submitte our selues vnto him, so that we embrace him aboue all thinges, and aboue our selues also. And all this is expressed in that commaundement: Thou shalte loue thy Lorde thy God wythall thy harte, wyth all thy soule, and wyth all What is to glorify God thy strengthes. And this word [...], which Paule here vseth, which is transla­ted, to gloryfye, signifyeth chiefely, to iudge very well and honorably of a man. [Page] But how sclenderly the Philosophers iudged of the prouidence of god, & of hys iudgements of his rewards I say & punishements, their opinions: which are e­uery where abroade, do sufficiently declare. If a man should demaunde what it is, that doth chiefely gloryfye god, I would answere that it is fayth. Which Fayth doth most of all glorify god. thyng I affirme not of my selfe: but the scripture teacheth it, for afterward it is sayd of Abraham, that when god had promised vnto him an heyre by Sara his wife, he considered not hys body being in a maner dead, nor the wombe of Sara now past childe bearing, but gaue glory vnto God. For he iudged so honora­bly of hym, that although he saw that by mans power that could not be perfor­med Who they be that do truly geue thankes vn to god. which was promised, yet neuertheles, he beleued. This is to geue glory vnto God: to thinke that he both is able and knoweth, and also will performe all those thinges which he promiseth.

Neyther gaue they thankes.] They do pecfectly geue thankes, which when they vnderstand that they haue receaued of God all the good thinges which they haue, do geue thākes vnto him for the same. But this did not the Philosophers forasmuch as they did not thinke that all thinges depended of God. For they The Philosophers did not perfect­ly geue thankes vnto god. referred many thinges to chance and to fortune, that is, to the concourse of causes, which they supposed to be most frequēt, in this our lower region which is vnder the Moone. Further they affirmed, that many things happened vnto vs through the necessity of the matter. And so, forasmuch as they excluded very many thinges from the prouidence of God, they became very colde in geuing him thankes.

But waxed vayne in their imaginations.] In Gréeke it is, [...], Erasmus sayth: they were frustrated: For when by theyr i­magination they thought to haue obteyned the name of excellent learning and wisedome, they wonderfully vttred their owne foolishnes. And to be frustrate, What it is to be frustrated. what called vayne. is nothing els, then when we hope for some good thyng to come vnto vs, and the same falleth far otherwise then we thought for. Although we myght say as A­ristotle writeth, y ^e that is vayn which is not brought to the ende appoynted. And experience teacheth by these men, that so it happened vnto naturall wisdome.

For therfore was it reueled, that when they knew God, they shoulde haue had hym in reuerence and honour: But forasmuch as they bended not that way, it became vayne. [...], which is turned into English, imaginatiōs, or cogi­tations, are reasonynges or disputations, which are done wyth great pesing, and depe iudgement. Wherfore the Philosophers are reproued. bicause they a­bode not in those thinges which they naturally knew of God: but declined from it through their disputations and witty collections. For on the one side the creatures taught thē that the one God which they knew, ought to be honored of thē wyth a singuler feruentnes and purenes. And on the other syde fleshly lustes & entising pleasures vrged them, whiche oughte vtterly to haue bene excluded in that true and lawfull worshipping of God. But these witty men inuented, how The Philosophers sought two thinges in the worshippyng of god to knit them both together. For they brought in a worshippyng of God, but yet such as consisted of gold & siluer, gorgeous sacrifices, dainty banquets, playes, spectacles or goodly straunge sightes, and such lyke thynges, whiche ministred vnto their flesh the pleasures therof: so that wyth one and the selfe same worke, they both worshipped God, and also delighted the sences. And in summe, they fayned that goodnes, which Augustine agaynst Iulianus, calleth Scylleum bonum, Scylleum bonum. because it consisted partly of a man, and partly of a beast. Wherfore, we ought diligently to watch agaynst these fond imaginations, for that they engender so great daunger. For in the latter epistle to the Corrinthians. Paule writeth. For the weapons of our warfare, are not carnall, but mighty through God to cast downe stronge holdes. Wherfore we ouerthrowyng such depe reasonings, and euery high thing we must ligentlye watche against our imagina­tions. that exalteth it selfe agaynst the knowledge of God, oughte to be content wyth that manifestation, wherby God declareth himselfe vnto vs. For as often as we patche any thing of our owne reason to the worde of God, so often we bring [Page 24] forth errors. Neyther do these thynges whiche Paule now reproueth, serue any lesse for these our tymes, then did they for y ^e idolatry of those tymes. For Christ This is applied to our tyme. Of the a­buse of the supper of the Lord. instituted the Lordes supper, that the death of the Lorde should there be had in remembraunce, and the communicantes should be pertakers of the fruite ther­of, and be ioyned vnto Christ, and be alwayes coupled together among them­selues wyth a greater amitie, and mortefie the wycked lustes, and through that heauenly meate more and more practise a new lyfe. This is the worshipping, which in thys sacrament God requireth of his. Wherewyth men not beyng content, eyther because it was a thyng hard to be done, or els because they would euermore adde theyr owne inuentions to thynges pertaynyng vnto God, haue inuented outward ornaments, vestmentes, golde, siluer, precious stones, waxe, tapers, belles, and infinite ceremonies, therby to set forth thys sacrament: And would haue men to stand by at theyr Masse, and to be onely gasers on & harke­ners, which should in the meane tyme mumble vp theyr prayers: and after thys sorte they would be counted very vprightly to haue done their dueties in these deuyne mysteries: so that by such humane deuises the true and lawfull vse of the institution of Christ is in a maner abolished. This is the profite that commeth of humaine inuentions. So madde and foolishe becommeth the hart, that it pre­ferreth lyght and friuolous thynges, before thynges necessary and sound▪

And when they counted themselues vvise, they became fooles.] They had a wonderfull pleasure in themselues by reason of theyr owne inuentions. And they which aboue others professed wisedome, by the iust iudgement of God be­came fooles. They disdayned to contayne themselues wythin the bondes of that wisedome and knowledge which God had reueled vnto them by his crea­tures, whereby they were called to worship God: and did rather geue place to theyr owne imaginations, then to the doctrine which they had receyued. They delighted in their owne sharpe wittes, & counted it for a great prayse that they had found out the reason, how to set forthe before the eyes of the common peo­ple, the worshippyng of God by images, & glorious idols. Which could neuer haue bene brought to passe wythout such reasons, whiche had great lykelihoode An excuse of idola­trers. of truth. When they were reproued, they excused theyr acte wyth this pretence, that they counted not those thinges to be gods which they worshipped, but that they vsed such helpes, wherby they might the easelier come to the true God.

And they obiected a similitude taken of a ciuile custome: for that men haue not free accesse vnto Kynges and Emperours, but by Erles, and vnder officers. But of how much force thys reason is, Ambrose vpon thys place declareth. For thus he writeth: Men throughe shame vse accustomably euery where thys miserable excuse, why they neglect to come vnto God, saying: that by them we go vnto God, as by noble men we come vnto a kinge. Well saide, is there any man so madde, or so vnmindfull of his health, to geue vnto a noble mā the honor due vnto the king only? For that if any in such sorte behaue themselues, they are iustly condemned as gilty of treason. And shall these men not thinke themselues gilty, which geue the honor of the name of God vnto a creature? and forsaking their Lord do worship theyr fellow seruauntes? as though there were anye thing greater then God, to whom a man might do seruice. For therfore also do we goe vnto a king by Tribunes, and noble men, because the kinge is also a man and knoweth not to whome to commit the publique wealth. But to come vnto God from whome vndoub­tedly We neede no aduo­cates to come vnto God. nothinge is hidden (for he knoweth the merites of all men) we haue no neede of an aduocate, but of a deuout minde. For wheresoeuer such a one shall speake vnto hym, he will aunswere hym. These wordes of Ambrose, if they be of value to confounde thys similitude of these Idolatrers, they are able also to confute our men: for­asmuch as they by the self same fayned deuise, defend the inuocation of saints.

They became fooles.] For that in steade of the true and perfect-worshippyng of God, they embraced but a shadow thereof: which thyng Paule in moe places The folishenes of idol [...] trers, then in one reproueth. In the 2. to Tim. the 3. chap. he sayth: Hauyng in deede the forme of piety, but vtterly denying the power therof. And to the Colossians the 2. chap. [Page] he writeth that The commaundementes and traditions of men, haue in deede a shew of wisedome, when as in very deede they are nothyng els but superstitious.

And they turned the glory of the immortall God into an image.] Made not onely after the similitude of a mortall man, but also of birdes, and foure footed An ampli­fication of sinne. and creepyng beastes. After that they began to esteeme their owne inuentions aboue the doctrine which was reueled vnto them, straight way followed idola­try, which springeth of the errour of the mynde. And whereas it is sayde, that God cannot be robbed of his glory. they transferred the glory of God vnto creatures, they are reproued, for that they knew that that glory was in deede in God. But when it was offered them they turned it by sacriledge from him an other way. Which sinne is here won­derfully aggrauated. It was an hainous acte to robbe God of his due honour: it was haynous also to transferre the same vnto a corruptible man: but it was more haynous to transferre it vnto brute beastes, and moste haynous of all was it to transferre it vnto the images of all these thinges. Neyther is thys thyng spoken, as Chrisostome noteth, as though they could in very deede depriue. God of hys glorye or honour: for that lyeth not in the power of any creature: But they are accused of rashe boldenes, in that they presumed, as muche as laye in them, to assaye to bryng the same to passe. GOD is in this place called [...], which signifieth not onely immortalitye, but also the takyng awaye of all kynde of griefe, or spotte of anye manner of corruption. And contrary wyse, in that man is called [...], it declareth hym not onelye to be mor­tal, but also to be subiecte vnto manye discommodities and corruptions. A place of the. 106. Psalme.

Thys phrase of speach, Paule transferreth out of the 106. Psalme, where it is written: That the Israelites made a calfe in Horeb, worshipped a molten Image, and chaunged theyr glorye into the similitude of one that eateth haye. Herein onely sée­meth the difference to be, in that here it is sayd, that the glorye of God was chaū ­ged: but ther is sayd, that theyr glory was chaunged. Howbeit in eyther of y ^e pla­ces is contayned one and the selfe same sense. For their glory was God: in him The glory of God con­sisteth in all things. gloried the Hebrewes: And Dauid euery where in hys Psalmes, calleth him hys glorye. And if a man should peraduenture demaunde, in what thinges this glo­rye of God consisteth, to aunswere brieflye, herein it is contayned: to acknow­ledge him for the author and distributer of all good thinges: the iudge of all mens doinges: and so amplye to bée spread abroad, that he filleth all thynges. These thynges if they be beleued, do engender adoration, a trust or confidence, inuoca­tion, geuing of thankes, feare, and other such lyke poyntes of religion. But the wicked inuentions of men doe ascribe these thynges vnto Idoles, and doe binds God vnto certayne places, signes, and images. And whom we know to be eue­ry where, hym do they make to dwell in some one place onely. And as mennes mindes are presumptuous and bolde, contrarywyse now in our dayes, whilest with tooth and naile they maintaine theyr transubstantiations, or (if I may so call them) theyr impanations, they in such sorte diffuse the body of Christ, which oc­cupieth in déede one certaine place, that it is really, not onely in so many places, The begin­ning of images. in how many the Supper of the Lorde amonge Christian men is celebrated: but also now they contend by expresse wordes, that it is euery where. The endeuour of Idolatrers at that tyme was, to teach the common people to honour God (which is but onely one) by sundrye proprieties, which they adioyned to certaine Images of their owne inuention. And it is a wonder to sée, how much those mē pleased them selues in these thynges. Plato in Cratilus bringeth in Socrates dis­puting of the right imposition of names: and chieflye he diligently examineth the names of the Gods, and sheweth, that by them are very aptlye signified the pro­prieties of thinges deuine. Which place Cicero also séemeth to haue imitated in hys booke of the nature of Gods: whē vnder the person of the Stoyke, he sheweth, what the names of the Gods signifie, and in what maner they ought to be refer­red vnto one God, onely. These men vndoubtedly woulde make them selues wyser then God, which hath declared hym selfe by the framing of the whole world. For, as though that were not sufficient, these men inuented Images, and [Page 25] many kindes of Idoles. But thys is a wyse saying of Athanasius: When a li­uing man moueth thee not to knowe God, how can a man of woode cause thee to doe it? They first inuented Images, as they alleaged, for representation sake. But from thence they were afterward ledde to worship thē. And that they also worshipped the Images of brute beastes, many historyes do manifestly declare. Vnto Bell T [...]e woor­shipping of brutebeasts among the Babilonians was first erected an Image, by whō was alwayes a Dra­gon present, if we credite to the Apochriphas of Daniell. The Aegyptians had A­nubis, an Oxe, which they worshipped. And Ambrose testifieth, that there were holy seruices done to Rauens. Furthermore, for that the Poetes fayned, that Iupiter for the fulfilling of hys filthye lustes, was sometymes turned into a bull, sometymes into a Swanne, and sometymes into an Egle, those kinde of beastes they consecrated vnto God, and honoured them as Gods. But they néeded not thus to haue set forth the power of God, by so many fayned inuentions: foras­much as all creatures doe beare witnes of hym. Wherfore to inuent Images, was nothyng ells, then to light vp Candles and Torches in the Sunne. Thys The deuise of the deuill concerning idolatry. thyng the deuill chieflye laboured for, that the power of God might be bound vn­to certayne places: that men myghte there onely praye vnto God: and there receaue great holynes: and lastly, there to make an end of theyr godlines: as though out of those places, they might liue as they luste them selues: as we sée now the vse is, in receauing of the Supper of the Lorde. There onely mē thinke that all good thynges are to bée poured out towardes God: vnto it they prostrate them selues, there they knocke their brestes, there they make inuocation, there shewe they forth what soeuer pietie they haue. All other thynges in comparison of it, are a playe and of no waight. Thys is worthye to bée noted, that Paule doth here so sharply reproue these men, which yet sayd that they worshipped not those Images, but by them honoured the one onely God: and the Scriptures do eue­ry where reprehend them, for that they worshipped the workes of theyr owne handes. By which wordes an vpright iudgement may gather, that these vulgare and common excuses, are not to bee admitted. Yea, and Augustine also in hys 6. Sermon in the 10. tome, after thys sorte conuinceth the Ethnickes, that they tooke theyr Idole for a God, because vnto it they builded altars: For (saith he) that A vaine ex­cuse or de­fence of the Ethnikes for Images they haue a God, and doe worship that Idole for a God, the altar doth testifie. What ma­keth the altar there, if that it bee not counted for a God? Let no man say vnto me, it is not a God. I haue already answered, that matter I would to God they knew this thyng so well as we know it. But both what they haue, and also for what thing they haue it, the altar doth testifie. Thys place of Paule taketh away all excuse from Idolatrers. They These thinges pertayne vnto them which wor­ship ima­ges, in the Papacy. An oration of Sym­machus. wer no lesse wittie to defend their Idolatries, then are our men at this day to de­fend the worshipping of Sainctes. Which thyng he that beleueth not, let hym read the 30. Epistle of Ambrose, which contayneth the oration of Symmachus: wherin in the name of the people of Rome, and of the Senate, he desired of the Emperours Ʋalentinian, Theodosius, and Arcadius, that the worshipping of the Gods myghte bée restored. Symmachus denyeth not in that place, but that God is euery wherebut yet he sayth, that it is much better, to haue some certain places appoynted for religion. And he would haue the secretes of the deuine na­ture to bée secluded from the people, vnto which diuerse nations aspyre not by one and the selfe same meanes, for that all are not of one disposition. Hée boa­steth muche of miracles: namelye, that by these Gods, Rome was defended from Hannihall, and from the Senons, and lastly, that it had subdued the whole worlde vnder her gouernment: but since they were neglected, greuous calami­ties haue happened vnto the publicke wealth. He contendeth, that there is but one God onely, vnto whom all men haue a regarde, and doe come vnto hym by sundrye wayes. Wherfore in the conclusion, he requireth that the Emperours would bée so good, to suffer euery nation to haue hys owne religion. But what Ambrose aūswereth to these thinges, here is now no méete place to declare. They whiche are desirous thereof, may easilie read it in hys 31. Epistle.

Wherefore God gaue them vp to vncleanes, through the lustes [Page] of their owne harts, to defile their owne bodies amōg themselues which chaunged his truth for a lye, and worshipped and serued the thinges that be made, more then him that made them, which is to be praysed for euer. Amen.

VVherefore God deliuered them vp.] Now is described the punishement, The pu­nishment wherewith Eod tooke vengeance vpon ido­latry. wherewith God tooke vengeance vpon the haynous sinne of idolatry. Whiche he therefore so greuously punished, for y ^t he will haue his owne glory alwayes reserued vnto himselfe. By Esay the prophete he sayth: My glory will I not geue vnto an other. And forasmuch as he hath spoused vnto himselfe the faythful, as a spouse and chast virgin, he can not abide, that they should be defiled with the adulterous worshipping of Idols. In the law he calleth himself a gelious God, for that he will not suffer this dishonour. Further greate was the anger, wher­with he was incensed: because these wicked actes were done by thē, of whom they were least of all to be looked for, that is, of the learneder sort, which farre excelled others in wisdome, as it is reported the Egiptians did. For as this nation was counted the mother of sciences, so also was it a most aboundant As the E­giptians were moste excellent in lerning so were they the greatest idolatrers. Chrisostom of Plato. Socrates. Astrono­mers. fountayne of idolatry. There, not only men were worshipped, but also Oxen, Crocodiles, Leekes, Oynions, Cattes, and many more such like thinges. And as Chrisostome thinketh, Plato for that by much traueling, he had attayned vn­to their doctrine, had a great pleasure in himselfe. And Chrisostome reproueth So­crates the scholemaster of Plato, because when he was at the poynt of death, he desired his friendes, to pay vnto Aesculapius a Cocke, which he remembred he owed him. Astronomers, which aboue others boast themselues as touching the knowledge of celestiall thinges, haue transferred into heauen a Beare, two twynes, a Bull, a Crowne, an Egle, a Scorpion, a Snake and such like mon­strous thinges: and to the starres which are the excellent workes of God, they faynedly adioyne these theyr madde dreames, and do after a sort attribute vnto them the gouernment of the world. This thing hath the deuill procured, that men should become subiect vnto those thinges, ouer whiche they ought to be Lordes and rulers. So man which was made, to be lifted vp into heauen, neg­lecting himselfe, hath to his power lifted vp to the same place brutishe and vn­reasonable beastes. Further the Poetes, which aboue other men were had in admiration, did they not fayne what they lusted themselues of the Gods? Of The sondry iudgemente of Plato touching Poets. their deuise and opinion Plato (which is counted the most graue amongst the Philosophers) speaketh doubtfully. In his bookes De Repub: he iudgeth them worthy vtterly to be banished out of the city, because they spake so vnreuerent­ly of the Gods. And yet in an other place, he commaundeth, that when they en­treate of thinges deuine, we shoulde geue credite vnto them: because they de­clare such thinges not of themselues, but by heauenly inspiration. If a man Why Ido­latrers worshipped Crocodiles and Ser­pentes. would demaund of them why so wise mē worshipped eyther Crocodles or ser­pentes, paraduenture they would haue aunswered, that they in them wondred at the most mighty power, whereby they do hurt men: and that in them is ex­pressed the auenging wrath of God, which by those worshippinges they desired to be turned away from them, in worshipping God as [...], that is, as an expeller away of those euill thinges. And this sinne was so spred abroade, that it infected the Iewes also. For in Ezechiell it is written, that when he was of the The Iewes also woor­shipped cre­ping beasts spirite caried by the heares of the head into Ierusalem, he saw in it not onlye that Idole, whereby the wrath of God was prouoked, but also in the Temple he perceaued, that on the walles were paynted, beastes, liuing creatures, and all maner of creeping beastes, vnto which the chiefe elders of the people with much reuerence offred incense: which was to geue vnto them deuine honours. The selfe same thing is at this day openly vsed in the Papacy vnto signes, I­mages, In the Pa­pacy they burne in­cense to I­mages. and stockes: and yet they say, they are free from the crime of idolatry. Further the Prophet saw on the other side women bewayling Tamuz, that is, Adouides. Lastly he beheld men in the sanctuary, whiche turning their shoul­ders [Page 26] to the most holy place, and their face towardes the dores of the Tempell, worshipped the Sunne as it rose in the Easte. And it is there sayd, that by rea­son of all these thinges, the wrath of God was wonderfully prouoked. Paule al­so in this place declareth, with what punishementes God punished the Gentles for these sinnes. For he saw that his doctrine was contemned: in that whereas he had reuealed himselfe through the beuty and hugenes of the whole worlde which he had made, so excellent a gift was vtterly had in no reputatiō amongst men. And they chose vnto themselues so many Images and peculiar inuenci­ons, as there were kingdomes, prouinces, cityes, families, and in a maner men. The punishement which they suffred, was, that God deliuered them vp to their owne lustes to be tormented. This was that punishement which is called Paena talionis, like for like. For euen as they spoyled God, as much as in them lay, of his glory, so agayne on the other side, God deliuered them, to be vexed Poena ta­lionis. with most filthy lustes: so that they degenerated, not only into brute beastes, but also became farre vnderneath them. This is the greatest infelicity that can hap­pen vnto man, when the spirite and the mynde, which ought to gouerne, are by the iust iudgement of God made su [...]iect to cruell and most filthy lustes, we We haue domesticall tormenters Many Actcons. A place of the Psalms haue no neede of any outward tormenters: we haue auēgers inough at home. For that which the Poetes fable of Acteon, that he was torne in pieces of hys dogges, hath place in these men, which are inflamed and rent in sonder of the lustes of their owne mynde. And this phrase, which Paule here vseth, is taken out of the 81. Psalme, wherein is reade: My people hath not harkened, neyther hath Israell geuen hede vnto me. And I haue deliuered them vp into the frowardnes of theyr hart: and they haue walked in their owne deuises. Let those which defend the powers That free will is no­thing with out grace. and strengthes of man, and which attribute in a maner all thinges vnto free will, yea and that without the grace of Christ, consider by these thinges, howe farre they erre from the truth. Here is described the horriblest punishement that can be: when a man is forsaken of God and delyuered vp to be gouerned of himselfe. Neither helpeth it any thing at all to say, that here is now entrea­ted onely of lustes, and of the brutish, or inferior partes of our mynde: foras­much as Paule hath togeth [...]r with lustes made mencion of the hart, whereby is noted the nobler part of the mynde. And Dauid sayth playnly, That God for­sooke them, that they should go on according to their owne hart, and counsels. But how is this kinde of speach to be expounded, God deliuered vp them to their owne lustes? Whether to deliuer vp be al one with God to permitte. The rea­sons of thē that say to deliuer vp is to per­mitte. All the fathers in a maner teach, that To deliuer, is all one, as if it should haue bene sayde, to suffer, to permitte, or to forsake. For they seme to abhorre to say, that God is the cause of sinne. And these are the reasons as farre as I ga­ther, that moue them thereunto: Because the holy scriptures do testefye, that God willeth no sinne, forasmuch as it is written: Thou art the God that wilt no iniquity. Further this thing they labour for, to take away all maner of excuse from the wicked actes of men: vnto which wicked actes if God shoulde driue them, it shoulde seeme, that they might lay for an excuse the will of God. Fur­ther they endeuor themselues to aduance the glory of God, that he should not be accused of iniustice, for that he driueth men into sinnes, and then afterward reproueth them for the same. Lastly they labour to mayntayne free will, least if it should be thought, that God driueth men to sinne, it should either be taken away, or els be diminished. Vnto these reasōs Chrisostom vpon this place addeth two similitudes. One of a captayne, which in the fight or battayle forsaketh his host. For he is sayd, to betray his souldiers to hys enemyes, when as in ve­ry deede he only withdraweth from them his helpe and presence. So God is said to deliuer vp these men, because he taketh away from them his helpe and grace. The other similitude, is of a Prince or king: which when he seeth his sonne to be past all goodnes, and perceaueth, that he can not make him good, depriueth him of all his goodes, and forsaketh him. So (sayth he) dealeth God with these men. But these reasons seeme not of necessitie to driue vs to this kynde of in­terpretation. [Page] For as touching sinne, we graunt y ^e God willeth no sin, if we loke vpō his wil, which is declared vnto vs in y ^e lawes of God & in y ^e holy scriptures. He answe­reth to the reasons al­leaged. But y ^• he vtterly and absolutely willeth no sinne, we may in no case graunt, for asmuch as we know, that he made all thinges whatsoeuer he would: & agaynst his will no man can resist, wherefore if by all maner of wayes he would it not, then could it by no meanes be done. Further we affirme, that all excuse is taken away from sinners: forasmuch as their conscience reproueth them, nether sinne they against their will or by compulsion. And that litle which lay in them to do, as touchyng outward discipline they performed not. Neyther ought God to be accused of vnrighteousnes, although he will and incline or dryue the wils of the wicked into greuous sinnes. For these synnes as they proceede from hym, are punishments, and those most iust, and whatsoeuer God appoynteth or decreeth, it is streight way iust and holy: neither ought hys iustice to be weighed accor­dyng to the consideration of our iustice. For God oughte not to be accused of blame or iniquity, because he suffreth many to sinne before hys face, whome he could holde backe, and helpe with his grace that they should not fall, vnder thys pretence, because we should iustly be acc [...]sed if we shuld permit any such thing. We may not thinke that these thinges are repugnaunte the one to the other: Namely, that we are iustly accused, and that we vtterly wante all excuse if we sinne: and yet notwithstandyng can not abstayne from sinne, neyther can we as we ought, obey the commaundements of God, vnles we be holpen by grace. And lastly, that it is God which worketh all in all: Forasmuch as in him we lyue, and are moued, and haue our beyng: And he beareth vp all thynges wyth the worde of hys power. These thinges ought we to beleue, for that they are O­racles of the holy scriptures. Wherfore, if by our reason they seme not to agree together, yet must we be content: for we can not perse the secretes of God, nei­ther hath God any nede of our excuses. Which excuses yet, if a man would na­rowly examine, he shal fynd y ^e they do not in any thyng satisfy our iudgement. If there be a maister of a householde which hath seruantes in hys house, which continually commit most greuous sinnes, and would make hys excuse and say that he driueth them not therunto, neither prouokee them to do naughtely, but onely suffreth them, wincketh at them, and permitteth them, what an excuse I pray you should this be. Neyther is free will, by thys thinge in daunger, so far forth as we must graunt y ^e free will is. For we ought not to beleue y ^e god doth so deliuer men, that he compelleth them or dryueth thē agaynst theyr will. They willingly, gladly, and of theyr owne accord serue their owne lustes. The simili­tudes which Chrisostome, bringeth are verye weake. For howe can a Captayne which forsaketh hys host, not be counted the cause of theyr destruction? And al­though, when the house toppe falleth, the wayght thereof draweth it vnto the earth, yet how shall not he which remoued the beame or piller, whiche stayed it vp, be sayd to be the cause of the fall therof? So that whether soeuer they turne themselues, when they say that God forsaketh and withdraweth his helpe, they must nedes be compelled to say, that God after a sort willeth sinne. And the fa­ther which disinheriteth hys sonne when he can not amend hym, what compa­rison hath he with GOD, whiche can if he wyll, amende men? Wherefore, we see not why we should be iustly perswaded by these reasons to interprete these wordes. To deliuer, to harden, to blinden, by these wordes. To suffer, to permit, and to forsake. But as touchyng this matter, let vs briefely examine Augustines opini­on: Augustine de praede­stinatione & gratia. Augustine de gratia & libero arbitrio. whether God be sayd to deliuer the vngodly vnto their lustes, onely in for­sakyng them, or also after some maner forcyng them. He semeth in this matter to be diuersly mynded. For in hys booke of predestination and grace the 4. chap. he hath this interpretation, of suffryng & permittyng. And he addeth that to harden is nothing els, then y ^e he wil not make soft. To blinden is nothyng els then y ^e he wil not illuminate: to put backe, is nothing els then y ^• he wil not call. But in his boke of grace & frée wil y ^e 21. chap. he writeth manifestly inough as I thinke. That God worketh in the hartes of men, to incline their willes, whether so euer it pleaseth [Page 27] hym: eyther to good thynges according to hys mercy, or ells to euill thinges according to theyr desertes: and that by his iudgement, being sometimes open, and sometimes hidden, but alwayes iuste. These wordes declare, that our willes are sometimes styrred vppe of God, not onely in forsaking or permitting vs, but also by some inclinati­on to euill thynges. Julianus Pelagianus also (as the same Augustine agaynst him Augustine agaynst Iulianus. in hys 5. booke and 3. chap. sayth) reproueth Augustine, because he had read, that the same Augustine affirmed, that God is wonte to punishe: sinnes by sinnes. And he sayth: If the matter were thus, then ought we to prayse and commende concu­piscense and sinnes, as good thynges, which thou affirmest to bee inflicted vpon vs as pu­nishmentes. But there, agaynst hym are brought forth many notable places of y ^t Scripture, by which is proued, that God bryngeth in sinnes, as punishmentes, Many no­table places of the scrip­ture. and paynes deserued. We can not denie, but that the deuill in tempting, poureth in to vs wicked cogitations: and that he receaueth power of God so to do. God styred vp Dauid to number the people, as it is written in the 2. booke of Samuell the 24. chapter. But in the booke of Chronicles, Sathan is sayd to haue moued Dauid vnto it. And it skilleth not, whether God dyd it by hym selfe, or by the de­uill: for it is all one. In the 1. booke of Kinges, God would haue Achab the king deceaued by a lying spirite, that hee shoulde geue credite vnto false Prophetes: which without doubt was sinne. And in Esaie the 63. chap. it is written: Wher­fore haste thou made vs to erre, and haste hardened our hartes that we should not feare thee? And in the 11. chap. of Iosua: God hardened the hartes of the vnbeleuing Gen­tiles. And in that Roboam harkened not vnto the elders, which gaue him good admonition, that was therefore, because the conuersion was of the Lorde, to performe hys worde, which hee spake of hym by the hand of the Prophet. And in the 2. Para­lip. the 25. chapter: Amasias king of Iudah harkened not vnto Ioas king of Israell, because God had so wrought in hym, to deliuer hym into hys handes. And in Ezechiell the 14. chap: If a Prophet bee deceaued, I haue deceaued hym. Also, in the Lordes prayer we praye: Lead vs not into temptation. These thynges in a maner allea­geth Augustine: wherby appeareth, that God deliuereth the wicked vnto theyr owne lustes, not onely by permission, but also by a certayne incitation. But a­gaynst these sentences, Iulianus séemed to obiecte thrée thinges: Fyrst, that lustes Thre ob­iections of Iulianus. are (as I sayd at the beginning) to be praysed, for that they are said to be punish­mentes inflicted of God. Further, as touching thys place, it is manifest inough (sayd he) what Paules meaning is. For in that he sayth, that they were deliuered vp vnto their lustes, it appeareth, that they were before infected with them, and that they had them before within them selues: and that God to deliuer vp, is no­thyng ells then to permitte. Thyrdly he sayth, that God is sayd to deliuer, rather by a certayne pacience, or suffering, then by power, God in déede suffreth these thinges to bée done: but he doth not by hys power and myght driue them to doe them. To these thynges, Augustine in the same chapter maketh aunswere, and sayth, that it is a very weake argument, that sinnes should therefore be prayse worthy, because God by them doth sometimes punishe vs. Otherwyse we should commend the deuill also, whose bondslaues we are made through sinne, and of hym are greuouslye afflicted. For he is the tormentour of God, and the execu­tour of the deuine vengeaunce. Moreouer we read, that Saule was geuen of God to be kyng, in Gods furye and wrath, to auenge the wantonnes and rebellion of the people, by the tyrannie of a wicked kyng. And yet is not an vngodly kyng therefore to be commended or praysed. These thynges and such lyke, do plainly declare the weakenes of that argument. And as touching that which was sayd in the second place, that the wordes of the Apostle, which we are here in hand with, carye with them theyr exposition (for they are sayd to be deliuered vp vnto the lustes of theyr owne hart. Wherfore they had them within them before, and God wrought them not within them: but for that they were before extant, he de­liuered them vp vnto them, to be set a fire of them) we graunt in déede, that the powers and faculties of lusting, are naturally grafted in man. And God was the author of them, when he created man. But God made them moderate, and such which should be subiecte vnto reason, and obedient vnto the worde of God: [Page] and not be rebellious, eyther agaynst hym or agaynst reason. But after sinne, they became stubborne, violent, and rebellious. Wherefore it is plaine, that that is false which thys man sayth, that suche lustes as we are now deliuered vp vnto for to be punished withall, were extant in vs before sinne. They are vndoubted­lye Iatsar harang, that is, an euill workmanship or imagination, wherwith our hart is perpetually enfected. But this euil imagination was not geuen of God in the creation, but followed after sinne. And agaynst that whiche was lastly alleaged, namely, that these things are done rather by the patience or suffrance of God, then by his power, Augustine declareth by the words of Paul that either of them is true: for to the Romanes it is written: Euen so God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power knowen, suffred with long patience the vessels of wrath Rom. 9. ordeyned to damnation. In these wordes is expresse mencion, as well of power as of pacience. And although in that 3. chapter of the 5. booke agaynst Iulianus, Augustine sayth, that he greatly passeth not, whether of these wayes these kinde of speaches be expounded, yet enclineth he more to my sentence, to thinke, that God worketh something els, when he delyuereth, hardeneth, or blyndeth, then that he suffreth, permiteth or forsaketh. Yea, he manifestly writeth that it is not likely, but that, euē as God whē he punisheth, worketh something in our bodies: so also should we thinke that he worketh something in the mindes, although af­ter a secrete maner. And thus much hitherto of the Fathers. If my iudgement therein should be demaunded, I would say, that these kyndes of speache, To de­liuer vp, to blinden, to harden, and to seduce, do signify somethyng more then to be forsakē of God, or withdrawing of grace, which hapneth through sin, and which all men confesse. For we can not deny, but that of God are offred many occasions, which in men that are destitute of grace and of the holy ghost, séeme to stirre vp euill lusts: & to be vnto thē occasion of fallyng, as it is manifest of y ^e vngodly king Achab, vnto whō the words of the false prophetes wer as a snare. And the words of God pronounced vnto Pharao by Moses, wer instrumēts of his greater hardening. And the aduersities, whiche happened vnto the Israelites in the desert, were occasions both of blasphemye, and also of infidelity. And that God ministred such occasions, it is out of controuersye. Whiche occasions, when they light vpon a godly mynd, and one that is adorned with the grace of God, they turne vnto good, and are profitable for theyr saluation. But when Occasions inward and outward. they happen vpon those, which are forsaken of God, they cause a greater fall, and a greater turning away from God. And such occasions happen both out­wardly, and also inwardly. For not only persecutions, aduersities, pleasures, and entismentes do outwardly offer themselues vnto vs, but also cogitacions, and inward motions are suggested vnto the mynde, which to the godly are pro­fytable to saluation: but the wicked they do more and more confyrme in impie­ty. Besides these occasions, such as are alredy alienated from God seme not to nede any other preparation to sinne. For by reason of our corrupt nature we are prone inough vnto it of our selues. Wherefore Paule, in this Epistle to the Romanes, sayth, that these vessels of wrath are prepared and apt to destruction. And in the booke of Genesis, Our cogitations and counsels are prone vnto euill euen from Sinne comprehendeth two things our childehode. But to make the thing more playne, being otherwise somewhat darke, it shalbe good to marke, that sinne comprehendeth two thinges, Action, and a defect or want. For, that action is called sinne, which wanteth of the law and of such conditions and circumstances, which should make it vpright and commendable. If we speake of the action, in that it is extant, and is counted a­mong naturall creatures, it is not to be doubted but that it is done of God. But the defect or want (forasmuch as it pertayneth to priuation, neyther is in very deede extant) hath no neede of any efficient cause: but it sufficeth, that the grace It is God which with draweth his grace from sin­ners. of the holy ghost be remoued, and our strengthes taken away, by whiche that action myght haue bene brought to a iust perfection. And who can deny, but that this withdrawing of strengthes and grace is done of God? For he is the mode­rator [Page 28] of hys owne giftes. But we must alwayes adde this, that God doth iust­ly and for our euill desertes withdraw hys ayde. And as Anselmus writeth, in his booke, of the fall of the deuill: Euen as we are not afrayd to confesse, that that creature is made of God, which yet is brought forth through the wicked will of man (for we say that God is the Creator of an infant borne of adultery) why also shall we deny, but that he is the author of that action, whiche is brought forth through an euill will? And this must we without all controuersy graunt, that whatsoeuer is extant in the nature of thinges, the same must of necessitie haue God for hys author. Wherefore it followeth, that these thinges are done of God, not only by per­mission, but also his might and power thereunto helpeth, and (as they say) wor­keth God per­mitteth not against his will, but willingly. with all. Otherwise that thing should be nothing. For whereas they talke of permission, I would fayne know of them, whether God permitteth willing­ly, or not willingly? If thou say not willingly, then shall it followe, that God permitteth it agaynst hys will, and by compulsion. But if thou say, that he doth it willingly, because he made all thinges, whatsoeuer he would, it can not be auoyded, but that the will of God after some maner concurreth to the pro­ducing of sinne. But this thing ought we alwayes to haue before our eyes, that one & the selfe same thinge, as it proceedeth from vs, is sinne: but, as it is of God, it is no sinne. Therefore if in thys question we should aunswere simplye, we ought to say, that God is not the cause of sinne, in that it is sinne. Because he (as we haue alredy often sayde) inflicteth those thinges, whiche in vs are sinnes, as punishementes, and wythdraweth his grace from such as haue de­serued Whether a man endu­ed with the grace of God, can fall into sin. The grace of God is not alwaies of one and the selfe same effica­cye. euill, and oftentymes ministreth vnto them occasions of falling, to the ende they should iustly be punished. And if thou wilt demaund, whether a man endued with grace, and not forsaken of God, can fall, I would answere, that the grace of God is not alwayes after one and the self same maner. For some­tymes, by the iust iudgement of God, it is more remisse, and by it our hart and mynde are not so strongly, and with such efficacy chaunged. And then a man may fall, and often tymes committe greuous sinnes. But when it is of effica­cy, and mighty, and when it fully beareth dominion in our hartes, it preserueth vs from the greuouser sort of sinnes, so much as in this life is possible. But to returne to that which we were in hand with, we can not deny but that God af­ter a sort is the cause of sinne, whether we consider the action, whiche is natu­rall, or the taking away of strengthes and grace: although that happen not but through our fault. For so sayd Oseas: Thy perdition or destruction commeth of thee O Israell, but thy saluation commeth from me. Wherfore, when it is sayd that God is the cause of sinne, we must graunt, that not to be spoken properly: forasmuch, as we haue in our selues sufficient cause of sinne. And although we cauel neuer so much of other sinnes, yet what shall we say of Originall sinne? Vndoubted­ly, there is none which doubteth, but that it is inflicted to vs of God for the a­uengement and punishment of the first fall. And we are so borne with it, that it can not be sayd, that we draw it by any other proper sinne before committed of vs. But in these thynges we must deale moderately, and in a Christian assem­bly we must speake warely. For if a man streight way shall absolutely and simply say, that God is the cause of sinne, he shall not say true: and the thyng not beyng well vnderstoode, will cause many to be offended, and men wyll excuse It must be aunswered by partes. theyr wycked actes, and go about to lay the cause of them vpon God. The mat­ter may be declared by partes, and the truth may in such maner be spoken, that all maner of offence may be auoyded. But, which is the best way thus to deale, The Ma­neches. we haue alredy shewed. A great many heretofore haue erred in thys matter. The Maneches, for that they woulde not make the almighty God the author of sinne, because they perceiued the Scriptures to be repugnaunt vnto theyr sen­tence, appoynted two beginninges, and framed vnto themselues two Gods, one good, and an other euil: one of the old Testament, and an other of the new, one the Creator of thys visible worlde, an other the father of our Lorde Iesus [Page] Christ. They thoughte that by this meanes they could conciliate those thynges which are euery where written in the holy scriptures. The good God, they vt­terly denied to be the cause of sin. But the author of it they made the god of this world, whome they pronounced to be euill. They abused a place of the latter e­pistle A place of the latter Epistle to the Cor: to the Corinthians, where it is sayd: In whome the God of this world hath blin­ded the hartes of the vnbeleuers. Behold, sayd they, to make blynde pertayneth not not in any case vnto the good God, but vnto the God of this worlde. But thys place nothinge helpeth them. For we may thus vnderstande it, that God hath blynded the hartes of the vnbeleuers, which are sayd to be of this worlde. And after this maner doth Augustine read it. Farther peraduenture by it, is signi­fied the Deuill, whome Christ, and also Paule calleth the prince of thys worlde, with his fellowes, powers, aduersaries vnto vs, & the gouerners of this worlde and of darkenes. Neyther is it any meruayle, if he be called a God: for so was he counted and worshipped of the infidels. For the Scripture vseth sometymes to name thinges, not as they are, but as they are counted. Moreouer, there is no cause why, but that we may vnderstande by the God of thys worlde, the true God, which hath created this world, that is, thys visible world: and the self same God is the father of our Lorde Iesus Christ. Neither is it a thyng vnsemely for hym, to blinden the hartes of the vnbeleuers: when as Paule in this place saith: that he deliuered them vp both vnto theyr owne lustes, and also into a reprobate mynde. Yea and Christ also sayth of hymself, that he came into iudgement: that they which saw, should be made blynde: and they which were blynde, should see. But vnto those thinges which we haue now spoken of, as touchyng occasions, A place of Iames. Whither God temp­teth men. namely, that God sometimes ministreth suche occasions, by whiche men desti­tute of grace and the holye Ghoste, are stirred vppe to sinne, a place of Iames seemeth to be repugnaunte, who in hys 1. chapter writeth thus: God tempteth not to euill. And yet we cannot deny, but that the scriptures sometymes testefye, that God tempted the Israelites, Abraham, and others. Augustine de consensu Euan­gelistarum, deuideth temptations into two kyndes. Namely, that some are to Two kinds of tempta­cion. proue, and other some to deceaue. And he graunteth, that God somtimes temp­teth to proue, but neuer to deceiue. But this distinction semeth not to be suffici­ent. For one and the selfe same temptation, when it ighteth vppon a godlye man, profiteth to trye hym wyth all. But if it happen to an vngodlye person, and one that is destitute of grace, it serueth to seduce him. As in the de­sert the temptacions, as touching Moses, Aaron, Iosua, and Chaleb, were proba­tions and trials: but vnto others, they were prouokementes vnto sinne. And yet it sufficiently appeareth, that God was the author of them. Wherefore, An other distinction of tempta­cions. The Greeke schooles. Howe God is not the author of inward tem­tations. laying a part Augustines distinction, there is an other which is more allowable, which is read in the Greeke Scholies: namely, that there are certayne tempta­tions vtterly outward: whose beginning or cause we haue not in our selues: as aduersities and persecutions: but there are other temptations, which seeme to burst forth out of the lustes of our mynde. And of thys kinde of temptation, say they the Apostle Iames admonisheth vs, that we should not make God the au­thor of them. Which must so be vnderstanded, that we ought not in such maner to appoynt God the author of them, therby to excuse our selues. And that thys is the Apostles meaning, those thynges which go before do well declare. Let no man (sayth he) when he is tempted, say, that he is tempted of God, as though he woulde excuse hys sinne. For euery man is tempted of his owne lustes. Wherfore he willeth vs to acknowledge in our selues the originall beginning of euill: and not to lay the fault vpon God. But yet he nothing prohibiteth, but that God may be sayd by hys iust iudgement sometimes to minister vnto these lustes which are graf­ted in our corrupt nature, occasions and prouokementes, as well inwardly in our myndes, as outwardlye. But we oughte to accuse the grounde, whiche wee haue in our selues: and not to laye that for an excuse, whyche is mi­nistred by God. Further, this is to be added, that we can not deny, but that the [Page 29] of originall sinne are inflicted vpon vs, to auenge the fall of the first pa­rentes, Two kinds of lustes. with which lustes euery one of vs is tempted. These lustes, vnto which those that are idolaters are deliuered vp to be punished, maye be deuided into two kindes: so that some lustes couet that which semeth good, and other some, driue away that, which is thought to be euill. And although it may séeme, that these affections were grafted in man by nature, yet were they not such at the beginning, when man was created, as now they are. But (as I haue alredy sayd) they were grafted moderate, and su [...]h as shoulde obey reason: but now What manner of affec­tions were grafted in man, when he was cre­ated. Stoikes without affections. A medio­crity of the Peripate­tikes. they are vnbrideled, and they resist reason and the worde of God. Wherefore when the Stoikes saw this corruption of them, they gaue iudgement, that their wise man should be vtterly free from all affections and passions, because, as the matter goeth now, they thought that wisedome could neuer agree with af­fections. For affections alwayes appeared vnto them to be subiect vnto vice and sinne. But the Peripatecians iudgement was, that the wise man ought not to be vtterly without affections: but they allowed those that were moderate. And be­ing demaunded, how these lustes should be kept in a meane, they sayd, that there is a mediocrity prescribed of reason. And they added moreouer, that this right reason, which should be iudge of this mediocrity, longeth to a wise man. But they were not able to shew who this wyse man was, which should perfectly de­fyne of thys meane, Wherefore the Christians, which deferre thys iudgement vnto the word of God, do nothyng at all erre: sithen they haue most sure rules taken out of the holy scriptures, by which are most manifestly defined, what thinges are to be desired, and what to be refused. There are two thinges vn­doubtedly Two rules to amend lustes with all. which amend, vitiate, and corrupt lustes. One is, that whether we eate or drinke or do any thinge els, we do all thinges vnto the glory of God. Which thing neither Aristotle nor Plato, nor any of the wise men of this world had taught, as Paule hath done. Further, forasmuch as it is agreed of the end, we must beware, that our woorke be not defiled other with defect or wante of affections, or els with excesse of them. And in summe, these appetites, so farforth as God hath grafted them in our nature, oughte not to be accused: but as we now haue them they are not without fault.

To vnclennes, with ignominye to defyle their owne bodies amonge them­selues.] The commentaries whiche are ascribed vnto Hierome, affirme that this ignominy or dishonor is to be referred, vnto the filthines, and vnpurenes whiche the Ethnikes committed in their sacrifices. And they expound the ignominye or dishonour of the bodyes to be burninges and markes, with which the bodies of those whiche were initiated and dedicated to Images, were defyled. But these thinges are farre wide from the truth: and the Apostle by those thinges which follow, doth manifestly declare, what his meaning is. For he referreth all thinges to vnnaturall carnall pleasure. Those thinges are cal­led What thinges are vncleane. vncleane, whose sight we can not abide, as in naturall thinges, is matter or corruption that commeth out of a sore, and dongue, and such like: and as is, as touching humane workes, glotony, dronkennes, especially when vomiting followeth, also lechery, especially that which is agaynst nature. Hereof he wri­teth vnto the Romanes, that that nacion, and all other nations, when they were without Christ, were wonderfull enfected wyth this pestilent vice. Neyther is this obscure, that he addeth. To defile their owne bodies with ignominy. For if he which committeth fornication, sinneth agaynst hys owne body, much more he which is defiled with this kynde of wickednes. Our bodies are the temple of the holy ghost, organes of God, and instrumentes sanctified.

Wherfore they which contaminate or defile them, do excedingly stray from the That they sin, which defile their bodies with luste. institution of God. And this happeneth vnto them, which departe from the true worshippyng of God. Vnto the Ephesians it is written of the Gentiles that be straungers from Christ. Howe that they walke in the vanitye of the mynde, hauyng their mynde darkened, and that they are alienated from the lyfe of God by reason of the [Page] ignoraunce which is in thē, & blyndenes of hart. Who, after that they came once to this pointe, that they ceased to be sory: gaue themselues to wantonnes, with a greedy desire to commit all maner of vncleannes. It might at the first sighte seme, that Paule speaketh vnreuerent and filthy thinges. But we must remem­ber, Paule ought not to be accu­sed of filthi­nes. that Vnto the cleane, all thinges are cleane: & the holy Ghost vseth, when he spea­keth of the elect, very freely to reproue wicked and most filthy actes. In y ^e Pro­phetes, and especially in Ezechiell, is mencion made of the Synagog, as of an harlot, which openeth her knees to all that come, and whose filthye lust was so great, that with reward she hired louers, which had the fleshe of asses, and the fluxe of horses. The holy ghost abhorred not from these kindes of speach. And yet thys letteth not, but that y ^e wordes of God, are wordes most chaste. For wordes otherwyse of theyr owne nature are indifferente: it is our luste that maketh them vyle and filthy. Howbeit Paule semeth somtymes somwhat to fauour the eares of the hearers, when vnto the Ephesians, by one world only he noteth these filthines of the Ethnikes, saying: It is filthy to declare the things which are committed of them in secrete. But Chrisostome sayth, y ^e the Apostle in thys place tēpereth hys speache betwene two great daungers. For on the one syde, forasmuch as it be­houed that these men should in such sort be reproued, that they should not be a­ble to deny their filthines (which thyng peraduenture had bene hard to be done if he had layd before them faultes not very greuous) it was necessarye, that he should most openly reproue those crimes, which euery man cōfessed to be most filthy. On the other syde some reuerence was to be had vnto the readers & hea­rers. Wherfore, he did with a wonderful prudence order his wordes. For in makyng mention of nature, he reproueth them, for that they were not content w ^t the vse of nature, but by their filthy lust, cōmitted violēce against their own na­ture. He vseth also some sharpenes of wordes, when he sayth: that they burnt, & defiled theyr bodies wyth contumelies dishonour, & that they fell into vn­cleannes and vnpurenes. All these thinges haue a wonderfull strength to moue the hartes of the readers. Ambrose demaundeth, howe these thynges shoulde be counted a punishment, which were vnto them great pleasures: when as contrariwise this semeth to be the nature of punishmentes, to be displeasaunt, and to be vrged vpon men euen by compulsion and against theyr willes. He answereth that this is to be ascribed vnto the goodnes of God, whiche woulde not punishe these men more greuously. But this semeth not to make much to Paules pur­pose. For that he by the bitternes of the punishment ment to increase the gre­uousnes of the sinne. Wherfore Chrisostomes iudgement herein fitteth better: for he sayth: that it is the greatest euill that can be, when a man reioyceth in hys owne hurtes, For if a man when he is sick [...], fele great griefe and payne, y ^e phi­sitions dispayre not of hym. But when he commeth once to that poynte, that he It is a most gree­uous euill, for a man to reioyce in his owne hurtes. feleth no payne nor griefe, then is he in a maner past all hope of recouerye. And madde folkes whē they teare themselues, and fare full ill wyth themselnes, are glad in so doyng, & miserably reioyce, when they eate dongue, stones, or coales, or beray themselues with dirt or filthy thinges. And yet doth not theyr myrthe make the calamity any thing the easier. So lykewyse are these men no lesse pu­nished wyth thys deformity of sinne: notwythstandyng, they seme to delyght themselues therin. Paule coulde vndoubtedly haue vpbrayded vnto them othervices. But those had not bene so full of shame, nor so apte to declare the calami­ty of the vnbeleuers.

Which haue chaunged his truth for a lye, and worshipped and serued the thinges that be created aboue the Creator, whiche is to be praysed for euer. Amen.

VVhiche haue chaunged his truth for a lye.] He agayne repeteth, that the Why I­dols are called a lye. cause of so greate a punishmente was idolatrye. By truth he meaneth the [Page 30] selfe same thynge whiche before he noted by glorye. And he calleth idols a lye. Because they wente aboute to take awaye from woode and stones that whiche they were: for that they no more counted them woode nor stones: And attributed vnto them that which they were not: deuine powers (I say) and the nature of God. And whē he sayth of God, which is to be praysed for euer.] He endeth his sentence with an excellent acclamation, which selfe thing he doth al­so when he writeth of Christ in the 9. chap. that he is God aboue all thinges to be praysed for euer, Amen. Wherefore seyng he pronounceth one and the selfe same thing both of the father, and also of the sonne, he manifestly declareth, that the sonne is equall wyth the father. And Chrisostome affirmeth, that this particle was therfore added, to the end we should vnderstand, that the enterprise of these men had no good successe. For although they assaied to robbe God of his glory, and to change hys truth, yet would they, or would they not, he remayneth God to be praysed for euer, Amen. Neyther did he therfore in suche sort take venge­aunce vpon them, to deliuer them vp into a reprobate sence, as though he could not otherwise cast them from hym. Their impiety was no let or hurt vnto him: they were their owne destruction: But because the Ethenikes are accused for the worshippyng of images, it shall not be from the purpose, somewhat to speake briefely as touchyng images. First we will speake of them whiche go about to resemble God by images: afterward we will touche somewhat of the Images of thinges which are corporall: and then whither they may be had in temples & in holy places: lastly whether there may be any good vse of them at all. And as God ought not to be expressed by any I­mages. touchyng the first, there is an expresse commaūdement in Deut. that God should not be portured by any images. And hereof he geueth a reason, because when he spake vnto them in Horeb, the people sawe there no image. The Prophetes al­so haue very often inculcated thys thyng: and especially Esay from the 40. cha. vnto the 45. entreateth in a maner of nothyng els. And Paule in the actes of y ^e Apostles, when he preached to the men of Athenes, sayde that men are of the ge­neration of God: but the nature of God hath no similitude, with stones, golde, or siluer. Farther, seyng no man hath sene God at any tyme, how shall any mā attempt to make his lykenes? He is infinite and can be comprehended in mynd, and much lesse in sence. Wherfore they which either painte or make his picture, do dishonour hys nature: as though it can be limited with lynes & cou­lors. And in the olde law the mercy seat in the middle part, which resembled the seat of God, was empty, to the ende occasion should not be geuen of making the nature of God in formes and images. For the representing of him by an image sprang first of infidelitie, because the reason of men could not perswade it selfe. The Ima­ges of God sprange of infidelitie. An example of the He­brewes. An obiecti­on touching the discrip­tions of the Prophets. that God was present, vnlesse it were manifest by some signe or image. Which thinge the Hebrewes plainly declared, when in the wildernes they sayde vnto Aaron: Make vnto vs Gods, which may go before vs.

But they obiect agaynst vs, That forasmuch as God is oftentymes diuersly described in the Prophetes, why in such sort may he not also be paynted? Espe­cially seyng scripture or writyng differeth very little from paintyng. Esay saith that he saw the Lord sittyng vpon an hygh seat, and exalted &c. How commeth it then to passe that the paynter may not set forth God in forme of a iudge or king. He is described in Daniell the 7. chap: like an olde aged man of person, vn­to whome the sonne of man was brought. What offence then shall it be for the paynter, if he only by loues and colours shadowe that, which the Prophete ex­presseth by woordes and writinges? In dede this argument semeth to haue a goodly shew: but it concludeth not that which it intendeth. For where the pre­cept of God vrgeth, there reasonynges and such like can not persuade, nor con­uince to cause vs to do otherwise. And though there seme to be some compari­son betwene those thynges which are prohibited, and those thynges whiche are permitted, yet oughte we neuer to take vppon vs to make those thynges a lyke, betwene which the worde of God hath put a difference. These are those [...] [Page] or vayne disputations and reasonings, which haue ingendred supersticions, [...] brought in idolatry. And though there were none other thyng to aunswere, yet Those things be­twene which the woord of God hath put a diffe­rence ought not to made a like. A differēce betwene writing and painting. Painting expoundeth not it selfe. were this sufficient. Howbeit, we coulde put a difference betwene writyng and payntyng: that although in the holy Scriptures there are set forthe one or two similitudes of GOD, there is yet in the same place expounded and decla­red what is the meanyng of them. And yf a man reade farther, he shall at the length fynde that God is a spirite, infinite, and whiche filleth heauen and earth. Which thing paynting teacheth not, neyther doth it declare it self: wher­fore it should easely at the length bring men into errors, and make them to be of that minde, to thinke that God is like a man. Augustine also in his little booke De fide & Simbolo, the 7. chap: And yet (sayth he) must we not therfore thinke, that God the father is circumscribed, as it were with the forme or shape of a man: that when we thinke of him, we should couceaue in our minds that he hath a right or left side, o [...] for that the Father is sayd to sitte, we should therfore thinke, that he doth it with bowing of his knees: least we fall into that sacriledge, for which the Apostle execrateth those which changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likenes of a corruptible man. For, all Christian to erect vnto God such an image & to place it in a temple, it is wicked: & much Of the pic­tures of Christ of the Apo­stles and of holy histo­ries. God forbad not gra­uing, car­uing, mol­ding nor painting. The begin­ninge of I­mages. more wicked is it to place such a one in the hart. Now resteth to consider touching I­mages which represent corporall things: as Christ, the Apostles & holy histories. Vndoubtedly, as touching the nature of these things, ther is no cause, but that they may be resembled by signs and pictures. Neither are the arts of grauing, caruing or molting, or painting at any time forbiddē by the commanndement of God. Augustine affirmeth, that the beginninge of Images, came of the desire whiche men bare towardes the deade. For when men tooke it vnpaciently, by death to be bereft of them whom they dearely loued, they desired at the least to solace themselues with the images of them. Which pretence (as shall after­ward be declared) the deuill abused to idolatry. And by thys meanes the Ima­ges of the elders were kept: and that was counted an honour vnto the dead, and brought some solace or comfort vnto theyr friendes. It is written of Alexander Emperour of Rome the sonne of Mamnea, that he had in hys Temple the Ima­ges Alexander the sonne of Mame­nia had I­mages in his temple. Images out of tem­ples are not to be con­demned so that they be not woor­shipped nor filthye. Marcellina a fellow cō ­panion of Carpocra­tes. A copper image of Christ. of Christ, of Moses, and of Abraham. The Turkes haue no Images at all, neyther publikely, nor priuately: In carpets they weue knots & small flowers, and certayne other thinges: but neuer any perfect Images. Which Images yet if they be had without worshipping: and that out of Churches, can not be condemned: so that they be rightly vsed and not worshipped. Wherfore Marcel­lina, is iustly condemned: which woman Augustine, in hys booke de haeresibus, ad Quoduult Deum, sayth, was a fellowe companion of Carpocrates, and had the Images of Christ, of Paul, of Homere, and of Pithagoras, which she both wor­shipped, & also offred incense vnto: which thing only was to be condēned. Other­wise to haue images, was not among the elders counted worthy of reproofe. Eusebius Cesariensis affirmeth, that he saw the Images of Peter and Paule, which certayne of the faythfull kept by them. And he telleth, that in Cesarea Phillippi, which was called Paneas, was a Image of Christ made of copper, at whose feete lay prostrate an other Image of that woman, whiche by touching the hem of hys garment was healed of her flux of bloud. And he sayth moreouer, that vn­derneath it sprang vp a certayne herbe, whiche when it grewe so high, that it came to the hem of the garment of the image of Christe, gate thereby such po­wer that it healed all maner of diseases. And Socrates in his 7. booke of the Tripartite history writeth, that Iulianus the Apostate remoued thys Image, and commaunded his owne Image to be put in the place thereof: whiche was so strikē with lightning, that it was vtterly destroyed. And although that Image of Christ was by the Ethnikes drawen throughout the whole world, yet it was An appo­cripha history of king Abagarus by the Christians after a sort gathered together again, & reserued. Eusebius wri­teth also of our Lord Iesus Christ: that he sent his owne Image by hys disci­ple vnto king Abagarus: but forasmuch as thys is Apochriphall, I can not ease­ly [Page 31] be perswaded, that it is true. But let vs see whether these Images of Christ and of Saintes may be had in holy places, where the faythfull assemble toge­ther, or whether rather they be forbidden. There were certaine of the Ethnikes which as touching this thing had no very ill iudgement. Numa Pompilius (as Plutarch declareth in his lyfe,) erected no kynde of Images in holy Temples. And so continued it at Rome for the space of 150. yeares. That king had learned The opini­on of Py­thagoras touching God. Pithagoras sentence. Who taught, that God is a mynde and a spirite, and vtter­ly tooke from him the nature of a body. Wherefore these mē were of this minde, that they thought it a thing most vnworthy, to represent a more noble nature by viler thinges. Although by the verity of the history, it is certayne, that Nu­ma was before Pithagoras, neyther could he learne thys of hym. But how soeuer it be, we may inferre, that that thing which they repelled out of their Tem­ples, We ought not to haue Images in our Tem­ples. ought we much more to banishe from ours. For those thinges which are there set forth, may withdraw the mynde from the wordes of God. For our mynde is of such condition, that it is so vehemētly withdrawen by those things which are offred vnto the senses, that it can not attentiuely applye it selfe vnto other thinges. Wherefore the Lacedemonians gaue straight charge that in the The ma­ner of the Lacedemo­nians. court, wherein the Senate was kept, there shoulde stand no signes or Images: for that it behoueth: that they which decide affaires concerning a publike welth, should not be plucked away to other matters by any occasion. And Virgill in his first booke of Eneas writeth, that when Eneas entred into the Temple where Dido was, and beheld the pictures on the walles, he gaue his mynde wholy to the contemplacion of them. Furthermore it commeth to passe (as sayth Augu­stine vpon the 113. Psalme, in his 2. Sermon) that much honor and maiesty is gotten vnto Images, when they are placed in Temples. Because partly tho­rough the worthynes of the place, and partly by reason of the authority of such as dedicate them, men beginne to conceaue, that there lieth hidden in them some deuine vertue. And although this be of some force to enstruct them, name­ly, that they see, that they with theyr eares can not heare, neyther can they with the mouth speake, nor with the eyes sée, nor vse any office at all pertaining to life: yet are they deceaued by reason of the holy seruices which they sée done vnto them, and also because of the honours which they perceaue to be geuē vn­to them: so that now they beleue, that in steede of life, there is grafted in them a deuine power. And that they so thinke, it is by this manifest, for that they in such maner humble themselues vnto Images. But for that they are afrayde An excuse of them which worship Images. to confesse, that some deuine power lieth hidden in the Images, they say that they worship that which is represented by those Images, that is, the sea, the earth, or the heauen.

And if a man goe on, and still reproue them, saying: that these bodyes also are not of that worthynes, eyther to be worshipped, or to be honored, they will answere, that in their mynde they haue a respect vnto hym, which hath the do­minion ouer all these thinges: that is, vnto God only, by whome al these things are gouerned. Wherefore we ought in any wyse to beware, that a holy place do not so much encrease the estimation of Images, that it become a most cer­tayne The deuin will ad­ioyne him­selfe vnto Idols and Images set vp in the temple. An history of the I­mage of our Sauiour in Latera­num. occasion of idolatry. The deuill will easely adioyne himselfe vnto them. For he is proud & deceitfull. Wherefore he will soone deceaue men, & draw vn­to himselfe those worshippinges which are due vnto God only, whē he includeth himselfe in these erected Images in steade of a soule, or a deuine power. And according to the desertes of the sinnes of men, he deludeth our sightes. There is a saying, that at Rome in the Church of Laterane, appeared an Image of our Sauiour paynted vpon a wall. Of the verity of which history I am not so cer­tayne, that I dare fully affirme it to be true. But graunt that thys kynde of miracle happened, and other miracles paraduenture more notable: yet ought we not for them to be pulled backe from the true worshipping of God. But a­gaynst them we must fence our selues with the oracles of God. It is true in­déede, [Page] that Gregory the great (as we reade in his epistles) reproued the bishop of Gregory reproueth the bishop of Massilia for brea­king of an Image. Missilia for that he had broken to peeces an Image in hys Temple. But in this case the authoritie of the reprouer ought not to blynde our eyes: but rather we must marke, whether he did by iust authority cōfirme that which he reproueth. Vndoubtedly, we are so proue vnto idolatry, that the faythfull thought it ne­cessary, that Images should vtterly be abolished out of Temples. For who is he, that perceauing himselfe to be geuen vnto filthy lust, will willingly keepe company with a harlot. In doing so, shall not he be thought to tempte God? Euen so to haue Images, where holy seruices are done, where there is adora­tion vnto God, and where the faythfull assemble together about gods affaires, Of the Cherubins that stoode by the mer­cy seate. can not be but a thing most perillous. They alleadge agaynst vs, that God had by the sides of the arke of the couenaut two Cherubines. But they should ther­unto haue added, that those were not open vnto the sightes of the people. For they were put into the entrance, which was called Sācta sāctorum, into whiche the high priest only entred, and that only once in a whole yeare. Further, they had the word of God, which commaunded such things to be made: whiche selfe same word is agaynst other Images. Neyther is it lawfull for vs to vse those things, which were lawful in the ceremonies of Moses. Otherwise let vs appoint in thys realm, or in this prouince, but one Temple only, as it was among the Hebrues: and let vs take agayne all those thinges, which at that tyme pertay­ned vnto offeringes, and to the furniture of sacrifices.

What the vsage of the olde church was as touchyng images, Epiphanius de An example of Epipha­nius. clareth, who dyd rent in sonder the image of a man, which honge in the place of prayer: And wrote an epistle vnto the bishop of Ierusalem, in whose dioces he dyd this thyng, that from that tyme forward he should not permit any such thyngs to be done in hys church; forasmuch, as they were not agreable with Christiā religion and discipline. And this epistle of Epiphanius, as a thyng very worthy to be knowne, Ierome turned into Latine. By the translation wherof, it appeareth, that he was of Epiphanius opinion. Yea and in the councel of Eliberinum it was decreed in the 36. article, that no pictures shoulde be painted on the walles of A counsell at Constanstinople vnder Leo I­sauricus. Churches. And vnder Leo Isauricus, which was an Emperour of Rome, there was a Counsell had at Constantinople, wherein images were condemned, & bro­ken to pieces, and consumed with fire: although Irene which afterward raigned wyth her sonne Constantine, thorough the suggestion of Tharasius Patriarche of Irene restored images in the councell of Nice Constantinople, called the second Councell of Nice, whiche is commonly named the 7. Councell, in whiche images were restored, and also the worshippyng of them. But by what friuolous & fond reasons they did thys, I am ashamed now to declare. It is true that Charles the great about y ^e same time called a Counsell The coun­cell of Charles the great a­gaynst the second counsell of Nice in Germany, vnto which assembled also two legates of the bishop of Rome: where the decrees of Nice touchyng images were abrogated. And yet notwithstāding, I know not by what meanes, that toke place which was decreed by Irene and Constantine in the seuenth Synode.

I know that Iohannes Damascenus, in the tyme of Leo Isauricus, fought harde for Images, and had much trouble about them. And he telleth a miracle, wher­by Damasce­nus fought for images. to confirme images. But he bringeth no reasons out of the scriptures. And as for myracles, they ought not to moue vs, to resist the worde of God. The brasen serpent was ouerthrown of kyng Ezechias, which yet was erected by y ^e com­maūdement of God, and approued by wonderful great miracles. For as many as loked vpon it were healed. Our temples are not therefore built, that we shuld in them behold pictures. But in them is ministred the worde of God, the sacra­mentes are geuen, and deuyne prayses are celebrated. All which thinges far ex­cell Churches ought to be shut when▪ there is no congrega­tion. all maner of images. And he which is not perswaded by this kynde of doc­trine, shall nothyng at all profite by pictures. A man wil say peraduenture, that in Churches these thinges are not alwayes had which we now speake of: for sometymes there is no teaching, neyther are the sacramentes ministred, ney­ther [Page 32] are the sacramentes ministred, neither is there had any holy assembly. I graunt this to be true: but yet the temples ought to be shut, when these christian exercises are not in doyng. Otherwyse, they are open for men to walke vp and downe and to be occupied about trifles. And of how small force their excuses be, Against thē which say that images are the bookes of idiotes or of the vnlerned. which they bryng for images, hereby appeareth, in that they alwayes say: that these images are the bokes of idiotes and of the laitie. But how chaunceth it then, that the images of highest estimation, vnto which were instituted pilgri­mages, and which were had in greatest reuerence and honour, were kept close? so that none could sée them, but for money? Why should the boke be kept shut, by which they would haue men to be taught? Farther, a man may sée certayne images euen of one and the selfe same kynde and person, neglected and contem­ned: and other of them, contrariwyse laden aboue measure with honours. They haue peraduenture, the image of the Virgin at home, or in the streate, or els in the market place, which yet they forsake, and go on pilgrimage into Boleyne, or into Italy, an other image of the selfe same. Vndoubtedlye, if they desire by them to be taught, the image at home could haue taught them euen as well as When the vse of ima­ges began first in tem­ples. the image in a straunge place. We see moreouer, that then the vse of images chiefly flourished, when pastors of Churches ceased from feedyng their flocke with holye sermons: as thoughe they ment to deliuer the people committed to theyr charge, to be instructed by domme images. Wherefore, my opinion is, that images oughte vtterly to be remoued out of holy temples. But in other Out of the temple and where no holy assem­bly is, ima­ges are lawfull. places there may be some vse of them. At the least, they may bryng an honest pleasure, which may haue some vtilitie ioyned with it, yf they represent those thinges whiche are monumentes and examples of pietie. But they are in no case to be suffered, no not in other places also, if they shoulde become occasions of Idolatrye. For then must we alwayes imitate Ezechias. Neither ought we at any tyme to attribute more vnto them, then vnto the holye scriptures. For We must neuer knel [...] before ima­ges. The vse of images came from the Etho­nikes. who falleth downe vppon hys knees, and worshyppeth the booke eyther of the new Testament or of the olde? None vndoubtedly, which is godly wise. And yet in them both, Christ and also the workes of God are more truely and expressed­ly set forth vnto vs to contemplate, then they are in all the images of the world. Neither is this to be passed ouer, that the maner of hauing of images came vn­to vs rather from the Ethnikes, then from the practise of holy men. And also if we haue images priuately, two other thinges also ought diligently to be taken hede of. First, that they be not lying images, so that vnder the title and name Lying ima­ges are condemned. of sayntes, they represent not those which neuer were extant. Suche as are the signes of George, of Christopher, of Barbara, & of such lyke, which are by images & pictures obtruded as sayntes, when as there is nothyng found, of certainty tou­chyng them. Howbeit, I deny not, but that some things may somtimes be painted, which may by an allegoricall signification profitably enstructe the behol­ders. Farther, we must beware that the pictures or tables be not filthy or wan­ton, Wanton i­mages are not allowed wherwyth to delyght our selues, lest by the syght of them, should be prouo­ked filthy lustes. Now resteth that we speake somewhat of the breakyng of I­mages. In which thyng I will content my selfe wyth the testimony of Augu­stine: Whether it be lawfull to breake i­mages. who in his sermons, and especially in his sixt sermon, hath these wordes: So God performe, and geue all thynges into thy power: as he hath geuen that which is broken. This we say to you good brethren, that ye do not these thynges, when they are not in your power to do them. It is the maner of wycked men, and of tauerne haunters, there to rage where they haue no power, and without cause to thrust themselues hedlong into danger of death. Ye haue heard the thinges which we red vnto you all, when ye of late lyued Deut. 7. in cotages and losely. When the land was geuen into your power. First, Moses sayth: that the land shall be geuen into their power: and so he tolde them, what they should then doo: Namely, ye shal destroy theyr altars, groues, images, &c. When ye haue receaued power, then do ye these thynges. Where power is not geuen vs, there we do not these thynges, but where it is geuen, we omitte them not. Many Paganes or infidels haue these abhomina­tions [Page] in their fieldes, do we come and breake them? No doubtles, for first we labour to breake the idoles in their hartes, when they also are become Christians, or do inuite vs to so good a worke, or do preuent vs. Now then we must praye for them, and not be angry with them. And thus much as touching images.

Wherfore God deliuered them vp vnto shamefull affections. For euen the women did chaunge the naturall vse into that whiche is against nature. And likewise also the men lefte the naturall vse of the woman, and brent in their lustes one with an other: men with men wrought filthines, and receiued vnto themselues the reward of their errour, as was meete.

Wherfore God deliuered them vp vnto shamefull affections.] For that he had repeted the crime of idolatry, he also more largely beginneth againe to de­clare the punishmentes therof. And sayth: that the men lefte the naturall vse of women, and were inflamed against nature: which selfe thing he mencioneth of y ^• women, whom reason, iudgement, and shamefastnes, ought to haue conteined in honest life, as they ought also to haue caused the men to haue done: which thing He dispu­teth of na­ture with the Ethe­nikes. came not to passe: because as God threatned in Deut. y ^• 38. chap. The vngodly are striken with madnes and fury. And the Apo. vseth this word Nature, because he disputed against the Ethnikes, which had no skill or knowledge in the scriptures, but onely in nature. And against them he taketh tohse things, which by the light of nature are by themselues manifest. And he sheweth, that they were altogether so foolish, that casting away the institution of nature, they followed those thynges which were repugnaunt against it: when as otherwise thinges that are done ac­cordyng to nature, are honest, profitable, and pleasant. But it iustly came to passe, that these men were in this maner blynded. For euen as they were not content with the doctrine of God, when as they thought it not sufficient, that he shoulde be represented by the fabrication of the world, but would nedes bring in idoles & images, so also as touching thinges that were to be done, they were not content with the institution of God, which was accordyng to nature, but more allowed their owne inuentions, although they were most filthy. And herein they did the selfe same thing which our first parentes did when they fell. For their desire was The sinne of the fyrst Parentes. to haue the knowledge of good and euill: that is, at their pleasure, and as they lu­sted to determine of good and euill, iust and vniust: whiche thing is proper vnto God onely: vnto whose determinations creatures ought to stand. So these men attempted in the coniunctions of bodies to doe according to their owne pleasure and filthy lust, and not accordyng to the decrées of God and of nature. And these affections are after the Hebrew phrase called the affections of dishonour, whiche in the Latine tongue is spoken by the adiectiue. For euen as that which the He­brewes say, The sonne of perdition, in Latine is turned filius perditus, that is, The lost sonne: So that which in this place is written, Affections of dishonour, in Latin is, Affectus ignominiosi, that is, Shamefull affections. Paule hath this worde [...]. which signifieth not vulgare motions, or the lighter sort of affections, but perturbations, and violent diseases, by which we are by a mightye impulsion stirred vp and prouoked. Neyther are these shamefull affections any thing els, then that which he before sayd: namely, lustes of the hart. By these thinges which are now written, is easely confuted that which Iulianus the Pelagian, obiected vnto Augu­stine. For he said, that lustes are extant in vs: and, God to deliuer vs vp vnto thē, is nothing els, then to leaue vs vnto them. But Iulianus cannot proue, that these shamefull affections were in the nature of man before his fall. And it semeth that the Pelagians abused this place, as Augustine, writeth in his 2. boke de nuptiis & concupiscentia ad Valerium, in the 19. & 20. cha. For they laboured to proue y ^• concupiscence or lust is a thing laudable, by an argumēt taken of cōtraries. For A false Ar­gument of the Pelagi­ans. sithē (said they) Paule condēneth y ^e coniunction which is against nature, it cōsequētly foloweth, that y ^• lust which is according to nature, is both vpright, and also wor­thy of praise. Wherfore (said thei) although some do in it excede y ^e meane, yet ought [Page 33] it not to be reproued: vnles we wyll also accuse both bread and wyne, because ther are some which abuse them. Neither is that of any force which thou saiest. The goodnes of generation excuseth not y ^• crime of adultery: neither doth original sin which is drawē frō y ^• natiuity, cōdemne y ^• goodnes of wedlocke. Because, this is to speake darkly, and thou seemest to labor not to be vnderstād. The na­turall copulation of men with women, oughte at the length to be expressed by some certayne note, that we may know whether it be good or euill. That it is good, hereby appeareth, because Paule condemneth the contrary. But if it be good, & the birth is good, which springeth thereof, by what chinkes or holes thē doth originall sinne creepe in? These thinges they obiected vnto Augustine. But Augustine aunswereth the Pela­gians. in this sort did he aunswere them. We must make a distinction (sayth he) betweene those thinges which God instituted, and betweene those thinges, which were by Adam brought in after sinne. We say that the naturall copulation of man with the woman was instituted of God, and therefore it is good, neyther of it cōmeth any euill. But lust, which The natu­rall copula­tion of man with wo­man as it was instituted of God is good. Concupis­cēce which was adioy­ned vnto it after the fa [...] of Adam is euill. is thereto adioyned, as we now haue it, is rebellious agaynst reason, vnbrideled, & stub­burne, also the disobedience of the partes of the body, which is not kept downe by our will, procedeth from vice and sinne. And such a lust, ought to be counted shamefull and euill. Which thing the sense of nature testefieth: for that we see that when man and wife will haue fellowship together they do hide themselues: which declareth that in it there is some thing which hath shame annexed vnto it. Further Paule writeth: I know that there dwelleth no good in me, that is, in my fleshe whome we ought rather to beleue then you, which set forth lust as a good thing. And he addeth: If our nature be to be made saue, then ought it to be good: otherwise it ought not to be made saue. And if it bad no euill in it, then ought it not to be made saue, because of it selfe it shoulde be saue. But as touching Paule, whereas he condemneth the vnchast, for that they left the naturall vse of the wo­man, he speaketh not a word there, of matrimony: but only sheweth, that these idolaters, were horriblye punished, in that they forsooke the naturall vse: whiche naturall vse yet may be obserued among whoremongers and harlotes, wherefore those thinges whiche ye alleadge of concupiscence are farre from Paules meaning. But how originall sinne is traduced by procreation, I will not in this place expresse.

And they receaued vnto themselues the reward of their errour as was mete.] By the name of error he here in this place vnderstandeth manifest sinne, and that which is committed of men, wittingly. And these filthy thinges whiche he hath spoken of (he sayth) were an hire and reward. In the Greke it is written [...], which may be turned, a compensation. And thys kinde of speach se­meth not to be much vnlike that, which is spoken in the Gospell, touching hipo­crites, that they haue receaued their reward. And forasmuch as sinnes proper­ly deserue not a bire or a rewarde, but a punishemēt: by this place is most manifestly perceaued, that that is true which Augustine oftētimes affirmeth, namely, that God auengeth sinnes by sinnes. And y ^• greuousnes of the wickednes cōmit­ted Here is proued that God puni­sheth sinnes by sinnes. agaynst nature appeareth, by that that it is answerable and is compared to the most greuous sinne of idolatry. Augustine in his first booke and 24. chap: against y ^e aduersary of the law & of the prophetes, sayeth, that that place which is written in the 38. of Deut: is vniustly reproued of the Maniches: where it is written that God wil inflict this punishement vpon the wicked, that sometimes they shall kill theyr owne children and eate them: whiche thing without doubt is sinne, neyther (as they say) ought it to be thought to proceede from the righ­teousnes of God. And hereby the Maniches endeuored thēselues to cōclude, that the God of the olde Testament is euill, because he inflicteth euill thinges, that is, sinnes. But Augustine aunswereth: The same thing might also be sayd of the God of the new Testament. forasmuch as Paule writeth in this place, that he deliuered vp men into these shamefull affections. But it is farre otherwise. Because the true God in­flicteth this kinde of punishement vpon the wicked, which punishementes are not tor­mentes of such as sinne, but encreasings of sinnes. And after this maner doth Paul reason. They whiche are without Christ and his Gospell, haue experience that such wrath of God, lighteth vpon thē: Therefore at Christes handes must be sought [Page] both remedy and also righteousnes. Wherefore it appeareth, how wickedly some do in such maner defend free will, that they are not ashamed to say, that by the strengthes thereof, and by that which is in vs, we may auoyde all sinnes. Which thing if it were true, then should Paule weakly conclude, that we ought to come vnto Christ, and vnto the Gospell. For a man myghte saye, I can a­uoyd these synnes euen without Christ, by my selfe, and by myne owne free wil. And this is worthy of noting, that the Apostle in this chapiter vseth thys Paule v­seth this word to de­liuer men three times kinde of speach, God deliuered vp men, three tymes. For which thinge if there be any man y ^e will accuse the iustice of God, as though he committeth iniqui­ty, the same man seketh now to be God ouer God. So far is it of, that he coun­teth him for God. Hetherto Paule hath entreated of the most filthy crime which is committed against nature, and that agaynste nature being vitiate and cor­rupted. As though he should haue sayd: Ye would not retayne: no not that litle vprightnes, and honesty, and institution of God, whiche remayned in nature. Now he goeth to the rehearsall of other vices, which he doth not so largely en­treate of, but onely rehearseth theyr kyndes in number. And before he commeth to the rehearsall of them, he sayth:

And as they regarded not to know God: euen so God deliue­red them into a reprobrate mynde, that they should do those things that are not conuenient:

And as they regarded not to acknowledge God, euen so God deliured them vnto a reprobate mynde.] He now diligently openeth, how the punishmente was correspondente vnto y ^e sin. That which we haue here turned, regarded not, is in the Latten probare, & in the Greke [...]. Where this word, probare, signifi­eth not, to tempt, or by argumentes to confyrme: but rather firmely, perfectly, and constantly to appoynt. And this is the meaning of his reprehension: They knew God by his creatures but they would not acknowledge him: that is, they would not haue the knowledge of him perpetually before theyr eyes, wherebye mought haue followed some chaunge of life, and lustes moughte after a sorte, haue bene brideled. And this thing do the cōmentaries which be ascribed vnto Hierome meane: wher we reade, that these men woulde not haue God before theyr eyes, For where that is, there men fall not so easly in sinne. Vndoubtedlye there are many, which being endued with an excellente wyt, do know a greate many of thinges righte well, and can handesomely deliberate vpon them: but when they know and haue determined vpon them, they lay them a side, so that when they to come to actes and doinges, they seeme in vaine both to haue kno­wen them, and to haue deliberated vpon them. Wherefore righte well see­meth They knew God but they acknowled­ged him not Erasmus in this place to haue noted the difference betwene, cognoscere & agnoscere, that is, to knowe, and to acknowledge: and he graunteth, that these menne knewe God: but hee denieth that they acknowledged him, because when they knewe hym, they gaue not vnto hym, that whyche they oughte to haue done. And in sum, that whiche is here sayde, is all one with that whiche is before written: When they knew God, they glorifyed him not as God, neyther were thankefull, and all one with this, which he reproued, namely, that they withhelde the truth in a lye. Although Ambrose semeth to expound this, as though these mē, althoughe they knew God by his creatures, yet seemed not to allowe, that God hath intelligence of those thinges which we do. For they thought him not to be curious ouer our actions. And therfore they did put themselues in good hope to escape vnpunished. This exposition is not amisse: but may right wel be appli­ed vnto the woords of Paule. But that which Chrisostome writeth in this place, is worthy to be noted. The minde of man (saith he) is compared with the driuer of a carte. Wherfore in the course there is no error, vnles the mind be troubled. And therehence come all manner of euils. Neyther is theyr flesh to be counted the chiefest fountayne of them. They are therfore deliuered into a reprobate minde, because they did not after a iust manner embrace the knowledge of God, whiche they had attayned vnto.

That they should do those things that are not conuenient.] That is, those thinges which vtterly shake of al honesty and comelines.

Being full of all vnrighteousnes, fornication, wickednes, coue­tousnes, maliciousnes, ful of enuy, of murther, of debate, and of dis­ceate, euill condicioned, whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, do­ers of wrong, proude boasters, inuenters of euill, disobediente to parentes, without vnderstandinge, couenaunte breakers, without naturall affection, such as can neuer be appeased, vnmercifull. Sinnes are the tormen­ters of God

Being full of all vnrighteousnes.] Here is setfoorth a cataloge of sinnes, as it were of y ^• tormenters & auengers of God. And this hath a wonderful Emphasis, that these mē are said to be filled with al vnrighteousnes: Neither saith he abso­lutely, with vnrighteousnes, but addeth thys word, all, by [...], y ^• is a strēgth or an increase. Because it is possible, y ^• godly men also may somtimes somwhat slip, & feele in thēselues the grounds of these vices. But these mē are sayd both to be ful, & also to be stuffed w ^t the whole nature of these euils. First is put vnrigh­teousnes, namely, wherby we do iniury vnto our neighbour. Thē is added forni­cation. He speaketh not of adultry: because (as sayth Ambrose) of the condēnatiō of the lesser sinne, is the grieuouser sinne condemned. For if fornicatiō be sinne, then much more is adultery sinne. And if he had ouerhipped fornication, and had made mencion onelye of adultery, then peraduenture they woulde haue thought fornication to haue bene no sinne at all. Whiche thinge (sayth he) the Romane lawes did, for they leuing fornication vnpunished, punished adultery. [...], whiche is englished, wickednes, signifieth that endeuor, whereby we la­bor to do hurt vnto an other. [...], that is, couetousnes, is deriued of these wordes [...], which signifieth, hauing to much: and those men are called [...], which seeke by all meanes possible in all manner of commodities to haue more then other men: and with the hurte and losse of theyr neighbour v­surpe more then is meete, whether it be as touching riches, or as touching pleasures or honors. [...], which is englished maliciousnes, if it be generally ta­ken, signifieth vice, and is contrary [...] that is, to vertue. Sometimes it signifieth sluggishnes: from whence commeth this prouerbe [...], that is, to speake negligently. And so [...] signifieth that vice whereby we are strayghte way wery of well doing. It signifieth also trouble and affliction, wherunto we bring our neighbors. [...], that is full of enuy, murther, and debate. Again he sheweth that they wer not in a meane sort infected with euils, but wer ouerwhelmed with thē. Very wel ioyneth he enuy & murther together. For first the murther of Cayne sprange of a certayne enuy. Agayne contenci­ons or debate follow straight way after the committing of murthers. [...], that is, deceate: by it are signified guiles: for whome they cannot kill and oppresse by violence, those they encounter with guiles and disceate. [...], that is, euill conditioned. Here are reproued those that are bytter, sharpe, and hard to be plea­sed. And such ar they which can almost be contented with no mans condicions. [...], that is, whisperers. These are they whiche priuely cary tales to and froo of whatsoeuer they ether heare or see, and chiefely they seeke by all meanes possible to breake and dissolue frendshippes betweene party and party. [...], that is, backbyters: who herein differ from whisperers, for that backe­byters detract openly: but whisperers do it secretly. [...], that is, suche as bate God, as of whom they delight neuer either to heare, to thinke, or to speake, And Iulius Pollux in his dictionary, sayth, that it is an Epitheton of the vngod­ly, and that also it is a tragicall word. For it signifieth those whiche saye vnto God, depart from vs, we will not haue the knowlege of thy wayes. [...], These are cōtumelious persons, which ouerburdē theyr neighbours with reproches infa­mies and filthy iniuries. [...], that is, proude, these men in al places that they come shew themselues disdainful, proud, and high mynded. [...], that [Page] is boasters, he meaneth such Thrasos and glorious fellowes, which attribute vnto themselues those thinges, that were neuer ether seene, or written, or pictured. [...], that is, inuenters of euill, These men are so wicked, that a man can set before them no good, sound, or fyrme thing, but they will gather some euell thereof. Or els it signifyeth those, which not being content with the formes and kindes of vices, which are alredy in vse, do inuent new kindes of wickednes. [...], that is, disobediente vnto their parentes. By parentes he vnderstandeth, not only father and mother, but also magistrates, schole­masters, and pastors, [...], that is, without vnderstanding. They are such, which do thinges without iudgement or reason, & order all thinges foolishly & furiously, [...], that is, couenaunt breakers. These men will abide by no con­ditions, couenauntes, nor leagues. They are vnfaythfull, and breakers of all couenauntes. [...], that is, without naturall affection: which are moued with no affection, toward those which are ioyned vnto them by any kind of kinred, They neyther care for parentes, nor children, nor bretherne, nor countrey, nor friendes, and at the length for no man. [...], this signifieth those, whiche will neuer be reconciled or pacefied, when they are once moued, or haue taken any quarell in hand. [...], that is, vnmercifull. So last of all he maketh mencion of those which are so cruell, that they are touched with no kinde of mercy. But these fower vices last spoken of, Chrisostome doth after this maner order, that by [...], which we haue turned couenaunt breakers, he vnder­standeth those which can agree with no man, no not with those, whose nature is like vnto theyr owne. An horse, acquainteth himselfe with an horse, and an Oxe, with an Oxe: but these will agree with no man. By [...], whiche we haue turned, without naturall affection, he vnderstandeth those, which are not touched with their next & most friendes. By [...], whiche is englished, to be those that can neuer be appeased, he vnderstandeth those that breake all ma­ner of leagues and felloshippes. By [...], whiche is in the Englishe, vn­mercifull, he vnderstandeth, those which shew mercy or compassion to no man. These vices are therefore so diligently rehearsed, that by them, as by certayne Notes or markes of vngodli­nes. notes, impiety mought the better be knowen. And they are for this cause also set forth vnto vs, partly that we should behold y ^• miserable estate of those which lyue without Christ and hys Gospell: and partly, that we shoulde haue before our eyes the enemyes, agaynst which we must fyght.

Who when they knew y ^• righteousnes of God, that they which commit such thinges are worthy of death, yet not only do the same, but also haue pleasure in them that do them.

By amplification he still depresseth them, when he sayth, that both they themselues are wicked, and also they excedingly delight in those that are wic­ked: when yet notwithstanding they knew the righteousnes of God. For both knowing & willingly, they commit sinne. How the lawes of God were knowen vnto men, he teacheth not: for that it is well knowen vnto all mē, that the same The law of nature is the law of God. It is kno­wen by the light of na­ture that▪ sinnes ought to be punished with death. Draco pu­nished all sinnes with death. commeth by the light of nature. And this righteousnes which men by nature attayne vnto, he calleth the righteousnes of God: so that we must remember, that the law of nature, is also the law of God. They were not ignorant, that they which do these and such like thinges, are worthy of death, because the light of nature, sheweth (whiche thing also Paule teacheth) that the reward of sinne is death. Draco the lawgeuer punished all maner of sinnes with death. And when he was admonished, that all sinnes were not alyke, he aunswered, that he knew that to be true: but he had no punishement more greuous nor crueller then death: and therefore he could adde no greuouser punishementes vnto the haynouser sort of offences. And yet was it not therefore to be suffred, that ligh­ter offences which deserued death, should not be punished with it. To consent [Page 35] vnto them that do euill, is to fauor, and embrace thē, & not to reproue thē: yea rather to prayse thē. And whē a mā hath cōmitted vnto him y ^• office either of teaching or of preaching or els of admonishing, to winke at these things: or (as the maner is in the court of Rome) to dispēce with thē, to take money, to bargayne, and (as they terme it) to cōpoūd for those things, which they count for manifest hainous crimes. The Apostle (as Chrisostome noteth) endeuoureth himself vtter­ly to stop the mouth of this kind of men. For if they had layd ignoraunce for an excuse, therto he answereth, when they knew the righteousnes of God: but if they had excused thēselues by weakenes: yet neuertheles, were they gilty, because they cō sented and reioyced at others, which committed the selfe same thinges. But for Whether al the Ethenikes were guilty of so many and so great crimes. as much as Paule inueigheth here against them, which when they knew God, glorified him not as God, neither were thankeful, but addicted themselues vn­to idolatry: whether shall we condemne all these Ethnikes, as guilty of so many and so great crymes, as we haue now heard recited, or no? Vndoubtedly, there were in the publike wealth of Rome many excellent and good men: as the Vale­rians, the Catos, and the Scipios: and also there were suche among the Grecians, as Aristides, Phocio, and Socrates, whome we reade not to haue bene defiled wyth so many shamefull and filthy lustes. There are some whiche to this question thus aunswer, that although these men were not polluted with all these sinnes, yet there was not one of them, but that at the lest he was spotted with a great ma­ny of them. Vndoubtedly they were proude, and ouermuch desirous of glory & fame. Farther, without all doubt their iudgement was very ill touchyng God. But this it should seme is an easier exposition to say, that these excellent men as touching the hart and mynde, were vnpure and contaminated: as such which had not Christ both for a mediator, and for a propitiator, through whome theyr natural lustes, mought not haue bene imputed vnto them for sinne. Nether had they the holy ghost or grace of Christ, whereby they should haue bene restray­ned from committyng of sinne, and also haue wrought suche workes, whiche mought haue aduaunced the glory of God. Wherfore, this their vncleannes of hart, and naturall enmitie agaynst God, as touching it selfe, coulde haue burst forthe into all these wycked actes, if God had not prouided (lest publike wealths should haue bene turned vpside downe, and least all politicall discipline shoulde haue perished) that euermore some excellent men should florish, by whose lawes and pure lyfe after a sort, other men should be conteyned in doyng of ciuile due­ties. And although the actions and doynges euen of these men were sinnes, as touchyng God, yet in outwarde appearance they were not so polluted, but that they might be vnto others an example, and also a certain rule of ciuile honesty. But there were so few of these men, that amongst a great number of Philoso­phers a man could scarsely fynde one or two of them: and in an infinite multi­tude of ciuile men, a man could (as we see) scantly be able to finde a few exam­ples of morall vertues. And Paule speaketh of men, as they are for the most part Wherfore, that which he here sayth: abideth firme, neither doth thys obiection any thyng weaken it.

WHerfore O man thou art inexcusable, whosoeuer thou arte that iudgest, for in that that thou iudgest an o­ther, thou condemnest thy selfe: for thou that iudgest doost euen the selfe same thyng. But we knowe that the iudgement of God is accordyng to truth, agaynst them which commit such thinges. And thinkest thou O man, that iudgest them which do such thynges, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the iudgement of God?

Knowledge generally is deuided into two partes: wherof, the one pertay­neth Two kindes of knowledge onely vnto contemplation: of whiche he hathe hetherto from the begyn­nyng at large written: when he declared that these men by the obseruation of thinges created, mought haue come to the knowledge of the most high God, the authour of the world: from whome when they had thorough idolatry filthilye fallen, they were deliuered vp to be punished with most shamefull lust. There is on other knowledge, which is called practike, for that it is occupied aboute the doyng of things. Now in this place doth Paule teach, y ^e they abused thys knowledge also: for that when as they knewe what was equitie, and right as tou­chyng the doyng of thyngs, yet notwithstandyng, partly they maintained and supported others, when they transgressed these bondes: and partlye if they dyd punishe sinnes in other men, yet wincked they at the selfe same sinnes in them­selues. And he in such sort reproueth them, that he declareth vnto them that they shall not escape the iudgement of God, although in the meane tyme they auoid the iudgement of men. So that his entent is, to take away from thē, al manner of excuse. Such great loue and affection beare we vnto our selues, that often­tymes we can geue vpright iudgement vppon other men, but can easely ouer­skip our selues offending in the like, or rather in things more haynous. Where­fore he sayth, Thou art inexcusable. This sentence he inferreth of those thinges which he had before spokē: because that as touchinge eyther of these two know­ledges they are conuinced both wittingly & willingly to haue sinned. Origen sup­poseth, that this is not a verye apte distinction of the chapiter, when as those thinges which are here spoken, do so plainely depend of the things going before. Ambrose also supposeth, that in this place is a preuention against them, whych peraduenture would excuse themselues, for that although they fal themselues, yet consent they not vnto such as worke wickedly, which men he willeth to call to minde, that forasmuche as they are seuere in punishinge of others, the selfe same iudgement shall at the length lighte vpon themselues. But why the Apo­stle seemeth, to cut of onely the excuse of ignorance, we haue alredy before decla­red the cause: namely, for that the Ethnikes, whiche attributed all thinges vnto free will, neuer pretended the other excuse of infirmitie: Therfore was it nede­full to vrge them on this behalfe, that they should vnderstand, that theyr know­ledge was not sufficient for them. Moreouer, the entent of the Apostle is, to call them backe from the lawe, and from Philosophye: of whiche two thinges, the principallest office is, to teach. Wherefore when he had declared, that knowlege by it selfe was not sufficient to iustefy them, he moste manifestly inferreth, that iustification cannot be obtayned, neyther by Philosophy nor by the lawe. And that these men by the lighte of nature, knew what thinges were to be doone, he proueth manifestlye by this token, namely, for that they coulde iudge of them. But there is no man, which can geue iudgemente of those thinges whereof he The Eth­nikes excel­led in sharpnes of iuge­mente. is vtterly ignoraunt. But how muche the wise menne of the Ethnikes exelled in sharpenes of iudgemente, the goodly lawes and excellente bookes, whiche they haue setfoorth, do declare, and also the determinations whiche were decreed at theyr places of iudgemente, when matters were decided. Chrisostome suppo­seth, that these thynges are therefore written vnto the Romanes, because at that time they were the chiefe Lordes ouer all, and the iudgementes in a man­ner of all prouinces were drawen thither. But vndoubtedlye those thynges whereof the Apostle here writeth, pertayne vnto all menne. For there is none, whyche hath hys righte wyttes, whiche eyther wyth himselfe or els with other menne discusseth not of those thinges, whyche he eyther publikely or priuately seeth done: and either prayseth or disprayseth the same, as they eyther disa­gree from naturall iustice, or agree therewith. But forasmuche as they can geue iudgemente of other menne, they oughte in especiall to geue iudgemente of themselues: for y ^• vnto them it is most plaine, not onely what they do, but also with what mind they do it: which they cannot so easely see in other menne. But [Page 36] they spare themselues, and do the selfe same thinges, whiche they geue iudge­ment of. Paule therfore to strike into them a terror sayth: Eueryman may better iudge of himselfe thē of other men.

But we know that the iudgement of God is according to truth against them which commit such things. And thinkest thou o man, which iudgest them which do such thinges, and doost the selfe same, that thou shalt escape the iudgemente of God?] They dissembled theyr owne sinnes, eyther because they thought that God little regarded the thinges which are done of men, against whiche errour the Apostle sayth, that it is moste certaine that God wil iudge these thinges, Reasons why God will iudge men. and that accordynge to truth. Otherwyse as sayth Ambrose he shoulde be counted an euell woorkeman, as one whyche shoulde neglecte hys woorke. And forasmuche as those thinges whiche he hath made are most good, and the same (as the continuance and order of thinges declareth) hath he not cast of frō his care, how dare they thinke, that man, which is the most excellent of al crea­tures should continue without the prouidence and presence of God? Others peraduenture were therefore perswaded to sinne against their owne iudgemēt, and to thinke that they should not be punished for it, because they saw and per­ceaued, that God deferreth punishmentes. Which erronious opinion, he after­ward confuteth, when he sayth: Doost thou despise the riches of his goodnes, patience, and long suffringe? But because such seeme there to be reproued whiche iudge o­thers (& that not a misse) when as yet they thēselues liue in the self same wicked actes: let vs see, whether theyr opinion be vpright, which thinke that suche Iud­ges cannot nor oughte not to geue sentence against others whiche are accused vnto thē, they thēselues being guilty of the selfe same fault. But this were to o­uerthrow all publike wealths, and vtterly to take away iudgements. Neyther doth Paule here any thing serue for the maintenaunce of this opinion. But one­lye Whither a iudge being guilty of a­ny crime, may iudge an other ac­cused of the selfe same crime. A place of Iohn tou­ching the adulteresse. sheweth, that they most grieuously sinne, which with a greate securitie pu­nish others, and ouerpasse themselues. They ought vndoubtedly first to correct and amend themselues. But yet Paule biddeth them not, to forsake the office cō mitted vnto them. They vse also for this purpose to cite the sayinge of Christe vnto them, which accused the adulterous woman: He which amongst you is with out sinne, let him cast the first stone at her. But this sentence of Christ is not against iust punishmentes, and lawfull iudgementes. Neyther commaunded he them, that they should not go forward in accusing the woman, whome they had ta­ken in adultery. He himselfe was no magistrate, but the most high preacher of God. Therfore, that which was his office to do, he executed, in perswading those hipocrites to repentaunce. And he woulde haue them first hereunto to haue a regarde, by a liuely fayth and repentaunce, to deliuer themselues from the sinnes whereof they were guilty. Neyther forbad he, but that they shoulde exe­cute that which the law of Moyses commaunded. He saw that these wicked men in these punishments wer infected with two manner of faults. For first the pu­nishment and payne, which theyr neighbour was put vnto, was pleasaunt vn­to them: for by accusinge him before the Magistrates and iudges, they priuely wreckt vpon him their hatred and enmities. An other fault was their hipocrisy: for that when as they themselues otherwise abstained not from the selfe same wicked actes, yet by accusynge of offenders they made a show, as though they had bene zelous of the law. These thynges Christ wente aboute to correcte: He condemned not the woman, for that he was not a polleticall magistrate. He ac­cused her not to the Magistrates, because he tooke her not in adultery. Where­fore farasmuch as he was not a sufficiēt witnes, he was not bound by the law, to prosecute such an accusation. But that which pertayned to hys function, he left not vndone: for he admonished her, that she should afterward absteyn from sinne. Likewise when we see any wicked acte done by our neyghbour, God re­quireth What is to be done when we see the fauts of our neighbour. not, that we shoulde not iudge of it accordinge to the nature thereof. For woe be vnto vs (as sayth the Prophete) if wee shall call euill good. That whiche is euill oughte to be iudged, accordinge as it is. Neyther oughte we [Page] ether to suspende our iudgemente, or to turne away our eyes frō those things, How thys is to be vn­derstand, iudge not. whiche are in very deede euill. If that we shall feele our selues also, to be infec­ted with the selfe same fault, let vs discend into our selues, and with a due cha­stisement reproue our selues. And therebye shall it come to passe, that we our selues being by repentance corrected, may both, more vprightly, and also, wyth more fruyte, admonishe our brother, when he offendeth. Neyther againste this, is that sentence in the. 7. of Mathew: Iudge not, and ye shall not be iudged. Because in that place is not entreated of the taking away of brotherly admonicion: but onely the curiosity of the vngodly is there reproued, whiche aboundinge them­selues, in all manner of synnes, do most diligently search out the sinnes of other men: not to the entent to amend them, but to delighte themselues in the multi­tude of sinners, and because they thinke, that hauing company, theyr case is the better. The godly are not infected with this curiositie, as they which haue con­tinually their eyes fixed vpon theyr owne sinnes, and dayly falles: so that they haue no leysure (vnles they offer themselues vnto them) to consider the faults of other men. Moreouer, they reioyce not, neyther delighte themselues in the con­demnation of theyr neighbours, especiallye that condemnation whiche is done rashely. For they know that theyr brother, forasmuch as he is of God, eyther stā deth to his Lord, or falleth. But we intreate now of priuate menne, and not of Magistrates or Pastors, whose parte is by office to be inquisitiue touching the life and manners of those, which be committed to theyr charge. Wherefore all men, as well subiectes, as magistrates, ought to iudge sinnes which are layde before them, by admonishing and punishinge, euery manne accordinge to hys office, leaste vices shoulde spreade to farre abroade. But thys thinge aboue others is diligentlye to be taken heede of, as Paule nowe teacheth, that wee winke not at those thynges whyche we our selues wickedlye committe. For as he sayth, In that we iudge an other, we condemne our selues. The selfe same sen­tence, whereby we punishe other men, striketh also our selues. And seing we can not escape our owne iudgement, how shal we escape the iudgement of God, which is according to truth? For then shall not that thinge happen whiche we see now doth, that in one and the selfe same kinde of crime one is condemned, and an other escapeth. Euen as our deedes are, so shall they be iudged. Now men spare themselues, and are seuere agaynst others. But so shall it not be in the iudgement of God. It resteth therefore, that we execute the selfe same seue­rity vpon our selues, which we vse in iudging of other men. Which thing how little the aduersaries of religion do performe, hereby it is manifest, in that they Papistes in what things they con­demne vs and flatter thēselues. euery where crye out agaynst the mariages of priestes, because they seeme vn­to them vnpure: but in the meane tyme while they ouerpasse themselues, being ouerwhelmed with all kynde of filthy lustes. They make exclamation, that vowes are not performed: and they consider not what they haue promised vnto God in Baptisme. They complayne, that fastes, which men haue commaun­ded, are not kept: and they neuer make an ende of their bankettinges and deli­cious feastinges. They make lamentacion, that the sacramentes are vnwor­thely neglected of our men: when as they themselues with their lyes of transub­stāciation haue hitherto sold them, mangled them, and filthyly deformed them.

The summe of Paules doctrine is, that we iudging others, shoulde discend into ourselues: for that it is most certayne, that the iudgement of God shalbe according to truth. Therefore we must to our power endeuour our selues, to make our life and maners acceptable before so great a iudge.

But this sentence to sinne, and to consent vnto sinners.] which before he obiected to the vngodly, semeth to be repugnant vnto that, which he afterward The selfe same mē are both seuete agaynst o­thers▪ and towardes their owne they are most fauorable. speaketh, namely, that they punished others, but spared themselues. For how do they consent vnto others which do euill, if by their iudgemente they con­demne them? but the apostle speaketh not generally. And the selfe same disease of selfe loue stirreth them vp, both to spare themselues, and also to supporte [Page 37] and mayntayne them, which are by any aliance knit vnto thē, whē as they are infected with the same vices, that they themselues are: but strangers and such as they beare no affectiō vnto, by their iudgemēt they most seuerely cōdemne, if at any tyme they commit any fault. Which thing is most playne in the history of Dauid. For when Nathan the prophet had accused before him, the cruell act of An example of Dauid the riche man, the kinge burst forth strayght way into these wordes, he is the sonne of death, which hath committed this acte. Vnto whome the prophet declared, that he himselfe was the man, which had committed this so haynous an act. He was seuere against an other mā, and had yet, neuertheles so lōg time wincked at himselfe, hauing committed the like fault.

Or despisest thou the riches of his goodnes, patience and leni­ty, not knowing that the goodnes of God leadeth thee to repen­tance? But thou after thyne hardnes, and hart that cannot repent, heapest vnto thy selfe wrath agaynst the day of wrath, and of the declaration of the iust iudgement of God, who will render vnto euery man according to his workes.

Or despisest thou the riches of his goodnes, patience, and lenity?] In ampli­fiing How the scripture vseth thys word riches. and setting forth the wonderfull and excellent proprieties of God, the scripture very oftentymes vseth this word riches, notwithstanding that the goodnes of God is not limited or bound in, with any endes, but much excedeth copia cornu as Latine men vse to speake, that is, all kinde of plentifulnes. Neither is goodnes in this place all one with vprightnes, iustice, and temperance: but is a redines, and an endeuour to helpe our neighbour. For thys Greke word, [...], is deriued of profite and commoditye. This bountifulnes of God, Christ partly touched, when he sayd, that God our Father maketh his sunne to arise vpon the good and the euill, and the rayne, to rayne vpō the iust and the vniust. Paule also partly here expresseth it, when he sayth, that God with long suffering beareth with the wickednes of men. For in this place Paule ouerthro­weth an other foundacion, whereunto the vngodly lening, perswaded them­selues, The ground of the vngod­ly, whereby they pro­mise vnto themselues to escape vnpunished that they should escape vnpunished, for that God differreth to inflict hys punishementes. This commeth not hereof sayth he, because God neglecteth these thinges: or that he will haue them to go vnpunished: but with lenity and pacience he suffreth for a tyme: otherwise, whē he seeth hys tyme he will seuere­ly auenge them. And this word, long suffering, is of great efficacy to moue our myndes: as though it were paynfull vnto God to suffer our iniquityes. For we are not sayd to beare and tolerate, but only such thinges, which of their own nature are both odious and troublesome. Which kindes of speach we haue first in Esay the Prophete, when he sayd vnto the vngodly king Achab: Is it a small matter vnto you of the house of Dauid, that ye are greuous vnto men, but ye must be greuous also vnto God? And the same Prophet bringeth in God speaking of the sacrifices and obseruations of the vngodly, that he could no longer suffer thē, but that it was a payne for hym to suffer them. For they being voyde of fayth and piety gaue themselues whole vnto ceremonies. And Dauid, in his Psalme, writeth that God complayneth, that by the space of 40. yeares the generation of Israell was greuous vnto him in the wildernes: because they alwayes erred in their hart. And the patience of God, which should haue wrought in them re­pentaunce, through their owne default profited them not a whit. Which he now vpbraydeth, saying:

Knowest thou not that these thinges leade thee to repentance?] Augustine The long suffering of God is pro­fitable vn­to the elect and predes­tinate. noteth, that this taketh place as touching the elect and predestinate: whiche by this long suffring of God do at the length obtayne saluation, although, so long as they sinne, and do not spedely repent, as touching their owne part, they heape vnto themselues the wrath of God. But he forsaketh them not: without whose [Page] impulsion, spirite, and grace, his lenity and patience shoulde be in vayne. And that the repentance of them that fall, is to be ascribed vnto God, the E­pistle The repē ­tance of thē that fall is of God. written vnto Timothe very euidently teacheth. For there he instructeth a Bishop, to obserue such a trade of teaching, that without contention he en­struct them, with whome he hath to do, if paraduēture God geue them grace to repēt.

Howbeit the differring of punishementes semeth of his owne nature to drawe men to returne vnto God: although in all men it hath not like efficacye. Wherefore, when we see some punished, and we our selues in the meane time spared, it is expedient that we shoulde diligently waye thys goodnes of God whereby he beareth with vs, to the ende we should correct our selues. Whiche thing Christ admonished vs of, when he sayde, when worde (was brought him of some which were killed with the fall of the tower of Syloa) Do ye thinke that Why God punisheth some and not all. they alone haue sinned? As though he woulde haue sayd. Not they alone haue de­serued that punishement, but many others ought to haue suffred the like: but God will shew forth certayne particular examples of hys iudgement, whiche one day shalbe generall. In deede, the punishement of the vngodly is differred: but it shall most certaynely come to passe at the tyme appoynted. The parable of the figge tree, which the goodman of the houshold commaunded to be cut downe, when it bare no fruite, admonisheth vs of this selfe same thing. The husbandman obtayned, that the cutting downe thereof, should be a litle while differred, or that he would donge it, and pruine it, if so paraduenture it would bring forth fruite. Whi [...]h thing if it did not, then should it not only be digged vp by the rootes, but also be throwen into the fyre. Here are we taught, not What is to be done to­ward our brethren when they sinne. strayght way to forsake our bretherne, when they offend, but patiently for a tyme to abyde: and that euen as God himselfe doth, so should we by benefytes prouoke them vnto repentance, not omitting in the meane tyme brotherly ad­monitions.

But this is worthy of noting, that in thys place is mencion made, that God puni­sheth the vngodly no [...] once but with a double pu­nishement. the selfe same men, which before he sayd were punished (when they were dely­uered vp to the lustes of their owne hart, and vnto shamefull affections, and also vnto a reprobate mynde) shall agayne be punished. Whiche therefore is done for that that fyrst kinde of punishement drew them vnto voluptuousnes, and pleasures. For he sheweth that it shall one day happen, that vengeaunce shall be taken vpon them, and that both great, and also most paynefull. But A place of Nahum declared. how agreeth this with that, which Nahum the Prophet writeth in his first chap­ter? That iudgement is not geuen or punishement taken twise vpon one and the selfe same thing. Seing these men were punished once, why are they agayne punished? Vndoubtly, that sentence whiche is so common, that God punisheth not twise, is not so written in the Prophet: although it be so reade in the 70. Interpreters. The wordes are thus: what do ye thinke against the Lord? He will make an ende, neyther shall tribulatiō arise vp the second tyme? Which words some of the Hebrues (as Hierome telleth) interpret of the Assiriās: who whē they had it the first tyme gotten the victory against the kingdome of the tenne tribes, thought, that they could in like maner preuaile against the kingdome of Iuda. But that it should so come to passe, the Prophet denieth, and sayth, that after the first tribu­lation the secōd should not follow. This expositiō may in dede be borne withall. But there is an other which is more playne: namely, to say that these thinges are spoken agaynst Sinnecharib, which besieged Ierusalem: vnto whome God threatened a fall and through ouerthrow: I will (sayth he) so blot thee out, that I shall not neede to rise vp the second tyme agaynst thee. One plague shalbe sufficient: thou Vnto God is not prescri­bed a mea­sure of pu­nishemēts as though it were not lawfull for him to punishe but once. shalt be so vehemently afflicted with it. Neither dreamed the Prophet (as many mē fayne) that vnto God is prescribed a measure in punishmēts: as though it were not lawfull for him to punishe one and the selfe same man, any more then once. Which thing if we should graūt, we should say that y ^e Egiptiās, forasmuch as they were punished in the red sea, are now free frō hell fire. And that they which [Page 38] wickedly perished in Sodome & in the floud, are now at the length at rest. Which The punishmentes of the vngod­ly begin of­tentimes in this life, & they shallbe more gre­uously afflicted in the world to come. The saints are afflicted with the punishmentes of this lyfe onely. thinges without doubt are most absurd. For, as certein, in this life receaue the holy ghost and grace as an earnest peny of the felicity to come, as which shall re­ceiue reward both here & in the world to come, so may it be contrariwise, that the punishments of some, begin in this life, which shalbe increased in an other world, as it is to be thought that Herode, Nero, and Saule do now fele punishmentes far more greuous, then those which they here tasted of.

And yet in the meane tyme I deny not, but that God as touching his elect, is content with these paynes and punishmentes, which he inflicteth vppon them in this life. As Paule sayd vnto the Corinthians, that one among them shoulde be deli­uered vp vnto Sathan, that his spirit might be saued in the day of the Lord. And agayne he saith, that some are here corrected of the Lord, lest they should be con­demned with this worlde. But when God will deale after this sorte, or when he wil vse that seuerity to punish both here & afterward, it lyeth not in vs to know. Wherfore, according to the commaundement of Christ, he is alwayes to be fea­red: forasmuch, as he hath power both to kill the body, and also to cast the soule into hell fire. Howbeit this we may assuredly affirme, that they which beyng af­flicted do perish and repent not, shal be againe more greuously tormented, & those on the other side, which being admonished with afflictiōs, do returne vnto Christ shall, being sufficiently chastised with the punishmentes of this life, obteyne eternall saluation.

Wherfore, accordyng to that whiche we haue sayde, Paule admonisheth these The pati­ence of god portendeth not vnto the vngodly that they shall escape vnpunished men, that although after a sort they were punished, yet, vnles they repented, they should in the day of iudgement, be more greuously punished. And his meaning is that the patience of God, whereby he suffereth them, doth not portende that they should escape vnpunished, but geueth them occasion to begin truly to repent.

God is set forth to be both mercifull and good, but yet in such sort, that his long sufferyng and patience haue endes & limites. And by reason of this differryng of punishmentes which happeneth in thys lyfe, the Apostle is compelled to make mē tion of the last iudgement. Otherwyse, forasmuch as in this lyfe many are passed ouer vnpunished, & others are most seuerely delt with all. God might be thought to deale vniustly. Wherfore he vrgeth them wyth the feare of the last iudgement and affirmeth that the differryng of vengeaunce bryngeth more greuous punish­mentes. Which thyng Ʋalerius Maximus, an Ethenike writer speaketh of, that God by the greuousnes of the punishment, recompenceth the long delaying ther­of. Wherby it is playne, that Paule, disputing against the Ethenikes, which knew The knowledge of the iudgement to come, is naturally grafted in men. not the holy scriptures, reproued them by those thynges, which might be known by the lyght of nature. Wherfore there is a certayne naturall knowledge grafted in the hartes of men, touchyng the iudgement of GOD to come after thys lyfe: which thyng the fables also of the Poetes declare, whiche haue placed Minoes, Radamanthus, and Eacus as iudges in hel. Wherfore they shall be more greuous­ly punished, which haue bene the longer borne withall: because the contempt of God addeth no small waight vnto theyr sinnes: which contempt semeth to haue crept into them, whilest they so long tyme despised his lenitie and patience. A hard hart

But thou after thyne hardnes, and hart that can not repent, heapest vnto thy selfe wrath in the day of wrath.] An hard hart is that, which is not softened Wherof re­bellion a­gainst God springeth. by the benefites of God, nor broken by hys threateninges nor feare of punish­mentes. And this rebellion agaynst God we draw vnto vs, partely by originall sinne, and partly by custome of sinnyng: so that now we are in a manner without any kynde of felyng. To beleue vprightly, forasmuch as it is a vertue, hath two extremities. On the one side, there is so great facility, that some wyll beleue euery thing, whether it be an inuention of mā, or superstitiō, or the word of God: which In bele­uing, the meane is to be kept, and two extre­mities are to be taken hede of. vndoubtedly is a vyce. On the other side there is so great difficulty to beleue, that they will not admit, no not euen that which is playne by the worde of God, vnles theyr owne reason be satisfied therein. Betwene these two daungerous extremities there is a certayne meane, that we should heasely beleue those thinges which are to be beleued, whē they are godly offred vnto vs, vsing therin a diligēt trial of [Page] the holy scriptures. For all thinges are to be examined by that rule. Paule vseth this Greke worde, [...], which signifieth to lay aside, or to lay vp in store. For we commonly vse to lay vp in our treasures those thinges whiche we will not vse presently, but will afterward vse them at some other conuenient tyme. And this very well fitteth with these vngodly ones. For then they felte not the anger of God, which yet afterward they shall feele: and that so muche the more aboundantly, as riches are more plentifull, whiche are continually euery day heaped vp together. He prudently & warely sayth, that these men heaped vp vn­to themselues, wrath: that they should not impute these punishmentes vnto the cruelty of God. By this kinde of speach he teacheth, that it was they themselues which brought this mischiefe vpon themselues. And this woord of heapinge vp treasure, is oftentimes vsed in the holye scriptures. In Deut: the 32. chap: God sayth touchinge the transgressions of the Israelites, that they were sealed vp in This Me­taphore of heaping vp treasure is oftentymes vsed in the holy scrip­tures. What the day of wrath is. hys treasures. Ieremy also in the 50. chap: threateneth, that God wyll poure out the treasure of his wrath, and indignation. And that which is added:

In the day of wrath.] And y ^• happeneth somtimes in this life, when God semeth, that he will not suffer any longer, and sheweth foorth some tokens of his seue­rity: which thing we see happened in the captiuitie of Babilon, in the euersion of Sodome, and destruction of the Egiptians. And the Prophets euery where describe the most bitter punishments of God by this title, that they be layd vp in store a­gainst the day of wrath. And wrath is here taken for vengeaunce, by that kinde of figure, wherby that which followeth, is expressed by that which goeth before. But it fitteth beste, to referre those thinges, whiche are here described, vnto the last day of iudgement: which he expresseth by three notes. Firste by wrath, se­condly by reuelation, and lastly by iustice. Vengeaunce he ascribeth vnto God: Three notes of the laste iudge­ment. least it should be thought a thing of smal waight: He addeth also reuelation, be­cause here thinges are hidden: but there all thinges shalbe made manifeste. He putteth thereunto also this word [...], that is, iustice: least (as Chrisostome noteth) some should perswade themselues, that the iudgemente of God shoulde proceede from an angry minde. Vndoubtedly there shalbe shewed a most grie­uous vengeaunce: but yet such a one as shal haue ioined with it iustice. Wher­fore we ought to haue that iudgemēt cōtinually before our eies: neither at any time to take vpon vs, any dueties or actions, but that our mind be euer turned vnto it. And this is to walke before God: whiche thinge as Abraham was com­maunded to do, so is the same most oftentimes required at our handes. And to walke before God is nothing els, then to thinke, that he doth moste intentiuelye behold whatsoeuer thinges we do. But alas, it is wonderfull to see, howe this To walke before the Lord. thinkinge vpon the iudgemente to come, is taken awaye from the sighte of the vngodlye.

VVho shall render vnto euery man according to his woorkes.] When he sayth, that vnto euery manne shalbe rendred, it plainelye signifieth, that none shall escape this iudgemente. In the iudgementes of men, it oftentimes happe­neth, that one is punished, and an other, is not so muche as accused. He addeth: According to their workes, to geue vs to vnderstād, that there shalbe no accep­tion of persons. There shalbe consideration had of the causes onelye, and not of God hath a considera­tion vnto the cause and not vn­to men. Moses vn­derstoode that the mercy of God is tempered wyth iustice. men. Of what state or condicion so euer they be, they shalbe iudged accordinge to theyr woorkes and deedes. In deede the mercy of God is now large: but yet in such sort, that the seueritie of iustice is not wantinge. Moses, although he had heard manye proprieties of God whiche serued to expresse his goodnes and cle­mency, that is, that he is mercifull, gentle, slow vnto anger, riche in mercy and truth, whiche reserueth goodnes or mercye for a thousande generacions, yet at the end added, that God wil not pronounce the wicked man an innocent: & that he visiteth the sinnes of the fathers vpon the children vnto the third and fourth generacion. But because they whiche attribute ouermuche vnto woorkes, and trust that by them to obteyne eternall life, are wont very often to alledge thys [Page 39] place. I haue thought it good briefely to declare, what is to be thoughte concer­ning Of works. workes. But we shal afterward, more at large set foorth and declare this thing, when we shall haue occasion to entreat of iustification. And those things whiche shall now be briefely spoken, we will afterward more largely discourse by partes seuerally. First, this is to be knowen, that we deny not that whych is Betwene our good workes & eternall fe­licitye there is no iust proportion. There are no good woorkes without fayth. Those thinges which are promised vnto works we obteyne by fayth. The causes of our saluation. Why God attributeth honor vnto woorkes. The words of the last iudgement are diligently examined here written, that vnto euery man shalbe rendred accordinge to hys woorkes: But there is not so muche good in good woorkes, as eternall felicitie is good. Yea, ther is betwene these, a greater difference, then betwene heauē and earth. Moreouer, there are no woorkes to be counted good, which lene not vnto faith, and haue not it for the roote, from whence they should spring foorth. Therfore that which seemeth to be promised vnto workes, the same in very deede we ob­taine by fayth, which is garnished with those workes. And because fayth taketh hold of the mercy of God, and promises in Christ, therfore throughe mercy and Christ, whiche are the obiectes of faith, shall we be made blessed. These are the true and chiefest causes of eternall life: the clemency (I say) of God, election, pre­destinacion and the merites of Christe. But God in the holye scriptures often­times addeth woorkes, thereby to stirre vs vp, beinge otherwise sluggishe and slouthfull, to lyue vprightly. And he adorneth woorkes with this kinde of honor, that he promiseth vnto them excellent rewardes. Whiche thing if we will more narrowly consider, let vs wyth diligence weigh, what the most high iudge shal in the last iudgemente, saye. For he will make examination of good workes, & will say that he was fed with meate and drinke, and visited &c. But after thys commendation of woorkes, when he iudgeth vnto the sayntes the kingdome and eternall life, he expresseth the principallest cause, that maketh vs happy & blessed. For he sayth, Come ye blessed of my Father, and possesse the kingdome whiche was prepared for you before the beginning of the worlde. These he pronounceth to be the causes of our blessednes; namely, that we are deare vnto God, and haue ge­uen vnto vs the blessinge of predestination and election. And therfore sayth he, that the kyngdome was prepared for vs, from the beginninge of the worlde. Woorkes in deede are to be had, but not as causes. Therefore Christ admoni­shed Works are not the cau­ses of our felicity. A place of Luke. How we are called vnprofita­ble seruāts. vs, saying, When ye haue done all these thinges, say, we are vnprofitable seruants, we haue done but those thinges, which we ought to do. Neither passe wee any thynge vpon theyr caueling which say, that therfore we are vnprofitable seruantes, be­cause out good woorkes do bringe no commoditie vnto God: Forasmuche as God needeth none of our good workes. But say they, it ought not to be denied but that we are by good workes profitable vnto our selues. We graunt indede that it is profitable vnto vs, that we liue well. But that vtility is not to be at­tributed vnto our workes, that they should be causes of our blessednes to come. For we haue nothing in vs, whereby we can make God obstricte and bounde vnto vs. For whatsoeuer we do, the same do we wholy owe vnto God, and a We cannot by workes binde God vnto vs. great deale more then we are able to performe. Wherefore as Christ admoni­sheth, The Lord geueth not thankes vnto his seruant, when he hath done his duety. And if the seruaunt by well doing cannot binde his Lord to geue him thankes, how shall he binde him to render vnto him great rewardes? Therefore the name of The name of merits ought to be abolished. merite, if we will speake properlye, oughte vtterlye to be banished out of our mouthes. I know that the Fathers sometimes vsed that word, but yet not pro­perly. But that woord is not found at al in the holy scriptures. For the nature of merite is, that there be a iust proportion and equall consideration betweene The nature of merite that which is geuen, and that which is taken. But betwene the good thinges, which we looke for, and those thinges which we eyther suffer or do, there is no proportion or agreemente. For Paule sayth: That the passions, of thys time are not woorthy the glory to come whiche shalbe reueled in vs. Farther, merite hath ioyned vnto it debt, whych thynge Paule testifyeth, when he sayth, That vnto hym whych woorketh rewarde is rendred accordinge to debte, and is not imputed accordyng to grace. Which selfe same Paul yet writeth expressedly, that the grace of God is eternall life. [Page] Lastlye vnto the nature of merite there is required, that that whiche is geuen pertayne vnto the geuer, and be not due vnto hym whyche receaueth it. But woorkes are not of our selues, for they are called the giftes of God, whiche he woorketh in vs. Wherefore Augustine very wisely sayth: That God doth crowne his giftes in vs. Now if our woorkes be due vnto him (whiche thinge we cannot deny) then vndoubtedly the nature of merite is vtterly taken awaye. Eternall life is sometimes in the holy scriptures called a reward: But then is it not that How eter­nall lyfe is sometymes called a re­ward. How bles­sednes fol­loweth good woorkes. reward, which Paule writeth to be geuen according to debte: but is all one as if it shoulde be called a recompensation. Gods will and pleasure was, that there shoulde be this connexion, that after good woorkes shoulde follow blessednes: but yet not as the effecte followeth the cause, but as a thinge ioyned with them by the appointmente of God. Therefore we may not truste vnto woorkes, for they are feeble and weake, and do alwayes wauer and stagger. Wherfore the promises of God depende not of them: neither haue they in themselues, as they come from vs, that they can moue God to make vs blessed. We say therefore, that God iudgeth according to woorkes, because accordinge as they are eyther good or euill, we shall obtayne eyther eternall life or eternall damnation. But thereby it followeth not, that woorkes are the causes of our saluation. Our sense iudgeth, that these two thinges are repugnant the one to the other: that a thinge shoulde be geuen freely, and yet neuertheles workes should be required. These thinges are not repug­nant, that blessednes is geuen frely, and yet goodworks required. But yet is not this iudgement true. For they most aptlye agree together, as it shall afterward in hys place be declared. We haue nowe sufficiently spoken as touchyng this kynde of speache vsed of Paule and of the Scripture. And those thinges which we haue nowe alleaged, shall in their places be more diligently examined euery one by themselues.

Vnto them which by patience in well doyng seke glory and ho­nour, and immortality: eternall lyfe. But vnto them that are con­tentious, and disobey the truth, and obey vnrighteousnes: indigna­tion and wrath. Tribulation and anguish vppon the soule of euery man that doth euill, of the Iewe first and also of the Grecian. But vnto euery one that doth good: glory, honour, and peace, vnto the Iewe first and also vnto the Grecian. For there is no respect of persons before God.

Vnto those which by patiēce in wel doing, seke glory, & honor, & immortality: lyfe eternall.] Ambrose readeth, that glory & honour, & immortality, shalbe ren­dered vnto them which seke for eternall lyfe. Which thyng wycked men do not, who rather labour by all meanes to aduaunce themselues vnto the honours, ri­ches and pleasures of this world, which is to liue wickedly. But godly and holy men do seke eternall lyfe, that they may redely moue themselues to knowe and to loue God, to worship hym, and to deserne well of their neighboures. Whiche selfe thing is eternall lyfe, but yet as now begon: and shal be accomplished in an other world. The scripture vseth by eternall life to signify the blessednes which Life is a thing excel­lent. we loke for. For among other thinges, life (as Aristotle writeth in hys Politikes) hath in it selfe many commodities. And therfore men suffer many and greuous thinges to retayne it still: vnlesse peraduenture beyng ouercome with the bur­then of miseries, they wishe for death. But this is the playner readyng, to say, that God geueth eternall lyfe vnto those, whiche by patience in well doyng doo seke glory, honour, and immortality. Vndoubtedly the saintes in liuyng well, do seke to be renewed vnto the image of God, after which followeth glory, ho­nour and immortality. And immortality is set in the last place, lest they should be thought to seke the glory and honor of this world. For those things do quick­ly perish: and are offred by those men, which are easely chaunged: and we which [Page 40] receaue them here, haue but a short tyme to lyue here. But those thinges which we seke for, are euerlastyng and immortall.

By patience in well doyng.] This he therefore saith, because as he writeth in an other place, They which will liue godly in Christ, shall suffer persecution. And not Why pati­ence is re­quired in wel doyng. only the deuill & our flesh, but also wicked men do withstand good workes. And forasmuch as among good workes these are the principallest, wherby we helpe our neighbours to the obteynement of true, sound, and firme good thinges, by teachyng, admonishing and correctyng them, therfore vnto them aboue other thinges we apply our selues. But they on the other side doe sometimes take it greuously, and do stirre vp persecutions agaynst vs, as it happened vnto y ^t Prophetes, Apostles, and Martyrs. But we ought not for all that to cease. Augustine in his 50. epistle willed that the Donatistes, although they wickedly and cruelly raged against the Catholikes, should yet not be forsaken. And he bringeth a si­militude A similitut [...] of horses and mules, which kicke and bite, when their sores are in cu­ring, and yet men cease not from healyng them. Which duety if it be performed vnto beastes, vndoubtedly much more ought it to be performed vnto men. It is assuredly a thing very hard, with a valiaunt mynde to suffer lettes and impedi­ments, which hinder good workes. But all thynges whiche are excellent are harde. And forasmuch as we all in a maner desire eternall lyfe, we ought to take vpō vs this patience in well doyng. And it is not from the purpose to consider, howe What is suffering. the saintes may clayme vnto themselues this patience, forasmuch as we dayly sinne: and if we shall say that we haue no sinne, we deceaue our selues. We aunswere, Two kinds of fallinge. that there are two kinds of fallings. There are certain which are in a manner dayly, comming from a wicked lust, which is grafted in vs by reasō of original sinne: which also therfore is yet of force in the regenerate, because they are not yet fully restored, neyther do they alwayes behaue themselues according to the principle and ground of regeneration. They are by reason of infirmity and vn­discretenes rapt and violently drawen by the enticements of this worlde: but it alwayes greeueth them, they resiste, and desire to be rid therof. Therefore they say together with Paul: Now not I woorke it, but sinne which dwelleth in me. Wherfore so longe as they be so affected, and that they cease not of from endeuouring themselues to fullfyll the will of God, they are sayde to perseuer, and to excer­cise pacience in well doynge. But when they fall into more heynouser sinnes, as did Dauid and Peter, then thys longe sufferynge is somewhat interrupted: but because (forasmuch as they pertayne vnto the elect) they are called backe to repentance, they are forgeuen that which they haue committed, and God no more imputeth it vnto them. Therefore they are iudged according to the good workes which they haue done before the fall, and do after the fall: so that that cutting of of the perseuerance, which is now blotted out by repentance, remay­neth no more. Now we will also entreate of those, whiche in the last tyme of Whether they which when they dye do re­pent shalbe iudged ac­cording to their workes. The thife wanted not good workes their life repent: which as it should seeme cannot be iudged according to their good workes, whereof before they had none: neyther vnto them can be attri­buted patience, and long suffering in well doing.

But it is to be noted, that fayth can neuer be without good workes. Ther­fore these men, if they beleue, although they repent in the last houre, yet vn­doubtedly shall they not be without good workes. Which thinge the example of the thiefe declareth, who repented in a maner at the very poynt of death, and was saued. For he, being conuerted vnto God, confessed Christ, acknowledged hys sinnes, exhorted his neighbour, and ernestly prayed for the obteynement of hys owne saluation. By all which thinges we may see, how diligently & ernest­ly if he had had space to liue, he would haue applied himselfe vnto good works. What shall we say to infantes, which dye in Christ. They, forasmuch as by reason of age they are as yet not able to do any thing, are to be exempted out of the number of them, vnto whome shalbe rendred according to their workes. For Paule speaketh of them whiche be of full age, who mought haue brought [Page] forth good workes. And that which Chrisostome writeth, that this place teacheth vs, not in any wise to put our trust in fayth only, forasmuch as before y ^e iudge­ment seate of God, workes also shalbe examined, this his saying (I say) must be warely taken. For true fayth neuer wanteth iust workes. But Chrisostome in that place taketh fayth, for that credulity whiche wicked men oftentymes boast of: which is rather an opinion and vayne perswasion, then that it can be called fayth: which selfe same, Iames calleth a dead fayth. And forasmuch as it A deade sayth is no fayth. is sayd to be deade, it can in no case be true fayth. As that man which certayn­ly is dead, is no more sayd to be a man. Wherefore Ambrose vpon thys place hath made the thing playne, saying: That we haue neede not only of profession, but also of good life. Wherefore where men do worke wickedly, and yet in the meane tyme boast of fayth, it is rather a vayne profession, then a Christian fayth.

But vnto those that are contentious, and which obey not the truth, but o­bey vnrighteousnes.] Here is expressed the other part of iustice, namely, that whereby sinners are most worthely punished. And by two signes he expresseth Two notes whereby the vngod­ly are ex­pressed. A wicked kinde of contēcion. such as are wicked, in that as touching rules of doctrine: they are contentious: and as touching maners, they obey not the truth, but vnrighteousnes. Con­tention which is here ment, is when a thing without iust cause, and with a more vehement strife then is nedefull is taken in hand to be defended. And of­tentymes it happeneth, that contentions men labour to defend that, which in their mynde and conscience they beleue not to be true: but only study to get the victory. Wherefore they do nothing with any mediocritye, but altogether with most vehemency and they are so tossed with the perturbation of the mynde that they alwayes farther and farther depart frō the truth. Howbeit there is some A certayne contention laudable. kynde of contention, which is pardonable, namely that which is taken in hād for the defence of the truth. And such contention is without obstinacy, whiche thing we may behold in Paule. For he, as soone as he knew himselfe to be de­ceaued, abode not still stubburnely in hys purpose: but strayght waye sayde, Lord, what wilt thou that I shall do? But these men whom God will thus punishe, are in prosecuting their matters not a whit better then they were in rules of doctrine, because they obey not the truth which they know: yea rather they hold it captiue with themselues, as we haue before hard: and are obedient vnto vn­righteousnes. For truth and lust are euer present with men, to geue counsell and Two per­petuall counsellers of men. perswade them in intreating of matters. In the wicked the worser counseller namely lust, prenayleth: and so they are miserably deceaued. Which thing the Apostle expresseth in hys latter Epistle to the Thessalonians the second chapiter: where he writeth, that Antichrist shall come with power, with signes, and lying waytes, and with all maner of deceite of vnrighteousnes in those which perishe: because that they receaued not the loue of the truth, to the ende they mought haue bene saued. Therefore shall God send vpon them the efficacy of illusion, to beleue lyes. But this vn­righteousnes, which they obey, is afterward in the 7. chapiter called The law of the members, namely, because wicked luste is, from the fall of the first pa­rentes, ingenerate in men, and is obiected to our mynd by the ministery of Sathan who vseth it as a most apte instrument for his purpose.

Vnto these mē (I say) shalbe indignatiō, & anger, & afflictiō, & anguish against euery soule of man that committeth euill, of the Iew first, and also of the Grecian. Betwene [...], that is, indignation, and [...], that is, anger, semeth to be a dif­ference, for that [...], it is a more vehementer impulsion or motion, and [...], a more easier: which differences yet haue no place in the high iudge. For God is not troubled with these affections. But the scripture vseth thys trope or fy­gure, to set forth the vengeance whiche followeth these thinges: whiche after­ward is expressed, in that he addeth, Affliction and anguishe. And as touching anguishe, which in Greke is called [...], we must vnderstand, that the minde of man delighteth in liberty. Wherefore whē we are brought to such a straight, that we can not by any meanes, eyther moue our selues or els fynde a way out, [Page 41] thinke we to be most greuous vnto vs. And by these wordes is described the great punishement, and a desperation of the felicity to come. The soule signifieth man.

Agaynst euery soule] There are some which by this place argue, that ther­fore is mencion made of the soule, because the affliction thereof shalbe a greate deale more greuous then the affliction of the body. But me thinketh it is more playne to say, that after the Hebrewe maner by the soule is signified, the whole man, or to speake more vprightly, all the powers and partes of man. Neyther doth this any thing let, that here in the texte man is put in the genetiue case, and because the Iew and the Grecian is here expressed. For, that tendeth to thys ende, to comprehend all mankinde: whiche Paule deuideth into two partes, so that some he calleth Iewes, and other some Grecians, namely the Gentiles, as ma­ny He begin­neth to re­prehend the Iewes. as were not subiect vnto the law of Moses. And here the Apostle beginneth to ioyne the Iewes to the selfe same reprehension, which he vsed agaynst the Gen­tiles, because he entendeth to reproue them also. And easely by litle and litle he turneth his speach vnto thē, vnto whom hereafter by name he speaketh, whē not much afterwarde he saith, Behold thou art called a Iew, and restest in the law &c. He Why the first place is assigned vnto the Iewes. therefore geueth the fyrst place vnto the Iewes, because in the knowledge and vnderstanding of God and of righteousnes they had the principalitye, if they be compared with other nations. Further forasmuch as Paule came of their kin­red, here hearseth them in the first place, least he should seeme to spare his owne, when as he had sharpely reproued the Ethnikes. It was meete also that they shoulde be named before Gentiles, to the ende they mought the more gree­uously be accused, and more sharpely punished, for that they were not ignorant both of the true God, and of the religion due vnto hym.

But glory, honour and peace to euery one that worketh good, to the Iewe first and also to the Grecian.] These wordes are so playne, that they neede no exposition. Onely thys thynge let vs note, that thys repeticion of felicity which abideth the godly, tendeth to thys ende, that they being allured with the hope thereof, might the more earnestly repent.

For there is no respect of persons before God.] As touching Paules methode The met­hode of the reprehensi­on past. in this reprehension of the Ethnikes, it is after this maner: As concerning the the fyrst part of knowledge, which is called contemplation, he hath proued that they knew God by the creatures, but when they knew him they worshipped hym not as they ought to haue done. Therefore when they had geuen the glory of God vnto Idols, they were delyuered vp by him vnto the lustes of their owne hart, vnto shamefull affections, and into a reprobate mynde. Moreouer as touching the other knowledge which consisteth in the doing of workes, he sheweth, that they knew right well the iustice of God. And that he thereby proueth in that they iudged vprightly, in geuing sentence vpon other men. But that which they so well knew, they performed not at all. For both they themselues lyued wickedly, and partly they consented vnto them which sinned and partly in seuerely punishing of others, they ouerhipped themselues. Which men he terrefied, in declaryng vnto them, that they should not escape the iudgement of God. And because they beleued not that the iudgement of God shoulde euer come, and that the prouidence of God had no care of thinges humane, because they saw by experience, that God ceassed from punishing wickednes: against the first reason he layeth, that we knowe assuredly that the iudgement of God shalbe without doubt agaynst those which do such thinges: as touching the other reason, he sayd, that this long tarying of God shalbe recompensed with sharpenes of the punishement. Whiche yet in the meane tyme is to thys ende proftiable vnto them, that they might haue space to repent. Whiche thing if they do not they shall fall into the horrible iudgement of God. Of whiche iudgement he sayth, that he shall render vnto euery man according to their workes. And he deui­ded it into partes, namely, what the godly and what the vngodly shall looke for, and added moreouer, that neyther affection nor fauour shall there be of any [Page] force: and made equal the Iewes with the Gētiles, & the Gētiles with the Iewes wherof he now bringeth a reason, for that before God, there is no respect of persons. Whether God haue a respect vn­to persons. This I thought good the more largely to repeat, that the methode of those things which are spoken, might be throughly vnderstanded. But now let vs sée whether this be altogether true, that God accepteth not persons, which is to deale in the cause according to the worthines or vnworthines thereof, not hauing regarde to the conditions or states of them which are to be iudged. It semeth vndoubtedly that God hath a respect vnto persons, bicause he gaue vnto the Iewes many good thinges, and that for this cause, namely, for that they pertained vnto Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, and because they were of their séede & stocke. Yea when the peo­ple had made a calfe, and deserued worthely all of them to be destroyed, Moses An exāple of Moses. prayed vnto the Lord, and although he confesseth that the cause deserued destruction, yet he desireth pardon for them, for Abraham, Isaac, & Iacobs sake, of whose stocke they came. And so he layd before God, not the cause, but the person. Yea, and in the 89. Psalme we reade of the séede of Dauid, that although they had pro­phaned A place of Dauid. the testament of God, and had forsaken his wayes, he would in déede vi­site them with the rod: Howbeit for hys seruaunt Dauid sake, he would not take from them his mercy, Is not this to accept persons? and not to weigh the causes? And in A place of the ten commaunde­mentes. An exāple of the So­domites. the ten commaundementes we reade, that he will do good vnto a thousand generati­ons of them that feare hym and kepe hys commaundement. And God was contente to spare the Sodomites, if there had bene but ten iust men amongest them. And he gaue vnto Paule all them that were in shippe, when they were in daunger of ship wracke. Neither spared he them for the iustnes of the cause, but because they say­led in the fame ship together with Paule. To the ende these thinges may be more What a person is. throughly vnderstanded, we must first declare what is in this place vnderstan­ded by the name of a person. And that is nothyng els, as we now speake of it, then the condition or state, or a certaine quality geuen vnto vs, either of God through nature, or receiued by election. Of the first kinde are these, to be a man, or a wo­man: a father or a sonne: of this nation or of that: to be borne a prince or a subiect, a frée man or a bondeman, and suche other lyke, taken. But these are taken of our owne will and accord, to be a minister of the church, to be a souldier or a handicraftes man, and such other lyke. In summe, a person consisteth by comparyng of a man, either vnto an other man, or els vnto certaine thinges or faculties. For if Abraham be referred vnto Isaac, he is his father: if Salomon be referred vnto the Israelites, he is their kyng, if Aristotle be compared, vnto sciences, he is bothe learned, and also a Philosopher: if Cresus vnto riches, he is riche: vnto which selfe same riches, if Irus be referred, he is a begger. So haue we what a person signifi­eth. Now let vs sée the differences of persons. There are certayne persons which Certayne persōs may want good workes but some o­ther cannot may vtterly be wythout good workes, as the person of a father, or of a brother, of a riche man, or of a poore man. But certayne cannot alwayes want good workes: as are the elect, the predestinate, the members of Christ, the faithfull, the partes of the church, and such other lyke. For it is not possible, that such men, althoughe they sometymes fall, should vtterly be without good workes.

Thirdly, there are some persons so ioyned vnto the causes, that the cause can not be iudged, vnles there be a respect had vnto the person. As when one striketh a man whiles he executeth the office of a magistrate: or if he which liueth wickedly be a minister of the church, and such lyke. As touching those persons which are not vtterly without good workes, and which are necessary for our saluation, God hath so a respect vnto them, that if without thē we shall appeare before hys iudgement seat, we cannot be saued. But of this kynd of persons, this sentence of Paul is not to be vnderstand. But as touching those persons, whiche haue not eyther good or euill workes of necessity ioyned with them, we answer, that if the causes be so annected, that in iudgement they either aggrauate or extenuate the person, then of necessity there must be a respect had vnto the person. Because accordyng to the saying of the Gospell, That seruaunt shall be more greuously punished whiche knoweth the wyll of his Lord and transgresseth it, then he which sinneth ignorauntly. Wherfore there remaineth, that this place of the Apostle be vnderstanded of such [Page 24] persons as are seioyned from causes. Farther there is to be put great difference Persons free from causes. Besides iudgemente somethinge may be ge­uen vnto one man freely, and an other of the same state and condition omitted. betwene, to accept a person in iudgemēt, & besides iudgement to geue vnto som one man any thing freely, and not geuing to an other. For this latter parte, no man can iustlye accuse. As if a man hauyng two debters, shoulde requyre his debte of the one, and forgeue the other, he of whome the debte is required, hath no cause iustly to complaine of his creditour: So likewise God, althoughe he cal one, and calleth not an other, because no merites went before in neyther of them, cannot be called an accepter of persons. Neither, if in rewarding those which labored but one houre in the vineyard, he would geue as great a reward vnto those, and to them which had labored in it all the whole day, ought he to be reproued? Because he defrauded not these men of the hire, for whiche he agreed with them. And vnto the other he would geue freely, that whiche they deserue not. But then should there be iust cause to complayne, if a thing should be geuē vnto one man, and an other vnto whome the selfe same thing is due, should be defrauded. And after the selfe same manner, forasmuch as God is bounde vnto God is bound to no man. no man, when he destributeth sondry giftes, it is lawfull for him to do with his owne what pleaseth him. For that in geuinge vnto some freely, he defraudeth not them of any thing due, whome he omitteth. These thinges hath Augustine against the two Epistles of the Pelagians, in his seconde booke and. 7. chap: vnto Bonifacius, where he thus writeth: Acception of persons is there rightlye sayde to be, where he which iudgeth, leauinge the deserte of the cause, whereof he iudgeth, geeueth iudgemente with the one, against the other: because he findeth some thinge in the person, which is woorthy either of honor or of compassion. And straight way, he bringeth the similitude of the two debters, and the parable of the vineyard, whereof we haue alredy spoken, and addeth: Euen as therfore here is no acception of persons, because one is in such manner freely honored, that an other is not defrauded of that his due: so also whē according to the purpose of God one is called, and an other is not called, vnto him that is called a good gift is frely geuē, of which good gift the calling is the cause, vnto him that is not called is rendred euill, because all men are guilty, for that by one man, sinne entred into the world. These are Augustines woordes, vnto which, to the ende we may ouer­throw the argumentes, which we haue before recited, this is to be added: That, Those thinges which God geueth vnto men he ge­ueth of hys mercy. whatsoeuer good thing God of his liberality geueth vnto menne, the same vn­doubtedly proceedeth of his mercy and clemencye. And althoughe sometimes he pronounceth, that he will do good vnto some, eyther for theyr progenitors sake, or els for theyr prayers, these thinges he therfore speaketh, to stirre vs vp to liue well. Neither are these promises to be vnderstanded of the whole kinred of the posterity, or vniuersally. For God accordinge to his secret predestination, hath his choyce in he seede of the saintes, and in hearing of prayers which are made out of other men: Which thing may be sufficiently confirmed by examples. For althoughe the seede of Abraham were blessed: yet that blessing had place in Isaac, and not in Ismael. The same promise was made vnto Isaac, but it was performed in Iacob, and not in Esau. The common wealth of the Iewes had a promes, that it shoulde be preserued: but that promes was performed in the kingdome of the house of Dauid, and not in the kingdome of the ten tribes. Wherfore, forasmuch as this choice, which is according to predestination, is vtterly vnknowne vnto The choyce which con­sisteth in pred [...]stina­tion is both vnknowne vnto vs, & also leaneth not vnto persons. Two kinds of the bene­fites of God. vs, we oughte not to lene vnto the person. And it commeth to passe perpetually, that they which are so chosen of God, are also adorned with good works. Wher­fore God hath not a respect vnto the person: but as we haue sayd, iudgeth accor­ding to the woorkes. And how little a respect of persons he sometimes hath: the place in the. 14. chap: of Ezechiell declareth: where it is saide: That the earth shalbe destroyed, forasmuch as it hath bene altogether viciate and corrupte. And thoughe there stoode vp in it, Noah, Iob, & Daniell, vndoubtedly they shall not deliuer it, but shall de­liuer theyr owne soules onely. Farther the benefites of God are eyther but for a time, whiche pertaine vnto this life: or els they are eternall, whiche belong vnto the chief felicity, of which Paule now intreateth. Who affirmeth that without [Page] respecte of persōs it shal by the iust iudgemēt of God be either rendred or denied. But as touchinge commodities, whiche dure but for a time, we doubt not but that God vseth sometimes, either to hasten or to slacken them, at the prayers of holy men: which selfe thinge he attributeth also vnto the seede of the saints. But in this doing, he eyther prouoketh men to repentaunce, or els by his lenitye they bringe vnto thēselues greater punishment. But as touching the eternal & chief felicitie, we haue now declared, y ^• God hath made no promise generally for the sauing of any posteritie. Therefore the Iewes deserued woorthely to be repro­ued, for that they promised vnto themselues onely so greate a thinge as thoughe for that they were of the seede of Abraham, they coulde not perishe: paule in thys There is no generall promes for the sauinge of any posterity as tou­ching eter­nall life. selfe same Epistle the. 9. chap: most manifestly declareth, That not all they whyche are of Israell are Israelites, neyther because they were the sede of Abraham, therfore they were straight way all sons. But by Isaac (sayth he) shall thy seede be called, That is, Not they whiche are the children of the fleshe are the children of God: but the children of the promes, are counted for the seede. This sentence of the Apostle testefieth that whiche we haue sayd, namely, that the promises of God in this kinde were singuler, and not vniuersal. And it is for certaine, that in those which are chosen to saluacion, are vndoubtedly found good workes, if they come vnto ful age. Wherfore these The elect if they come to full age, shall vn­doubtedly haue good woorkes. What Moses and the Pro­phets had a regarde vnto, when in theyr prayers they made mencion of the names of certain of the electe. thinges nothing let this sentence, which was alleaged, namely, that before God there is no acception of persons. And as often as we read in the prayers of Mo­ses, or of the Prophets, that mention is made of the Patriarkes, whereby they endeuoured themselues to prouoke God vnto mercy, we muste thinke that they had a regarde to two thinges. First, forasmuch as in that nation God had some appointed vnto himselfe, they desired that for theyr sakes he woulde spare the whole multitude. Secondlye, they attributed not these thinges vnto the merites of the saintes: which, as we haue sayd, are none: but they made mencion of the promises made vnto those Fathers. Hereby therefore it is manifeste by what meanes those thinges which were obiected may be aunswered. But nowe let vs retourne to the exposition of the woordes of Paule.

For as many as haue sinned without the law, shall perishe also without the law: and as many as haue sinned in the law, shalbe iudged by the law. For the hearers of the law are not righteous before God: but the doers of the law shalbe iustified.

For as many as haue sinned &c.] Paule here teacheth that God in very dede hath no respect of persons, neyther in iudgement doth iniury vnto any man. He maketh the Iewes equall with the Gentles: forasmuch as of ech nation, they which haue liued wickedly, shall perishe. And as touching the maner of iudge­ment, the Iewes which shalbe condemned, shalbe iudged by the law of Moses, because they shall haue it, both to accuse them and to condemne them. But the Gentiles being wicked, shall neither be accused nor condemned by that law, but by the light of nature and euen by their own cogitations. By the law in thys place we must vnderstand the law of Moses. For it only is perfect, and for it be­gan all the contencion: otherwise there were none, or very fewe nations, which were not gouerned by some institutions or lawes. Here are added two preuentions. The first is, that it mought haue semed wonderfull vnto the Iewes, that theyr cause should not be a whit better, forasmuch as they were adorned by God with the benefite of the law. Vnto whome, Paule answereth, that ther­by they were rather the more greuously to be accused, because before God, not they which heare the law shalbe iustefied, but they which do it. The other pre­uention is, for that it semed a hard thing vnto the Ethnikes, that they should pe­rishe, when as they wanted the law of God. Vnto whome he sayth, ye were not vtterly without a law. And two maner of wayes he proueth, that they had a law: fyrst in that by nature they did those thinges which are prescribed by the law: secondly, because they had within themselues their owne cogitations, mu­tually [Page 43] accusing them, or excusing them. As touching the Iewes, he sharpely re­proueth them, as which were of so small sound iudgement, that they iudged themselues to be therefore iustefyed, because they had receaued the lawe. And now he beginneth by litle and litle to come vnto them: which a litle afterward he doth more openly.

For (saith he) the hearers of the law shall not be iustified before God, but the doers]. He therefore saith before God, because they before mē wōderfully much boasted of the law, which they had receaued. God (sayth he) nothing regardeth this. For there shall not be required of you, that ye receaue the law, but that ye execute y ^e law. The discourse which now is in hād, is touching the righteousnes The righ­teousnes of the law re­quireth deedes and workes. of the law, which alone they allowed. For touching the righteousnes of fayth he will afterward plainly entreate. Now he cutteth their throtes with theyr owne sword, in defining the righteousnes of the law, namely, that it vrgeth dedes, and requireth works to the fulfilling thereof. Whereby he calleth thē backe to consi­der their owne life. Neither saith he in the meane time, that mē cā not be other­wise iustified: but only sheweth vnto thē, that they haue fallē away frō the righ­teousnes of the law, wherof they so much boasted. That therfore which he now saith, hath this sence: If any man should by the righteousnes of the law be iusti­fied before God, it behoueth, that the same should fulfil y ^e law according to that saying: Cursed be he which abideth not in all the things which are writē in the booke of the lawe. This is an easy & plaine expositiō. But Augustine in his booke de Spiri­tu & litera ad Marcellinum, is of this minde: that the doers of the law are iusti­fied, but yet in such sort, that righteousnes goeth before the good works which the saintes do. For they are fyrst iust, before they do iust workes. But because he seeth that this word of iustifying is in the future tence, and by that meanes is signifyed that men shall not be iustefyed, vnles they fyrst haue good workes, therefore he addeth: that to be iustefied in this place, is not first to receaue righ­teousnes, but to be counted righteous: so that the sense is, they shalbe counted for righteous, which shalbe doers of the law, but they ought first by fayth to haue receaued righteousnes, whereby they were made iust: but afterward they shalbe made knowen by the effectes, & as they were before iust, so now shal they be counted for iust. And the like kinde of speach (sayth he) is in this sentence when Halowed be thy name, how it is to be expounded, we pray, Thy name be sanctified. Where we desire not that the name of God should be made holy, as though before it were not holy: but we desire that it may be of men counted holy. This is Augustines exposition.

For when the Gentiles which haue not the law, do by nature the thinges contayned in the law, they hauing not the lawe, are a lawe vnto themselues, whiche shewe the effect of the law in theyr hartes, their conscience also bearing witnes, and their thoughtes accusing one an other or excusing, at the day when God shall iudge the secretes of men by Iesus Christ, according to my Gospell.

For when the Gentles &c.] Now commeth he vnto the Gentles: whiche ought not to complayne, thoughe they perished, seing they had not the lawe of Moses. For hee declareth that they were not vtterly without a lawe, because they did by nature those thinges whiche were contayned in the law. And when hee sayth, by Nature, he doth not vtterly exclude the helpe of God. For all truth that men knowe, is of God, and of the holy ghost. And nature here signifieth that knowledge, whiche is grafted in the myndes of men. Euen as in the eyes of the body, God hath plāted the power of seinge. Neither doth Paul in this place entreate of y ^e strēgthes, by which y ^e Gētiles being holpē performed these things: For, that shall afterward bée declared, how by the spirite and grace of Christ the power to lyue vprightly is ministred vnto the regenerate. But now he speaketh onely of certayne outwarde honest and vpright actions, whiche as touchyng ci­uill righteousnes, might by nature be performed of me. Neither sayth hee, that [Page] the Ethnikes fully performed the lawe, so that they kept it all whole, or that by­cause of it they were iustified: but onely hee vnderstandeth that they performed some certaine pointes thereof. Whereof hee inferreth, that they by the light of nature could discerne betwene honesty and dishonesty, betwene right and Some E­thenikes in ciuil righ­teousnes far excell very many Christians. wrong. Yea if we looke vpon the lyfe and maners of Cato, Atticus, Socrates, and Aristides, we shall sée that in iustice & ciuill comelynes they farre excelled a great many Christians, yea and also Iewes. Therfore they can not excuse them selues, that they had not a law. Ambrose vpon this place, for asmuch as by this sentence, to do those thinges whiche are of the law, he vnderstandeth the full and absolute accomplishement of the law, and séeth not how it is possible, that any man should performe it, whiche beleueth not in Christe (for asmuch as Christe is the ende of the lawe) affirmeth, that Paul here speaketh of such Gentiles, as were now con­uerted vnto the Gospell, and beleued in Christ. This kynd of men, without the helpe of the law of Moses did those thynges which are contayned in the law. Au­gustine in this booke De Spiritu & litera ad Marcellinum, is of the same opiniō, that by the Gentiles, are vnderstāded the Christiās whiche were conuerted frō y ^• The diffe­rence be­twene the olde Testa­ment and the new. Ethnikes: for y ^• he herein putteth the difference betwene the old Testament and the new, namely, that in the old Testament the law was described in outwarde tables: but in the new Testament it should be written in the hartes and bowels of men, accordyng to the Prophesie of Ieremy in hys 31. chap. Wherfore, seyng Paul here sayth, that the Gentles, whiche by nature fulfilled the law, shewed the worke of the law writen in their hartes: it could not (sayth he) but pertayne vnto the new Testament. And bycause he saw that this was agaynst hym, where it is sayd, by nature, he sayth, that by that worde is excluded the law of Moses: but not the grace and spirite of Christ, by which, nature is not ouerthrowen, but restored to hys old estate, wherfore hys mynde is that the Gentles fulfill the lawe by na­ture, beyng reformed by the spirite and grace. But nowe let vs sée, how those thinges which Augustine & Ambrose alleage agrée with the sentēce of the Apostle. Vndoubtedly that whiche moued Ambrose to this exposition is very weake: for Many E­thenikes before the comming of Christ ob­teyned sal­uation by faith in him asmuch as there mought haue bene many before the commyng of Christ, whiche beleued in hym, and were iustified, and obserued the thynges contayned in the law, so much as the infirmitie of man will suffer. Iob was an Ethnike, who yet was not ignoraunt of Christ: and also at the preachyng of Daniell, the kyng of Babilon, and (as it is easie to bée beleued) together with hym, many of the Chal­deans were conuerted vnto God: & as it is written in Ionas the Niniuites retur­ned into the right way. And seyng all these attayned vnto saluation, vndoubtedly they looked for the Mediator to come, and by that meanes endeuored to performe those thynges whiche pertayned vnto the law. Neither hath the reason of Augustine The holy patriarkes & prophets had the law written in their [...]arts because they pertai­ned vnto the gospell. much force. For although it be a promise of the new Testament, that by the benefite of the holy Ghost the lawes of God should bee written in the hartes of men, yet is not that so to be vnderstand, as though before the comming of Christ the same happened vnto none. For the good fathers, and holy Prophetes, whiche were both endued with the fayth of Christ, and had also geuen vnto them the holy Ghost, had the law grauen not onely in stones, but also in theyr bowels. And although they liued, before the sonne of God tooke fleshe vpō him, yet for asmuch as they beleued in him, they pertayned vnto the Gospell. Whiche is not therfore called a new Testament, bycause the thyng is new: but onely bycause it was pu­blished The Gos­pell is not called the new Testamēt because the thing is new. abroad in the latter tymes, and was then publickely receaued. Wherfore although before the preachyng of the Apostles, it was not publikely professed a­mong the Gentles, yet florished it among many of the Ethnikes, in whose harts the law of God was sealed: so that although they wanted the doctrine of Moses yet were they so much rightly instructed, that they could frame theyr actions vn­to the preceptes of God. And yet the same Augustine in the booke before cited, the 7. chap. bryngeth the selfe same exposition, whiche we before brought: namely, y ^• these thinges may be vnderstanded of certeine excellent actions of the Ethnikes, whiche were notwithstandyng vngodly. Their excellēt workes, although as tou­chinge [Page 44] them they were sinnes, yet of their owne nature or kynde, for asmuch as they agréed with those thynges whiche God commaunded in the law, could not The workes of the Eth­nikes al­though theiwere goodly to the outward shew: yet were they sinnes be condemned by the iudgement of mā. But that they were wicked before God, therfore it is not to be doubted, bycause they were not referred to the right end. Augustine noteth the same and addeth, that therfore the worke of the law is sayd to be written in the hartes of the infidels, bycause the lineamentes of the first estate still abode. Hereof we gather, that the writing of the lawe of God in the hartes of men, is after two sortes: one is, which serueth only to knowledge and iudgement: the other is, which besides that addeth both a readines, and also strength to doe that which is iudged to bée iuste and honest. And the Image of The law may be writea in the hartes of men not vp the holy gost geuen vnto the faithful, but by the naturall know­ledge graf­ted into mē God, vnto which man is created, is not, as touching this, by hys fall vtterly blot­ted out, but obfuscated, and for that cause hath néede to be renued by hym. So naturall knowledges are not fully quenched in our mindes, but much of them do still remaine: which thyng Paule now toucheth. Wherefore, the difference be­twene the olde Testament and the newe, abydeth whole: although Paule so speaketh of the vngodly Ethnickes, that they had the worke of the lawe written in their hartes. Neither is it sayd, that because of these thinges which they did or knewe, they attayned vnto the true righteousnes. Yea rather when Paule had shewed, that they wanted it, he styreth them vp vnto Christ. Chrysostome in déede vppon thys place, writeth: that God made man [...], that is, sufficient of himselfe to eschewe vices, and to embrace vertue. Whiche if he vnderstande of man as he was first created, is true. But after hys fall it is not to be graunted, for­asmuch as without Christ we can doe nothyng of our selues: yea, by our owne strengthes we can not so much as thinke any good thyng, much lesse to doe any thyng. Vnlesse peraduenture he vnderstand this as touchyng the knowledge of iustice and vprightnes in generall, wherof we doe now speake. For the self same father in an other place more then once auoucheth, that we haue altogether néede of the grace of Christ. That which the Apostle now maketh mencion of, touching the knowledge of the Gentiles, is very apte to repell the sclaunderous Against the complaint of the late comming of Christ. talke of the vngodly, which vse to say: Why came not Christ before? How was mankinde prouided for before hys comming? What wrought hys prouidence then? By these thinges which are now spoken, thou now perceauest, that man­kinde was then also prouided for. For as touching knowledge they had inough, whether we vnderstand that, which pertayneth vnto contemplation: or that which is directed to workyng and doing. Wherfore, before the cōming of Christ they dyd vniustly complaine, that they were forsaken, when as they had know­ledge, and thought not them selues to want sufficient strengthes.

Theyr thoughtes accusing one an other or excusing.] Now bryngeth he an other reason, wherby he proueth that the Ethnickes had a law, because they were not without accusations & excusations of the conscience: which were most manifest testimonies of the knowledge grafted in vs by nature. And by this self A manifest profe of the iudgement to come, same argument may probablie be inferred, that the iudgement of God shall at y ^• length come. For if our minde do iudge with it self touching those thyngs which we doe, what will God at the length doe, which hath ingrafted these iudgemētes in the mindes of men?

Accordyng to my Gospell.] He calleth it hys Gospell, partly because hée tooke much labour in preachyng of it, and partly for the excéeding great affection that he had towardes it, & for that he was appointed to y ^e publishing of it abroad.

In the daye of the Lorde.] Then shall our cogitations be both accusers, and also witnesses of all our doinges: and by them shall the Ethnickes be iudged. Now for that we are drawen away by the entisementes and lustes of thys lyfe, we doe consider them not: but then shall the Lorde bryng them forth to light: Who (as it is written in the first Epistle to the Corinthians) shall illuminate the hid­den workes of darkenes. By thys place we sée, that the iudgement of God is a part of the Gospell: forasmuch as it is profitable to styrre vp to repentaunce. More­ouer The iudgemēt of God is a part of the gospell▪ as touchyng the godly it is a glad tidinges: For Christ sayd: When these thynges shall beginne to come to passe, then lift vp your heades: for your redemptiō draw­eth [Page] nye. And although God will render vnto euery man according to his workes, In iudge­ment God rendereth not lyke to our works. yet will he not render like for lyke. For we shall receaue farre much more, then our workes haue deserued. And they which shall be condemned, shall be lesse pu­nished, then the greatnes of their sinnes requireth. And as touchyng these excu­sing cogitations, Augustine in hys booke which we haue now cited, writeth, that they shall not obteine forgeuenes. Howbeit they may obtaine a more easter pu­nishment. The pai­nes of the damned shall not be a like. For the paynes of the damned shall not be a like. And he vseth thys similitude: that euen as there are certaine veniall sinnes, which can not let but that the godly may obtaine felicitie: so are there certaine excellent workes be­ing of their own kind good, which yet shall not deliuer the damned. And as y ^e lyfe of euery one, be he neuer so holy, can not wante small sinnes: so the life of no mā though he be most wicked, can be so filthye, but that it may in y ^• meane time haue some excellent worke annexed vnto it. And after thys maner doth the Apostle close vp the accusation of the Gentiles, making mencion againe of the last iudge­ment. And when he sayth: Beholde thou arte called a Iewe, he beginneth his The accu­sa [...]iō of the Iewes. accusation agaynst the Iewes: which consisteth of these principall pointes. Fyrst, he setteth forth the excellent giftes wherwith God had adorned them: afterward he addeth how they had abused them: thirdly, he expoūdeth what it is to be true­ly The principall pointes of the accu­sation of the Iewes. a Iewe, & what true Circumcision is. Afterward he declareth, that those giftes of God bestowed vpon the Iewes, could not by thē be so contaminated, that they should not be estéemed and praysed. But yet by them the Iewes had no matter wherby to preferre them selues before the Gentiles, when as they liued wic­kedly. For theyr filthye life made them equall to the Gentiles: which thing in Why he fyrst repro­ued the Gentiles. the laste place he maketh playne by testimonie of the Scriptures. He repro­ued the Gentiles before the Iewes, that by the former reprehension, hée myght prepare hys waye to the latter. For the Iewes were hautye, neyther coulde they easilie abide one to reproue them. Farther, if the Apostle hadde fyrste accused them, he might haue semed more extreme against his owne nation then was mete: especially forasmuch as he was accused of the false Apostles, that he was an Apostata from the law, and that he had filthily fallen from the Iewish The sum of the reprehension of the Iewes. religion. The summe of the reprehension of the Iewes, is, that they by professiō and not by life measured their righteousnes. First of all, he maketh mention of the giftes which were geuen vnto the Iewes, and reduceth them in a maner to The giftes bestowed vpon the Iewes are reduced to three principal pointes three principall poyntes. The first is the dignity of the name, which came vnto them by the kinrede and holy sede of the fathers. The second is, that they knews the will of God by the law geuen vnto their elders. The third, that they were a­pointed to teach other nations. These were in dede excellent things, but yet they nothing helped them: because they both degenerated from their fathers, as tou­ching honesty and iustice: and also by their sinnes they repugned the law, which they had receaued: and moreouer, because they neglected themselues, and much lesse did they teach other people. But herein the Apostle chiefly maketh mention of those thinges which they had frely receiued. For they were not bestowed v­pon them for any merite of theirs.

Beholde thou art called a Iew, and restest in the law, and glo­riest in God, and knowest hys wyll, and allowest the thynges that are excellent, in that thou art instructed by the lawe: and perswa­dest thy selfe that thou art a guide of the blynde, a lyghte of them which are in darkenes. An instructer of them whiche lacke discre­tion, a teacher of the vnlerned: which hast the forme of knowledge and of the truth in the law.

Behold thou art called a Iew.] In this place there is two maner of readyngs. The Latines seme to haue read, [...], that is, and if. But in the Greke copies it is written by Iota simple, [...], that is, Behold or see. But whether of them thou readest, it skilleth not much: saue onely that to the purpose of the Apostle, & con­nexion [Page 45] together of his speaches, that which is in the Greke semeth to be more apte. The name of a Iew was no lesse set by at that tyme, then the name of a Christian is at this time. Vndoubtedly, it was an honourable stocke: But Paule saith wisely, cognominaris, which signified, thou art so called: for he wil not graūt vnto them, that they were in dede Iewes. Neither could he: when as afterward he sayth: That he is truely a Iew, whiche is a Iew in secret: and that that is the true Cir­cumcision, which is marked, not in the flesh, but in the hart.

And restest in the lavv.] This is nothing els, but w ^t a certayne vayne bostyng to delight himselfe by reasō of the law: wherunto perauenture, they wer moued by reason of those things which are written in Deut. the 4. chapter. Namely, That other nations should wonder at the publike wealth of the Israelites, which [...] had so noble and excellent lawes. Dauid also sayd, That it was not so done vnto other nations

And boastest in God.] Because as it is written in the 17. chap. of the boke of Genesis, God had made a league with Abraham and with all his posterity. These thinges vndoubtedly, had bene vnto them great honour and estimation, if they had broght forth fruit accordingly. For to come of godly elders, is a gift of God not to be despised. Moreouer, to rest in the law, so that thou wholy quietest thy selfe in it, and art so content with the commaundementes of God, that thou fai­nest not vnto thy selfe any other, is a thyng worthy of prayse. And lykewyse to count the true God for God, may be ascribed vnto glory, and that to sound glo­rye. But they onely boasted in these thinges, glorying in themselues of these vayne titles.

And knowest his will, and allovvest the things that are excellent beyng instructed by the law.] To know the will of God, is a great benefite of his. But that commeth by the instruction of the scripture. For no where els is the knowledge of the wil of God to be sought for. Out of it we learn to alow most best things, so y ^e therby we are able to discerne them from things filthy & vile. In Greeke is red [...], which is turned, things excellent. Augustine in his boke de spiritu & Litera readeth Distantia. that is, thinges different: because those things which are excellent, are different from meane thynges. The Latin interpreter turneth it Vtilia, that is, thinges profitable, because peraduenture (as Erasmus admoni­sheth) [...], in Greke is to profite. Farther this verbe [...], which is, to allow, is here taken otherwise, then it was in the first chapiter. Forasmuch as here it is referred onely vnto iudgement: but there it is referred to that allow­yng, whereby we do in very deede and actes declare that which we iudge.

And persuadest thy selfe that thou art a guide of the blynde, a lyghte of them whiche are in darkenesse. An instructer of them whiche lacke dis­cretion, a teacher of the vnlearned.] He saythe not that these men perfor­med those thynges, but that they went about arrogantly to clayme them vnto themselues. For they both iudged and also spake most contemptuously of o­ther nations: whome in comparison of themselues they counted to bee blynde and lyuers in darkenes, vndiscrete, and vnlearned. And also they so vsurped vnto themselues the office of teaching others, that Christ saide they went about sea and land, to adioyne vnto themselues proselites, whome they made not the children of God, but the children of hell fyre. And whiche was worst of all, as Christ vpbraydeth thē, they had takē away the kay of knowledge by clayming it vnto themselues: when as neyther they thēselues would enter into the king­dome of heauen, nor yet would they suffer others to enter therein. They shewed themselues to be masters, when as yet they were blynde. Vnto whom the Lord sayd: If the blynde leade the blynde, they shall both fall into the ditch. And in Esay the 42. chapter we reade, who is blynde but my seruaunt? Also in the 9. of Iohn: If ye were blynde ye should haue no sinne. But now because ye saye, we see, your sinne abideth.

Hauing the forme of knowldege.] Chrisostome thinketh, that [...], that is a forme, signifieth not here, the true maner of knowing whiche hath in it no­thing that is filthy, but only a shew thereof.

Hauing the forme of knowledge, and of the truth in the lawe.] We should vn­doubtedly haue the forme of our doctrine in our selues, and not in the law, or in Where the forme of doctrine should be had. bookes, as Chrisostome here noteth. For as they are not very well learned, which are wise only by reading commentaries: so they are not to be counted iust, which put theyr righteousnes in lawes or in decrees. For Iohn sayth, Hereby we know, that we loue God, if we obserue his commaundementes.

Thou therefore which teachest an other, teachest thou not thy selfe? thou that preachest, a man should not steale, doost thou steale? Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, doost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest Idols, committest thou sa­criledge? Thou that gloriest in the law, through breaking the law dishonorest thou God? For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.

Thou therefore vvhich teachest an other, teachest thou not thy selfe?] This The figure of interro­gation. How Paule here speaketh of the Iewes. figure of interrogation is of great efficacy in reprouing. But were all the He­brewes such? No vndoubtedly but Paule here speaketh of them, Christ being ex­cluded: as the Gospel is set agaynst the lawe. There were some of the fathers very holy, which so liued in the Iewishe religion, that yet neuertheles they most perfectly beleued in Christ. But they were not such as Paule here describeth. They were blessed vndoubtedly, not because they had receaued the law, but be­cause they were occupied in it both day & night. But these mē, of whom is now intreated, knew the law in deede, but they knew it not as they ought to haue done. The summe of Paules reason is this, that to receaue the law, iustifyeth An expli­cation of Paules reason a­gaynst the Iewes. not. For if it should iustefye, then vndoubtedly all the Iewes should be both iust and holy: when as they all had receaued the law, and professed the same. And that they were not holy and iust, it is partly alredy declared, and partly shall now more largely be shewed: wherefore to haue receaued the lawe iusti­fyeth not.

Thou vvhich teachest an other, teachest thou not thy selfe.] They coulde not abyde to be taught of others, as it appeareth by the words which they spake The Iewes could not abide to be taught of others. to hym that was borne blynd: Art thou altogether borne in sinne: and teachest thou vs? They ought at the least to haue taught them selues: which thing forasmuch as they did not, but regarded only how to instruct other men what they should do, they were like the figge tree, which had leaues without fruite, and by the curse of Christ withered away. That which he before spake of the Gentiles: Thou condemnest an other, and doost the selfe same thinges whiche thou condemnest: now he pronounceth of the Iewes, that they taught others, and ouerhipped themselues. Without doubt in thinges pertayning vnto this world, we are not of that disposition. For you shall not see one, that will so distribute almes, but that he will first prouide of his goodes for himselfe. How commeth it then, that we inculcate our doctrine to others, whiche we our selues receaue not? Chriso­stome A simili­tude. compareth this kinde of men with a paynter, whiche hath before his eyes an excellent table, whiche hee perpetually beholdeth, and yet neuer taketh any thyng out of it. Paul had sayd before, that not the hearers of the lawe but the doers shalbe iustified. But now hee reproueth the preachers, whiche performe not the thynges that they teache. Wherefore we may conclude, that it is not It is not inough to heare or to preach the word of God. inough either to preache, or to heare sounde doctrine, vnles the same bee put in execution.

Thou that preachest, A man should not steale, doost thou steale?] Hee obie­cteth vnto the Iewes those thynges, whiche were commonly cōmitted of them. And to reproue them he vseth that parte of the law, wherof none was ignoraūt, What theft is. namely, the x. cōmaundemētes. And as touching theft, theft is, when we with­hold [Page 46] that which is an other mās agaynst the owners will: or whē we by iniury draw vnto vs other mens goodes: or whē we distribute not that whiche is ours The forme of the doc­trine of the Decaloge. whē nede requireth. And there are also many other kindes of theft. But in y ^e Decaloge, or x. cōmaūdemēts, the chief purpose is onely to setforth y ^• chiefe somme, & that but rudely & grossely, vnder which we ought to vnderstand all the partes therof. The groūd & somme of all theft is couetousnes: euē as in filthy pleasures is expressed onely adultery: vnder which are comprehended all kindes of vnclea­nes. And as touching idolatry, there is forbidden al kinde of false woorshipping: when yet onely is expressed, that which is most grosse. For there is forbidden vs any straunge God, and there are forbidden also grauen images, and sondrye formes. Wherefore it is our part, when anye of the ten commaundementes of God forbiddeth vs any thinge, well to consider, what things are comprehended What is to be had a re­garde vnto in euery commaun­dement of the Deca­loge. vnder that vice. And afterward to secke out the roote, agaynst which we muste to our power resiste. Couetousnes, or thefte herehence springeth, for that we di­strust in God, and are alwayes afrayde, least we should wante. But adultery & all vncleanes of the fleshe springeth of the desire of voluptuous pleasures: as Christ expressed, when he sayd, If any man shall see a woman to lust after her, he hath already committed adultery in his harte. And agaynste thys concupiscence or luste ought we to striue. And as touching murther, Christ hath likewise admonished vs, that we should cutte of anger, as the roote therof. Now resteth as touching sacriledge to see what the Apostle complaineth therof. Sacriledge is rashely to What sa­criledge is. touch or to vsurpe vnto himselfe holy thinges whiche are dedicated vnto God, due either by the name of a vow, or els of a curse. The Iewes had a commaun­dement geuen them, that they should not spare idols. For theyr duety was to o­uerthrow and destroy all thinges pertayning vnto them. But they being led by A law ge­uen vnto the Iewes for the de­strong of Idols. couetousnes, reserued those thinges vnto themselues, and turned them to theyr owne proper commodities. So sinned Acham, and also Saule, when he had ouer­come Amalech. Contrariwise Moses gaue an excellent example of vertue, when he not onely brake the golden calfe, but also did beate it into pouder, and threwe it into the riuer. For if the reliques of the idole had remained stil, peraduenture the Israelites, as they were outragious, would haue woorshipped them. Indede the pub: wealth, and our magistrates may take away those thinges whiche are What our Magi­strates may do touching superstici­ous giftes. supersticious, and conuert the prices of them to good and godlye vses. But this thing is not permitted vnto priuate men. But the Hebrues were generally for­biddē, that they should not saue such things, especially as wer vowed by a curse.

Thou abhorrest idols, and committest sacriledge.] He noteth them to be in­fected with so great couetousnes, that they tooke away and vsurped vnto them­selues euen those thinges that pertained vnto the woorshipping of idols, so that they were any thing precious. Although this may also be vnderstāded of things consecrated vnto the true God. Of the sons of Hely we reade, y ^• they toke away from the offrers raw flesh dedicated vnto God, before they were made a sweete smell before the Lorde. Yea and the matter came to that point also, that the de­grees of the ministry and of the high priest were boughte and sold for money. I know that Origene and Ambrose do interprete these things allegorically: that the Iewes steale Christ out of the holy scriptures, do counterfaite the old testamēt, and with greate sacriledge do deny Christe. But the playner sentence delighteth me beste.

Thou boastest in the lavv, and by the transgression of the lavve dishonourest God. This vndoubtedly is repugnaunte to the ende of our condicion. For we are created, to sanctify the name of God. And Paule affirmeth, that we are ther­fore The end of the condiciō of men. created, to liue to the prayse of his glory & grace. Christe also sayde: Let your light so shine before men, that they maye see your good woorkes, and glorifye your Father which is in heauen. They mocke with God, which boast of him & in theyr workes continually resist his will.

The name of God through you is euell spoken of amonge the Gentles. As it is [Page] vvritten. Men vse to measure doctrine by the manners and life of the teacher: and by the meanes of the euill life of the Christians, the Iewes and Turkes curse Christ. And for the selfe same cause the Papistes at this daye are enemies to the Gospell. For if they see vs no lesse apply our selues vnto filthy lusts, then they do, to be greedy of lucre, to seeke auengemente, to be fearefull to dye, to be desirous of life, to contend and striue to muche earnestly amonge our selues for the commodities of the flesh, straightway they say, that our doctrine is woorse thē that which they professe. And without doubt those things which are here spo­ken, These things fitte with the Christians and espei­ally with those that professe the Gospell. fitte rather with the Christians then with the Iewes: when as we are en­dued with more excellente giftes then they were. Christe sayde, Beholde a greater then Salomon here, and a greater then Ionas. We boaste of the knowledge of Christe, we reste in the Gospell, and we haue the forme of doctrine out of the articles of fayth, and we contende that all thynges are more perfecte in the Gospell, then they were in the Iewysh religion: we haue y ^• fruiciō of y ^e liberty of the spirite, when as they were greuously oppressed with the yoke of ceremonies: yet though we be indued with so many and so excellent gifts, we leade our liues in such sorte, that the Gospell of Christ is euill spoken of through vs. But if any man will say, that the truth and dignitie of the doctrine dependeth not of the dig­nitie, maners, and life of the teacher, because Christ sayd of them which satte vp­on the chaire of Moyses: The thinges which they say, doe ye: but the thinges which they doe, doe ye not: This I know to be true. But in the meane time, let vs marke, Whether doctrine ought to be iudged by the maners & life of the teachers. that Christ sayd of the false prophetes and deceauers: By their fruites ye shall know them. Wherefore we must put a difference, that of men there are some already instructed in religion, and other some are to be instructed. Wherfore, they which are instructed in sound doctrine, do acknowledge it to be true, and do count it for the worde of God, though he which teacheth it and deliuereth it, be not so pure. But they which are to be instructed, and are not yet come to the vnderstandyng of it, doe iudge of it accordyng to the maners and life of the teachers. Not that in very déede the doctrine is by the maners of the ministers made eyther true or false: but because the vnlearned sorte are wont so to iudge. And in summe, God will not be honoured with outward titles and ceremonies. Thys is the wilie subtiltie of the deuill, that the giftes of God, which ought to be fruitfull, shoulde be made both of no force, and also should more aggrauate our cause. It is a great infelicitie, to deforme those thinges, wherby we ought to be honoured. And it is no small ingratitude to dishonour God, which hath so honoured vs. Paule accu­seth these men, that they dyd not onely them selues transgresse the lawes, but al­so allured others to the same, and caused them to blaspheme y ^e name of the Lord. And by an antithesis or cōtrary position, he exagerateth or amplifieth that which he before sayd: Thou that teachest an other, teachest thou not thy selfe? But y ^e place which he citeth, is in Esaie the 52. Chapter. And in the Greke edition the place is thus written: [...]: That is: Through you my name is euery where euill spoken of among the Gentiles. But in He­brewe it is written: Ve tamid col haiom schemi meuoats: That is: And al­wayes euery daye my name is ill spoken of. Wherby appeareth, that betwene the Hebrewe veritie and the Greke edition, there is not much differēce. But Paule vsed the Greke edition, partlye because it was in their handes vnto whom hée wrote, and partly because it serued well for hys purpose. For the Greke hath, among the Gentiles, which the Hebrewe hath not. But here is no small doubt ob­iected vnto vs, for that the Prophet séemeth to laye the whole cause of the blas­phemie vpon the straungers: namely, for that when they had lead away the Is­raelites captiues, they railed vpon their God, as though he had not bene able to deliuer thē. Which thing is more expressedly read in Ezechiell the 36. chap. from whence it may séeme that these thynges were taken: for there it is apertly writ­ten, that they in mockage sayd: Beholde the people of thys God. But we must con­sider, what was the cause and occasion of the captiuitie of y ^e Hebrewes: and we shal finde, that it was nothyng ells, but theyr wicked actes, and transgressions of [Page 47] the lawe: by which they in a maner compelled God, to deliuer them into those calamities: wherof followed the blasphemies of the Ethnickes. God was vrged The cause of the blas­phemie was not in the Gē [...]les but in the Iewes. two wayes: for on the one side vnlesse he had chastised them, when they liued wickedly, other nations would haue spoken euill of hym, for that he so much bare with wicked men. On the other side, if he should correcte them in forsaking and deliuering thē to outward nations, he should be euill spoken of, as a weake and féeble God. And the fountaine and originall of these euills, was the wicked lyfe Note that the glory of God is two maner of wayes en­daungered. of the Hebrewes. Wherefore in Ezechiell there is added, that he being touched with the compassion of hys name, had decréed to deliuer them at the length: both that he himselfe myght afterward bee set forth as a mightie God, and that they, by amendment of lyfe, myght behaue them selues the better. By thys place we may gather, that the Iewes greuously fell. For the greater their dignitie was, the more greuouser were those thinges which they cōmitted: so that by euery mans iudgement, they could no way be defended. Therefore in Esaie the Lorde sayd, when he had reckened vp all the ornamentes which he had bestowed vppon hys vineyarde: Iudge thou house of Israell betwene me and my vineyarde. Which para­ble Christ also vsed in the Gospell.

For Circumcision verily is profitable, if thou doe the lawe: but if thou be a transgressour of the lawe, thy circumcision is made vn­circumcsion. Therefore if the vncircumcision keepe the iustifica­tions of the lawe, shall not hys vncircumcision bee counted for cir­cumcision? And shall not vncircumcision which is by nature (if it keepe the lawe) iudge thee, which by the letter and circumcision arte a transgressour of the lawe?

For circumcision in deede is profitable.] When he had hetherto recke­ned vp the benefites bestowed vpon the Iewes, and had shewed how they had a­bused them: now by the way he setteth forth a manifest exposition of the true circumcision, and of the true Iewishnes. By reason of circumcision, they arro­gantlye puffed vp them selues. Vpon whiche occasion Paule sheweth by preuen­tion, that it made them not a whitte better then the Gentiles, when as they liued so filthilye. It was a great thyng in déede to be circumcised: so that the vncir­cumcision were cutte of in the hart also. Otherwise, how litle the circumcision of the body, profited them vnto righteousnes, their vices sufficiently declare, which a litle before he hath expressed. They often alleaged, that Moyses through the A commen­datiō of cir­cumcision. helpe of circumcision, was deliuered from the daunger of death. For the An­gell woulde haue killed hym, if hys wife had not circumcised hys sonne. And after the generall Circumcision celebrated by Iosua, the people were brought into the promised land, and that not without a wonderfull miracle. For the wa­ters of Iordane were compelled to go backe to their spryng. And in the booke of Genesis the 17. chap. it is manifest, with what waight and seriousnes this Sacrament was instituted of God. Wherunto as he added excellent promises, so also added he horrible threatnynges: that the soule of hym which was not the eight If circumci­sion being cō ­temned de­struyeth a man▪ then being added it saueth a man. day Circumcised should be destroyed. Whereupon it semeth that the Iewes rea­soned a contrariis, that is, from contraries: If Circumcision being intermitted, destroyeth a man, then contrarywise where it is had, it saueth a man. But thys kynd of argument is not of necessitie. It is in dede probable, but it doth not al­wayes conclude well: as many instancies teache vs, and Augustine oftentymes affirmeth. And those thynges whiche are here spoken, are not so to be vnderstanded, The dignitie of the sacra­mentes de­pend not of our faith and vprightnes. The fruite of the Sacra­mentes de­pendeth of our fayth. as though the dignitie of the Sacramentes should depende of our fayth or goodnes. For as much as here is not entreated of the nature or excellency of the Sacrament, but of the fruite and vtilitie therof. Whiche we must nedes graunt dependeth both of the fayth and godlines of the receauers. And by this place we learne, that outward thynges of them selues nothing profite vnto saluation, vn­lesse there be a mutation or chaunge made by the holy Ghost in our hartes, ei­ther before, or els whilest they are put in vse. Neither is this to be obiected, that [Page] the Baptisme of children is an outward thyng, and yet bryngeth saluation vn­to infantes. For the infantes haue no commoditie by the force of the outwarde What fruite chil­drē haue by Baptisme. washyng, vnles there come with all some spiritual thyng, and such as pertaineth to the soule. Augustine thinketh that saluation commeth vnto them; by the fayth of them whiche offer them (whom we call Godfathers and Godmothers) or by the fayth of the Churche. I know in déede, that the fayth of godly men may vnto some obtaine grace, conuersion, and excellent spirituall giftes. But saluation hap­neth not vnto them that are of full age, but only by their owne faith, and vnto in fantes by the spirit, and grace, which secretly worketh in them regeneration: of which regeneration baptisme is the outward sealyng. Wherfore it is apparant, how miserably the Iewes erred in attributyng so much to their circumcision.

And there were some (if we will geue credite vnto Augustine in hys booke De ciuitate Dei.) which affirmed as much of Baptisme. Namely, that a man being once baptised, although he liued wickedly, should not vtterly perishe. He shall in They which are baptised, may perish. dede (said they) suffer many thinges, but at the last he shall be saued, peraduen­ture by fire. But this error both Augustine hath confuted, & we haue subscribed vnto hym in our exposition of the first epistle to the Corinthians. The purpose of the Apostle in this place is, to shew, that God will haue no regard to the outward circumcision, if there want piety and holines: and agayne on the other side, that vncircumcision shall not be a let vnto the Gentiles, so that they meane wel, and Outwarde thinges by themselues profite litle, yea rather they are hurtfull, if the spirite & faith be wā tyng. If the receiuers haue faith, then the sacra­ments haue some vtility liue godly. Let vs note, as I began to say, how little is to be attributed vnto out­ward things, if they be taken by themselues. And yet so great is the error in our dayes, that men make prayers recited in a strange & vnknowen tonge, pilgrimages, & certaine fastes rashly taken in hand, as the chief anker holde of their salua­tion. Yea they are now at the length come to this point, that sometimes they at­tribute remission of sinnes vnto these trifles. The prophets cry out euery where, that God despiseth, hateth, and detesteth worshippinges without fayth and god­lines. Howbeit we must vnderstand (as we may gather by the wordes of the A­postle) that if they which receiue the sacramentes, haue faith and pietie, then out ward things haue theyr certain vtilities. For forasmuch as they are instituted by God, we must nedes graunt that they are good, vnles it happen that through our fault they be made hurtfull. But they are good and profitable vnto the iust, in whō through faith, iustification goeth before. For sacramentes (to speake in general) What cir­cumcision is. are visible signes: which signifie, & by which the holy ghost exhibiteth vnto those, which beleuyng receaue them, both grace and coniunction with Christ, and also seale vnto vs the promises of saluation. And to tooch somwhat of circumcision, it was a signe, or to speake more apertly, a sealyng of the promise & league made w ^t God through Christ. And they were marked in the partes apointed to generatiō & to geue vs to vnderstand, that Christ as touching his manhode, should be borne of the séede of man. And by that signe they were continually put in minde of the league made with God: and thereby they professed the obseruation of the law.

Wherfore to the Galathians it is sayd, that he which is circumcised is debter to kepe the whole law. It was also in stede of a marke or cognisance, wherby that people was discerned from other nations. Wherfore, whilst they iorneyed in the desert, they were not circumcised, because there were no other nations there, from whō they might by that signe be discerned: as the commentaries which are ascribed vnto Ierome alledge: although of that thyng there may an other cause more pro­bable be assigned. By this sacrament also was noted the mortifieng of y ^e flesh and Circumci­sion in stede of baptisme Children ought to be baptised. filthy lustes, and that all superfluous things should be cut of from the godly. And superfluous things are whatsoeuer displease God. This rite was to the old men in stede of baptisme, & was counted for y ^e sacrament of regeneration. Whereby it appeareth that our infantes ought to be baptised, forasmuch as their lotte is no worse then the lotte of the chyldren of the Hebrewes: yea rather it is in many partes more happy. For our baptisme (somewhat to speake thereof now) is not bound to the eight day, as was the circumcision of the Iewes in the olde time: for we are by Christ deliuered from circumstaunces of tyme and place. And sacred rites are certayne outward professions of piety. And such not onely the Iewes [Page 48] had, but also those which in the first state of nature, liued godly. Therfore the sim­boles The godly had holy rites also before the law. or outwad signes of rites, are in dede by reason of the diuersity of tymes oftentymes chaunged: but the thinges remayne the selfe same. Moreouer by the wordes of Paule is gathered, that Circumcision profit [...]th, so that the law be ob­serued. For it is very profitable, to obteyne regeneration, to haue the signe of the couenaunt, and a perpetuall admonition of the mortification of the flesh, and an obsignation or seale of the promise of God, and of the heauenly gifte bestowed vpon vs.

If thou be a transgressor of the law.] Here he vnderstandeth none but those which of purpose transgresse: and not those which fal of infirmitie, and are drawē either vnawares or vnwillingly, and do sighe and grone, saying together wyth Paule, who shall deliuer me from the body of this death?

Thy circumcision is made vncircumcision.] To be made vncircumcision in this place, is to be counted vncircumcision, as it shall afterward be declared, whē he sayth, Shall not his circumcision be counted vncircumcision? And to kepe the law, is to be taken in the same sence that we before declared. Ambrose vppon this place sayth. He then kepeth the law, which beleueth in Christ. But if he beleue not, he is a transgressor of the law. Which wordes although they serue not much to the exposi­tiō of this place, yet are they very profitable. Bicause therby we perceiue that he which beleueth in Christ kepeth the lawe: for that by fayth is geuen vnto vs the power and facultie of the spirite, wherby to obey the law. And if there want any thing to the obseruation therof, as in very dede there alway wanteth, the same is He that be­leueth not is accor­ding to the sentence of Ambrose a transgressor of the law. The Iewes gloried in cir­cumcision. holpen by the imputation of the righteousnes of Christ. Moreouer in that he af­firmeth, that he which beleueth not in Christ, is a transgressor of the law, he ma­nifestly sheweth, that the workes of them which beleue not in Christ, are sinnes and transgressions of the law. The Iewes bosted excedyng much of circumcision as though it had bene geuen them for their merites, and as though it had ben an assured testimony of a iust and holye lyfe: whiche thyng is declared to be vntrue. Chrisostome vpō this place vseth a very trim order, both as touching the law & also as touchyng circumcision. There is (sayth he) an outward law, there is also a law in the hart, and in the middle place are set good workes which procede from the law of the hart & are agreable with the outward law. Likewise, there is circumcision in the flesh, & cir­cumcision in the harte. In the middest is placed a iust and holy life. For it proceedeth from the circumcision of the harte, and agreeth with the circumcision of the flesh. Paule put­teth A double comparison of circumci­sion. a double comparison of circumcision. The first is, whereby it is contrarye vnto vncircumcision, y ^• is, vnto the condiciō of the Ethnickes. And of this he spea­keth now presently: and sheweth, that it was nothinge preiudiciall vnto men as touchign saluation. The other is whereby circumcision is compared with faith and thereof shall afterward be entreated, when the Apostle sheweth, that Abrahā first beleued, and therefore obteyned righteousnes: and afterwarde that righte­ousnes was sealed with circumcision. Wherfore the circumcision of the flrsh is of lesse dignity then fayth, and commeth after it.

Therefore if vncircumcision do kepe the iustifications of the law, shal not his vncircumcision be counted for circumcision.] In ciuile iudgementes when any is to be condemned, which is in any dignity or Magistrateship, he is The ciuile manner in condem­ning of no­ble men. first depriued of his dignity or office, and then afterward condemned. So the A­postle first depriueth the Iewes of the true Iewishnes, and of the true circumci­sion, and then afterward condemneth them, because they liued filthely. This si­militude in a manner vseth Chrisostome. Wherunto we may moreouer adde, that like as in a publike wealth they which shalbe preferred to honour, if they be of a base and obscure stocke, are fyrste adorned with some noble Magistrateship, or publike dignity: so Paule minding to bring to honour the Gentles, which seemed abiecte, attributeth vnto them the true circumcision, and true religion of the Iewes, when he sayth, that theyr vncircumcision is counted for circumcision, which they haue in theyr hart. And in these wordes, circumcision (I say) and vn­circūcisiō, [Page] is vsed the figure called Metonymia, which is a trāspositiō of names. The figure called Me­tonymia vsed in cir­cumcision & vncircumcision. For by those signes is signifyed the state and condicion of the Iewes and Gentils.

The iustifications of the lavv.] In Greeke is red [...], which many take to be ceremonies called of the Hebrues Chocoth. But I do not easly se, how the Ethnikes kept the ceremonies of the law: vnles we wil say that the Hebrues in theyr captiuities taught the Gentils the ceremonies of Moses: which is not ca­sy to be beleued: especially, forasmuch as they were not to be obserued, but in the land of promise. Peraduēture they meane y ^e these iustifications do signify those rites, which the Ethnikes counted in the law of nature godlye and good. For we speake not of idolatrous rites: but of those whiche some obserued by the tradici­ons The holy Ethnikes had certain good and godly rites in the law of nature. of theyr Fathers, which hoped in the Mediator to come. For by suche cere­monies they both professed God, & also accused thēselues as sinners: after which folowed y ^e practise of vpright liuyng. And we deny not, but ther were many such mē. Yet can we not therfore affirme, that either Socrates, or Phocion, or Aristides, were of the number of these men: when as we haue nothyng that is certayne of theyr pietie and fayth, but rather by historyes they appeare Idolatrers. Neuer­thelesse, the Scriptures commend Iob, vnto whom (no doubt) there were many like. But by our iudgement (as we haue sayd) they can not be declared or defi­ned. But the Apostle speaketh not of those rites of the lawe of nature: when as by the lawe, he here vnderstandeth the lawe of Moses. For he hath to do against the Iewes. And that the Ethnickes obserued not the rites of Moses, hereby it is By the iu­stifications of the lawe he vnder­standeth the morall partes of the lawe. manifest, because they were vncircumcised, & are called vncircumcision. Wher­fore, it is more truely sayd, that the iustifications of the law, signifie here the mo­rall part of the lawe, of which the Gentiles by the light of nature, were not igno­raunt. The scope of the Apostle is, to shewe, that righteousnes is not of necessi­tie ioyned with the rites and ceremonies of the lawe: and that it was no let vn­to the Gentiles touching saluation, that they wer not circumcised, so that they had pietie. And contrarywise, that the Iewes, being destitute of fayth and holy lyfe, are not holpen by circumcision, to bee therby preferred before the Gentiles. And where as we haue in our reading, [...], that is, shall be counted, or im­puted: Chrysostome readeth [...], or [...], that is, shall be turned. Neither doth hée onely read it so, but also interpreteth it so: so that he sayth, that the Apostle sayd not [...]. And he sayth plainly, that Paule here so speaketh as before, when he sayd: Thy circumcision is made vncircūcision. He would (sayth he) speake that which is of more waight and greater, to the end to speake with more efficacie. Thys diuersitie of readyng, Erasmus weighed not: neyther will we contende therefore, for that the sense eyther way remay­neth sounde.

And vncircumcision which is by nature (if it kepe the lawe) shall iudge thee, which by the letter and circumcision, art a transgressour of the lawe.] To iudge. is taken iij. maner of wayes. To iudge, may be taken thrée maner of wayes: eyther that the Ethnickes shall pronounce sentence agaynst the Iewes: as Paule sayd to the Corinthians: Knowe ye not, that we shall iudge the Aungells also: or by comparison, as the Lorde sayd of the Sodomites, and of the Niniuites, and of the Quéene of Saba, that they should iudge the Israelites: or to iudge, is to reproue, to accuse, and to beare witnes a­gaynst a man. For euen as before were alleaged the cogitations, which shall ac­cuse one an other: (for the good shall accuse the euill, for that they corrupted the man: and agayne, the euill shall accuse the good, because they helped not:) so the holy and iuste Ethnickes shall accuse the wicked Iewes, for that they being ador­ned with so many giftes and spirituall graces, serued not God. He calleth it vn­circumcision by nature, because we are naturally so borne. And they whiche are Vncircumcision by nature. Ethnickes, purpose not in their minde to circumcise them selues. Or to speake more rightly, as I thinke, vncircumcision by nature, is an Ethnicke man, which is led onely by the light of nature. By the letter hee vnderstandeth what soeuer is What the letter signi­fi [...]th. outward, and is not grafted in the hart, to moue hym to doe well. Augustine in hys 3. booke and 5. chap. De Doctrina Christiana, writeth: that they sticke in [Page 49] the letter, which take the signes for the thynges, and that which is figuratiuelye spoken in the holye Scriptures, they take it so, as if it were spoken proper­ly: and so lowe créepe they on the grounde, that when they heare the name of the Sabboth, they remember nothyng but the seuenth day, which was obserued of the Iewes. Also, when they heare of a Sacrifice, they thinke vpon nothyng but vpon the sacrifices which were killed. And though there be some seruitude tolle­rable, yet he calleth that a miserable seruitude, when we take the signes for the It is a ser­uitude most miserable to count the signes for the things. An errour concernyng the Eucha­rist. thinges. Wherin there is great offence committed in these dayes, in the Sacra­crament of the Eucharist. For how many shall a man finde, which, beholdyng the outward signes of thys Sacrament, calleth to memorye the death and passi­on of Christ, wherof it is most certayne that they are signes? or which thincketh with him selfe, that the body and bloud of Christ is a spirituall meate of the soule through faith, euen as bread and wine are nourishmentes of the body? Or which weigheth with hym self the coniunction of the members of Christ betwene themselues, and with the head? These thinges are not regarded, and they cleane on­ly to the sight of the signes. And men thinke it is inough, if they haue looked vp­on, bowed their knée, and worshipped. Thys is to embrace the letter, and not to geue eare vnto the sayd Augustine, who in the place which we haue now cited, and a litle afterward most apertly affyrmeth, that to eate the body of Christ, & to To eate the body of Christe and to drinke his blo ud are figura­tiue spea­ches. drinke hys bloud, are figuratiue kinds of speaches. So are the Iewes accused, be­cause they cleauing only to the letter & circumcisiō, wer trāsgressours of the law.

For he is not a Iewe, which is one outward: neyther is that circumcision which is outward in the fleshe. But he is a Iewe, which is one within, and the circumcision is of the hart in the spi­rite, not in the letter, whose prayse is not of men, but of God.

For he is not a Iewe, which is one outward.] Here he more apertly sheweth, what is y ^e true Iewishnes, & what the true circumcisiō. And he vseth iiij. antithesis or contrary positions: Outward & inward: the fleshe & the hart: the spirite & the letter: the prayse of men, and the prayse of God. But thys is to be marked, that where as he sayth, That he is not a Iew, which is a Iewe outwardly: neyther is that cir­cumcision, whyche is in the fleshe, these thynges oughte to be vnderstanded by exclusion (as they call it) so that, this woorde, onely, or alone be added. For that circumcision whyche is onelye in the fleshe, is not circumsion. And he whiche is a Iewe onelye outwardlye, is not a Iewe. But Paule see­meth to deny that simply, which should be denied but partly: because to exagg [...] ­rate That sometimes is simply de­nied, which is denied onely partly. What the Fathers ment when they sayd that the Eucharist is not bread Against the Anabap­tistes. or amplify his matter he speaketh Hyperbolically. Such as is that saying, whē he sayth, that he was not sent to baptise. Neyther ought we any otherwise to vnderstand the Fathers, when they say that the Eucharist is not bread. They speake hiperbolically, and vnderstand that it is not breade onely, or alone, or cō ­mon breade: because vnto the bread, is added, the woorde of God, whereby it re­ceaueth the nature of a sacrament. And this is a stronge reason againste the A­nabaptistes. which haue euer in theyr mouth that saying of Paule vnto the Corrin­thians: Circumcision and vncircumcision are nothing: but the obseruation of the cōmaun­dements of God. So they saye that Baptisme, and the Eucharist, and the Ecclesi­asticall ministery are nothing, but pretend onely the obseruing of the cōmaun­dementes of God. But we aunswere them, as we haue now sayde of Paule, that other thinges are nothyng, if they be alone without fayth, and piety, and a holy life. But what it is to consist of the spirite and not of the letter, is thus declared, that by the spirite we vnderstand the renuing of the minde: whereby it willing­ly What is ment by the spirite and the letter. embraceth, and desyreth that whiche is contained in the outward commaun­dement of the law. For the spirite sometimes is taken for the excellenter part of the minde, and sometimes for the power and faculty, whereby God chaungeth and regenerateth a man. But we here by the spirite vnderstand the mynd of mā compacte of them both, being renued by the holy Ghost. But the letter signify­eth, whatsoeuer is outwardlye set before vs, be it neuer so spirituall, when it cleaueth not to our minde, or vrgeth not.

Wherefore the circumcision of the flesh, is the signe of the circumcision of The circū ­cision of the flesh, is the signe of the circumcisiō of the harte. The circū ­cision of the hart in the bookes of the law. Both God woorketh in vs good things, and we also woorke. The spirite and the let­ter are dis­cerned by the affect of the mind. the harte and of the mind. Therfore great care was to be had, that it should not be vayn or superfluous. This phrase touching the circumcision of the hart, Paul borowed out of the olde Testamente. In the. 10. chap: of Deut: commaundement was geuen, that they should circumcise the foreskins of theyr hartes: and in the selfe same booke the. 30. chapter. Moses promiseth, that God will one day circum­cise the foreskin of theyr hartes: to declare that either is true, namely, that God woorketh in vs the things that are good, and that we also worke the selfe same: forasmuch as God vseth our ministery to bring forth good woorkes. Wherfore so longe as our minde resisteth the woorde of God whiche is set foorth vnto vs, althoughe outwardlye it make a shewe of somewhat, yet is it occupied in the letter. But when it is made prone vnto the commaundementes of God, then is it gouerned by the spirite. Wherefore as touching the thinge whiche is set foorth and red, there is no difference betwene the spirite and the letter, but as touching the affect of the minde. Which thinge Paule hath declared in his latter Epistle to the Corinthians the 3. cap: whē he saith: Ye are the Epistle of Christ wrought by our ministery and written not wyth inke, but with the spirite of the liuing God, not in tables of stone, but in tables of flesh. Where he manifestlye teacheth, that this is the ministery of the spirite, whē in the tables of our hart are imprinted those things which God commaundeth, and will haue to be of vs beleued and done. Neyther let vs meruaile, that Paule sayth, that such an Epistle was written by him, whē as it is the worke of God: for he meaneth that he wrote it, onely as an instrumēt ioyned with the woorking of God. Wherefore they are to be counted ministers of the spirite, which do not onely expounde the woordes of God, but also do im­printe Who are ministers of the spi­rite. thē into the hartes of the hearers. Which thing such as do not, althoughe they speake good and healthfull thinges, yet are they but ministers of the letter: neither of theyr woorke followeth any thinge els, then the death of the hearers. For they which vnderstand the will of the Lord, and do it not, shalbe punished with ma­ny stripes. And therefore Paule sayde, that the letter killeth, but the spirite quickeneth. Wherefore it is the duety of pastors, and of them that teache, to pray vnto God For what thing pas­tors ought to pray. What is the true circumcision. moste ernestly, to make them ministers not of the letter, but of the spirite. Paule also vnto the Philippians declared what is the true circumcision, when he sayth: We are the circumcision, which serue God in the spirite, we glory in Christ, and haue not confidence in flesh. By these thre notes he expressed the spirituall circumcision. And vnto the Colossians after he had said, that we are circumcised in Christ, but yet with a circumcision not made by handes, he declareth by very many circumstances, what that circumcision is: namely, that we haue put of the body of the sins of the fleshe: that through Baptism we are buried together with Christ: that we haue forgeuenes of synnes: that the hand writing is put out, which was agaynst vs by reason of ordinances: and the principalityes & powers which were agaynst vs, are by Christ vanquished & ouercome. In which place this is not to be passed ouer, that baptisme is called the true cir­cumcision, so that it be in the spirite and the hart, and not in the letter and the Baptisme when it is in the spirite is the true circumcisiō. fleshe. Wherefore these sentences a Iewe inward and outward, the circumcision in the flesh and in the hart, are to be taken in respect as they are opposite one to the other: that is, a part, and disseuered one from the other. For ioyne them toge­ther, and then the sentence of Paule pertayneth not vnto them. For it is not to be doubted, but that there were very many Iewes in the olde tyme, which were Iewes both outward and inward: and were circumcised not only in the fleshe, but also in the harte. These thinges may be taken three maner of wayes: so that there is one circumcision of the fleshe, an other of the spirite, and the thyrd ioyned together of them both. For it is not to be thought, that the olde Testa­ment Many liued vnder the law which there­withall liued also vnder th [...] Gospell. An [...]or of the Mani­ches. was so seperated from the Gospell, that they which liued in it, could not also therewithall haue the Gospell. These two thinges are indeede seperated the one from the other: but yet in such sorte, that they may be ioyned together in one and the selfe same man. Manicheus so reiected the olde Testament, as [Page 50] though it were vtterly vnprofytable vnto vs. And vsed this kynde of reason: Forasmuch as that inheritance of the land of Chanaan pertayneth not vnto me, I do re­iect also both the Testament and the writinge whereby the bequest was made. Yea also though it should bring vnto me the possession of that land, yet Christ hath so ex­alted vs to better thinges, that I regard not these thinges. These wordes obiected Fau­stus, and they are red in the 4. booke of that worke whiche Augustine wrote a­gainst him. In which place he thus answereth him: Those thinges which are writ­ten The olde Testaraent pertayneth vnto vs also. in the olde Testament are types of our thinges. Forasmuch as Paule in his latter E­pistle to the Corrinthians sayth: These thinges happened vnto them in a figure: but they are written for our correction, vpon whome are come the endes of the world. And vnto the Romanes we reade whatsoeuer thinges are written, are written for our erudition and learning. And in the oracles of the olde Testament is promise made of Christ. Wher­fore he being raysed from the dead, and disputing with his two disciples of himselfe, cited testimonyes out of Moses, and out of the whole scripture. And the same Christ sayd, that the good father of the houshold brought forth of his treasure both new thinges and olde. Wherefore the olde Testament is not so contrary vnto the new, as the Mani­chies fayned it was. And therefore Paule when he semeth to speake any thinge Paule whē he semeth to diminish any thing frō the law, condēneth not the olde testament. How we shall iudge rightly of the sacra­mentes. So much let euery man esteme himselfe, how much he seeth himselfe to be in the sight of God. ill of the law, that doth he not, but in respecte as it is taken by it selfe, a parte from Christ.

VVhose prayse is not of men, but of God.] Paule reiecteth not the prayse which commeth of men, but so farforth as it is seperated from the praise which commeth of God. In summe, although the sacramentes were not only profes­sions of faith, but also outward seales of the promises, and of the giftes of God: yet was not perfect righteousnes, to be put in their outward simboles. Hereby we gather that no man ought to boast of his outward thinges. So much let e­uery man esteme of himselfe, how much he seeth himselfe to be in the sight of God, who marketh not only the thinges whiche are seene, but is also the sear­cher of the hartes. Hereby we learne also, that both the wordes of God, and the sacramentes, if they be receaued only as thinges outward, do pertayne vnto the letter, which quickneth not, but killeth. And by these thinges, hath the A­postle made the Gentiles equall with the Iewes. For that they also mought no les then the Iewes, be Iewes inwardly, and haue circumcision in the hart: which God chiefely regardeth.

WHat is then the preferment of the Iewe? or what is the profite of circumcision? Much euery maner of way: For first, because vnto them were committed the wordes of God. For what though some did not beleue, shall their vnbeliefe make the fayth of God without effect? God forbid. Let God be true, and euery man a ly­ar, as it is written: That thou mightest be iustefied in thy words, and ouercome when thou art iudged.

The Apostle continueth still in that which he entended, namely, to accuse the Iewes. And now entreateth he of the fourth thing, which we tooke in hand to make declaration of: that is, that their noughty liuing was no let, but that the giftes which were geuen vnto them, were both excellent, and also to be had in great estimation. He had before much deiected thē for their corrupt life. But A distinc­tion. because it could not be denyed, but that God excedingly loued their nation (when as we reade in the Psalme, He hath not done thus vnto euery nation) he se­meth to put a distinction: wherein, if we haue a respect vnto God, he graunteth, that he was very louing vnto them, when as he gaue vnto them these thinges, which he gaue not vnto other nacions: but if we consider them by themselues, [Page] then those excellent giftes, nothing profited them, vnles peraduenture to theyr farther iudgement, and condemnation, and that through theyr owne default, and not through any faulte of the giftes. And whē he setteth forth the dignity of The digni­ty of the Hebrues herein con­sisted, in that God committed vnto them both his words, and sacramēts. the Hebrues, he declareth that it chiefely consisteth in this, for that vnto them were committed the wordes of God. Which wordes, although they comprehē ­ded in them many thinges, yet aboue all thinges they offred vnto them the pro­mise of Christ, and of saluation. Which thinges the Iewes neglecting, wholy endeuored thēselues to the setting forth and extolling of circumcision, and out­ward rites. Euen as do our men also now in our dayes: who, when the sacra­mentes are set before them, and especially the supper of the Lord, haue a regard only vnto the outward simbols and signes, which are but the seales of the pro­mises and giftes of God: but the things themselues they consider not, and much les haue they them in estimation.

Much eu [...]ry maner of way.] This is not to be referred vnto this worde Multum per omnem modum, not, mul­tam. profite, which went next before. For then he shoulde haue sayd, multam in the feminine gender. Therefore it is to be referred vnto that, which he put fyrst, when he sayd: VVhat preferment hath the Iew aboue the Gentile? He attribu­teth both vnto the Iewishe religion, and also vnto the sacramentes thereof, so much dignity, as he myght do by the word of God. And this hath a great em­phasis or force, that he answereth, Much euery maner of vvay.

For vvhat though some did not beleue, shall their vnbeliefe make the faith of God vvithout effect? God forbid.] These thinges he putteth by the figure An­tipophora, as though there were Gentiles, which went about to deface this dig­nity of the Iewes, for that they beleued not the wordes of God committed vnto them. But against them Paule writeth, that their noughtines was no hindrance at all vnto the truth of God. For, forasmuch as he is truth it selfe, whiche gaue them his word, and promised them that he would be their God, and that they should be hys people, their sinnes could nothing let, but that that whiche was promised, should take successe: because among that people there were alwayes some good men, which both beleued the promises of God, and also lyued vncor­ruptly. Wherefore in them, although not in all, was performed that which was promised. And so far is it of, that their noughtines of life was any derogati­on vnto the truth of the wordes of God, that by it rather it was illustrated, and appeared more bright. Which thing he proueth by a sentence of Dauid, as it shal afterward appeare. And as touching the words, where as the Apostle saith, First, he hath not a respect vnto order, as though he ment to rehearse a greate many other benefytes of God geuen vnto the Iewes: But it is in a maner an entrance or beginning of that which he entendeth to speake. Or els it signifyeth The words of God are a most riche treasure. the chiefest or principallest of those things which were geuen. Vndoubtedly the wordes of God were as a most rich treasure, which was long tyme hidden and layd vp among the Hebrues only, and not communicated vnto the Gentiles, vn­till the Apostles tyme. For this was the function committed vnto them, name­ly, to sow abrode this treasure among the Gentiles. It is certayne, that Ptolo­meus Philadelphus was desirous to haue the lawes of the Hebrues conuerted by the 70. interpreters into the Greke tonge. But yet for all that, knew not he, that those thinges which were therein contayned, pertayned vnto the Gentiles also. The Apostles only began to make manifest vnto the whole world, that the promises of Christ, & eternall saluatiō, were common also vnto the Gētiles. And marke in this place, that those prerogatiues only are mencioned of, which were geuen freely, and depended not of any vertue of the receauers. And this particle God forbid, which he most oftentymes vseth, is euery where ioyned vnto those thinges in a maner, of which it is not lawfull for vs once to thinke: forasmuch as whosoeuer is a professor of godly religion, ought to abhorre them.

Let God be true and euery man a lyer.] Man is many wayes a lyar: part­ly, Man many wayes a lyar. because by reason of inconstancy he doth not alwayes abyde still in one and [Page 51] the selfe same purpose: partly, because he performeth not those thinges which he promiseth: and partly, because he oftentymes bringeth forth a lye, and that ether of infirmity, whilest he is not able to attayne vnto the truth, or els of an euill purpose to vse deceite. This sentence is read in the 116. Psalme In my hast A place of Dauid out of the 116. Psalme. I sayd, euery man it a lyar. And certayne interpreters of the Hebrues affirme, that Dauid had then a respect vnto Samuell. For when he was on euery side enclosed in by the host of Saule, & was in a maner past all hope to escape, such cogitacions were offred vnto him through the infirmity of the fleshe: as though the Prophet had made a lye touching those thinges, which he had promised him concerning the kingdome. Or els, he mought speake these thinges against himselfe: for that when according to mans reason he had cast awaye all hope of escaping, and thought himselfe to be in a maner forsaken of God, as soone as he came agayne into the right way, he brake into this sentence, Euery man is a lyer, because he also had deceaued himselfe touching the goodnes of God. And by the antithe­sis or contrary position it is playne, that a liar here signifieth an vnconstant person. For before he sayde, Let God be true. Wherefore we maye con­clude The word of God and the sacra­mentes de­pend not of our fayth. that the dignity of the scripture or of the sacramentes, dependeth not of our fayth or misbeliefe. For whether we beleue God or mistrust him, they are to be estéemed according to their dignitie: because they depend of the institution of God, who is most true: neither is hys truth chaunged through our defaultes: as Dauid writeth:

That thou mightest be iustified in thy wordes, and ouercome when thou arte iudged. Thus the 70. interp [...]eters haue turned it, whom Paule now fol­loweth: when as in the Hebrewe it is thus written: Lemaan titsdek be dhob recha tizkeh beschoatecha. And that which the 70. haue turned, That thou mightest be iustified, may accordyng to the Hebrewe be: Therfore shalt thou be iu­stified. And where as it is written, agaynst thee onely haue I sinned, Rabbi Da­uid Chimchi expoundeth it thus: I haue priuilie and in secret, transgressed: and therefore agaynst thée onely. But thou art iustified, and in iudgement ouercom­mest: which hast by Nathan the Prophet shewed y ^e thou knowest these thinges. But thys exposition fitteth not very well with the wordes of Paule: Wherfore we omitte it. Others interprete it: Although Dauid sinned agaynst Ʋrias, and agaynst Bersabe, and agaynst the hoste of Israell: yet these were not sinnes, but in respecte that they were prohibited by God in the lawe. For there hence depen­deth the iuste consideration of sinne. But it is better to say, that Dauid was so much gréeued, because he sawe, that God, by reason of hys sinne was blasphe­med, and had in derision, which bare fauour vnto such a kyng, who to satisfie hys owne filthye luste, permitted hys enemyes to haue the vpperhand. These things (I say) so much vexed hym, that in that feruencie of minde, he had a regarde vnto these thynges onely. And therfore by the figure Hyperbole, he sayth: Against thee onely haue I sinned. As we, when we are oppressed with many troubles at one tyme, are accustomed to say of the chiefest and greatest trouble which afflicteth vs most: Thys one thyng greueth me very much. But afterward he comforteth hym selfe, hauing conceaued a firme hope, and sayth: That thou mightest be iusti­fied in thy wordes, as if he shoulde say: Vndoubtedly I haue greuouslye sinned: but such is thy goodnes, that hereby I sée it to bee more poured out: so that al­waies, when thou contendest in iudgement, thou wilt in the cause, haue the vp­perhand. Neyther is it to be thought, that Dauid when he sinned, had thys con­sideration in hys minde, to illustrate the goodnes of God. For there he sought onely to satisfie hys owne desire and luste. Wherefore, thys particle, That, hath Good haps are not to be ascribed vnto sinnes but vnto the mercy of God. a respecte, not vnto Dauid, but vnto God, by whose benefite it commeth to passe, that of that which is euill, shoulde come some good vnto them which loue hym. Forasmuch as vnto them, all thynges turne to good. Wherfore, the good things, which followe after sinnes cōmitted, are to be ascribed, not vnto our sinnes, but to the mercy of God. Neyther let vs maruaile, that God is iudged as Paul saith. For oftentymes it happeneth, that men when they thinke them selues to be euill God is iudged of men. handled of hym, they reason concerning hys iudgementes, and although not in [Page] wordes, yet in thoughtes they striue agaynst hym. But then if they shoulde call to memorye, how many & how greuous sinnes they haue committed, they should alwayes p [...]rceaue, that God is in hys cause iustified, and ouercommeth. Thys worde, wordes, which in Hebrewe is bedhobrecha, may signifie iudiciall acti­ons: and in that sense haue I interpreted it. Although other take that worde for the wordes of the promises, and especially touchyng Christ. For Dauid when he considered, that he had greuouslye fallen, desired God to make him cleane, and that he woulde not, by reason of the wicked acte which he had committed, cease to accomplishe the promise, which was, that of hys séede shoulde Christ be borne. Which interpretation Ambrose hath. But besides the expositions now allea­ged of these wordes, there are two other expositions also: Of which, the one is thys: For that Dauid was a kyng, and was the chiefest in authoritie amongest the people of God, he had no iudges ouer hym, whose tribunall seate, or iudge­ment, or sentence, he shoulde néede to be afrayde of. But he saw, that onely the wrath of God dyd hange ouer hys head. Therefore he sayd: Ʋnto thee onely am I giltie, although men can not punishe me. The other exposition is: Ʋrias, Bersabe, and part of the hoste haue bene ill delte withall through my meanes: but they vn­doubtedly, as they were men, had sinnes, for which they deserued those thynges which they suffred: yea, and thynges farre more greuous then them. But thou O God, hast nothing in thée for which I ought so to offend thée, whom thou hast adorned with so many great benefites, and exalted to so high a dignitie. There were some also which thought, that thys addition, That thou myghtest be iustifi­ed in thy sayinges, is to be referred vnto that, which went before: Haue mercy vppon me O God: Washe me, and clense me: that being receaued into grace, I may obtayne those thynges which thou hast promised me: and so thou mayest be iusti­fied and ouercome, euen by the iudgement of men. Here we sée, that thys worde Of the woord iusti­fieng. It is the part of per­fect men when they are afflicted to acknow­ledge God to be good. iustifying, signifieth not to obtayne any newe righteousnes, which thyng we can not ascribe vnto God, but to be counted or pronounced iuste. For euery man doth not, when he is afflicted, acknowledge God to be good. Of that minde was Daniell, when he sayd: Ʋnto thee belongeth righteousnes, but vnto vs confusion of face. God suffred Peter the Apostle, Dauid the kyng, and Moses to sinne: that calling them backe agayne vnto hym, and geuing vnto them the thynges which hee had promised them, he might the more declare hys goodnes. But because some men myght thinke, that by those wordes may be gathered, that men which pro­fesse pietie, although they liue wickedly, yet shall notwithstanding obtayne the promises of God, if thys be generally true, that our incredulitie or noughtines, are no hinderaunce vnto the promises of God: we must therfore make a distinc­tion A distincti­on of the promise of God. betwene the promises of God. For there are some onely touching outward thynges, and tend onely to temporall good thinges: as that their publicke wealth should be preserued: that the kingdome shoulde continue in the stocke of Dauid: and that Christ should take fleshe of hys séede. The sinnes and vnbeliefe of mē, could nothyng hinder the bringing to passe of these thynges. In déede in y ^• meane tyme, came captiuities and afflictions, howbeit at the length the promise of God, as touchyng all these thynges, tooke place. There is an other kinde of promises touching those thinges, which pertayne vnto our saluation. And vnto these in déede, the vngodly do not attayne. And yet can we not therefore inferre, that by our wicked doinges, the promises of God are frustrated. For they pertayne not generally vnto all men, but onely vnto those which be called by the predestinati­on Vnto whome pertaine the promises of God. of God, according to election: as it is writtē in this Epistle the 9. chap. where it is sayd: Not as though the worde of God hath fallen awaye: And straight way is added: Are the children of the fleshe the children of God? And aunswere is made: They which are the children of promise are counted for the seede. Wherfore they vnto whome the promises pertayne, if they haue fallen, shalbe called backe agayne to repentance. And so theyr synnes which they haue before committed, shall not make voyd the promises of God. Indede as touching thē, they deserued to haue them made frustrate. For they hauing once broken couenaunt, it wer conueni­ent, [Page 52] that God toward them, should not stande to his promises accordinge to this common sentence, Qui fraugit fidem, fides fraugitur eidem. That is, He whiche breaketh promise, let promise againe be broken vnto hym. But God so dealeth not to the end his goodnes might be the better declared. And those things which Vnto vs also pertayne those thin­ges which Paule now teacheth. Paule now speaketh of the Iewes pertaine vnto vs also. For, most excellent are these benefites of God towardes vs: namely, that the Gospell is committed vnto vs: that we haue baptisme, the holy Eucharist, and such other like: which thinges vndoubtedly the Turkes and infidels haue not. But a man might obiect, what do these thinges profite, when as in the meane tyme very many are a great deale the worse, and the most part abuse them. We aunswer with Paule, that by this is the goodnes of God to be gathered, that he will suffer many noughty men and hi­pocrites for a few good mens sakes, whiche vse these giftes well: and will rather very long beare with many wicked men, then that his church should come to ru­me. Thou wilt say peraduenture, then he willeth their sinnes if he suffer them. We ought not after the example of God to suffer sins when we may amend them. What els, after a certaine maner he willeth them? Otherwise he would not suf­fer them, vnles he willed them, for God suffereth nothyng against his will. But hereby canst thou not gather any excuse for mē, or y ^• we also must alwayes beare with sinnes. For God hath no law prescribed vnto him. Therfore when he of hys goodnes doth whatsoeuer thinges he will, he is not to be accused. But vnto vs is a law geuen, wherin we are commaunded to admonish our neighbor, whom we sée to offend: and that not once, or alone, but twise, and the third tyme, & to take witnesses with vs: so that if at the length he will not heare vs, let him be brought before the congregation, which if he also neglect, let him be counted for a Publi­cane and an Ethenike. These thinges are prescribed vnto vs, and therfore ought to be done of vs, so that the sinnes be manifest, and that it may be done without a schisme. Otherwyse, if by plucking vp the tares, shoulde also be rooted vp the wheat, it must be differred vntill the end, as Augustines iudgement is. But in the meane time, some wicked men vse to say, I woulde to God, we had neuer had ei­ther the woord of God, or Baptisme, or the Eucharist. For, forasmuche as these thinges profite vs not, they are to our greater and more bitter iudgemente. But these m [...]nne ought to consider, that this euell commeth not of God, but of them­selues. Those thinges whiche are geuen by God, are good: let them ascribe vnto themselues, whatsoeuer euell commeth of them: and let them knowe that those thinges are alwayes profitable vnto some: although very oftentimes to the grea­ter parte they serue vnto condemnation. Wherefore a good pastor ought not to Pastors al­though the [...] se that they profite not much, yet ought they not to for­sake theyr ministery. An example of the Pro­phets. forsake his ministery to cease of, either from preachyng, or from ministryng the sacraments, vnder this pretence, because he séeth his labour to profite but a litle, yea rather that men become a great deale worse. Forasmuch as the truth of thys place abideth vnshaken: namely, that these thinges haue great profite. Neither is there any cause why he should feare that he is not sent of God, so that his calling be as touchyng other circumstances iust and lawfull. For the Prophets without doubt were sent by the Lord, when the captiuity of Babilon was at hand. And when of theyr sermons they had none, or at the le [...]t, very litle fruit, & their words as touchyng the greater parte, were both to iudgement & condemnation: yet ceased they not from the charge committed vnto them. The Lord hath assigned one When it is lauful to depart from the mini­stery. cause onely, for which it is lawfull for the ministers of the worde, to holde theyr peace: namely, when men wil no more geue eare, and openly deride and mocke at those thynges which are spoken. Then vndoubtedly, must they shake of the dust of theyr féete and go theyr wayes. But so long as they wyl abyde to heare, al though they striue agaynst it, yet are they to be borne wyth all. Neyther doth the worde of God by and by bryng forth hys fruites: as the féede cast into y ^• grounde doth not streight way spring vp. And there are many tymes some, which whē they The sede of the word of God doth not streight way bryng forth his fruite. haue heard the word of the Lord, do not at that tyme bryng forth fruit. But after ward beyng both chastised by God, and more [...]ehemently stirred vp, with fruite they repete with themselues those things which otherwise they hard without profite. Which selfe thyng happeneth in the sacrament of Baptisme. For a man shall fynde an infinite number, which haue had it by them a long tyme wyth out any fruite. [Page] But afterward beyng conuerted vnto God, they do not onely much esteeme it, Baptisme sometymes is had a long tyme without fruite. Whether the papistes haue the promise of the holy ghost. but also therby they profite much. Here also the Papistes obiect an other doubt vnto vs. The promises of God (say they) are not made voyde (as Paule sayeth) thorough our sinnes and vnbeliefe. Therfore seing we haue the promise of God, that by the holy ghost he wil alwayes be present with vs to gouerne his church: he fully performeth the same. Wherfore ye do ill in departing frō our rules and our communion. But these men are excedingly deceiued: when as the promise of the holy ghost was made vnto the disciples of the Lord and not vnto them.

First, let them proue that they are the disciples of Christ, and then will we be­leue thē. They which are the disciples of Christ, adde nothing vnto his wordes, neither appoint any thing contrary to the holy scriptures: which thing these mē vndoubtedly do. They cry out that the holy ghost is geuen vnto the church. We The church hath the holy gost, but not the con­gregation of the aduersaries of the Gospell. graunt that. But what maner of church is that church? A counsell of bishops? or a sinode of mitred prelates? The holy ghost hath alwayes bene in the church, and hath inspired some good men to cry out against these men, when as they or deined their decrees contrary to the worde of God. In summe, the Apostles meaning is, that the performing of the promises of God, dependeth not of our me­rites, but of the goodnes of God. And, as it is manifest by the wordes of Dauid when he sayth, Agaynst thee onely haue I sinned, We, when we praye vnto God, We bryng nothing of our owne vnto God but sinnes. doe bryng nothyng vnto hym but sinnes. Therefore we desire hym to heare vs, that he might be iustefied in his sayings. Hypocrites wyll be heard for theyr merites & good workes sake: for they acknowledge not their sinnes. But they which vnderstād them, do therby take great consolation, because their trust is, that they shalbe heard euē through the goodnes of God. For forasmuch as they see that in themselues all thinges are full of vncleanes, they woulde neuer pre­sume to lifte vp eyther theyr eyes or prayers vnto God. Farther let vs marke, We must speake well of the giftes of God and inueigh a­gainst the abuses. that the Apostle reuerenceth the gifts of God, and onely inueigheth against thē which abuse them. For he saw that it followeth not, that if men beinge by God aduaunced vnto great honors, and they in the meane time are ingrate towards him, that therefore those honors should not be had in estimation. The husbande men of the Lords vyneyard were vndoubtedly noughty men. But theyr nough­tines caused not, that the ornamentes of the vineyarde, whyche Christ and Esay make mencion of, were not wonderfull excellent and profytable.

Now if our vnrighteousnes commendeth the righteousnes of God, what shall we saye: Is God vnrighteous whiche bringeth in wrath? (I speake as a man) God forbid. Els howe shall God iudge the world? For if the verity of God hath more abounded throughe my lie vnto his glorye, why am I yet condemned as a sinner? And (as we are blamed, and as some affirme that we saye) why do we not euell, that good may come thereof? whose damnation is iust.

Novv if our vnrighteousnes commendeth the rightousnes of God, what shal vve say.] Here Paule turneth somewhat from his purpose, but it is not a di­gression strange from the cause, which is entreated of. He before very much ex­tolled the mercy of God: and declared, that the promises of God were not made of none effect through the vnbeliefe of menne: yea rather that by our sinnes the goodnes of God is more illustrated. Hereby he saw, there mighte be obiected vnto him (as the wisdome of the flesh, is alwaies redy to speake ill of the words of God, and to wrest them to a corrupt sence) both that God is vniust, which pu­nisheth our sinnes, when as by them he is made more illustrious: and also, that we, without hauing any regarde, oughte to committe synne, seing God, by our wicked actes, is more iustefyed, and so, hath alway the victory, and his cause is thereby made the better. Commendeth, sayth he: which in the Greeke is [...], which signifyeth also, to confyrme, and to establish. Which thinge very well a­gree [Page 53] with commendatiō. Which forme of speaking the Apostle afterward vseth, Paral [...]gis­mus acci­dentis. when he fayth, that God hath commended vnto vs, his loue, for that when we were yet sinners, he gaue his owne sonne for vs. But in this kinde of obiection is committed a false argument taken of the accident. For that it is not the office of sinnes pro­perly and of themselues, to illustrate the glory of God. Which selfe thinge may also be sayd of that which is writtē in this selfe same epistle, That of the fall of the Iewes, followed the saluation of the Gentiles: For we must not thinke, that theyr fall was the true and proper cause of the saluation of the Gentiles. For it came of the determination of God. For God had appoynted, that the preachinge of the Gospell, beinge reiected of the Iewes, shoulde be transferred vnto the Ethnickes. And they whiche let loose the bridle vnto sinne vnder this pretence, for that they would thereby make God to haue the victory, & iustefy him, are muche like vn­to them, which hauing bene payned with a most greuous sicknes, and then be­ing restored to health by the Phisition, haue made his arte more famous, will a­gayne endeuour them selues, to fall againe into the selfe same kinde of disease, that thereby the Phisition maye be the more renowmed: or if poore men & beg­gers should determine, that therfore they would eyther wante or begge, thereby more and more to shew foorth the liberality of riche men. That which of it selfe conduceth to the setting forth of the glory of God, oughte not to be blame woor­thy, or filthy. Vertues whiche are ioyned with true prayse, do of themselues ad­uaunce the glory of God. We ought not to meruayle, that our doctrine is sometimes The doc­trine of the Apostles was sub­iect vnto sclaunders. oppressed with sclaunders, when as we see, that this selfe same thing happened vnto the Apostles. They preached true things, & yet the vngodly through theyr sophisticall subtelties, inferred of theyr woordes most pernicious conclu­sions. Paule preached those thinges which we now read, and had oftentimes in­cultated, that grace is ther aboundant, where sinne hath abounded: and taught, that the law therfore entred in, that sinne shoulde be increased. Of these thinges the vngodly sayd it followeth, that men should sinne freely, because to the attay­nemente of grace and the promises of God, we haue neede of synnes. All menne All men are greeued when they heare that they are e­uill spoken of, and espe­cially mini­sters. doubtles are sory when they heare theyr name or fame to be euell spoken of. For they vnderstande, that the prayse of a good name, and of a good fame, is an ex­cellente good gifte of God. But aboue other, the pastors and ministers of the word of God, are most greeuously troubled with this kind of discommodity. Be­cause they rightwell perceaue that theyr infamye, and especially as touchinge doctrine, redoundeth not onely against the truth of God, but also bringeth no small hurt vnto the people committed vnto theyr charge. Therfore the Apostles did euermore put away suche slaunders from themselues. And that the fathers also did the like, theyr writinges do testefye. But Paule in thys place doth not playnely absolue that which he obiected vnto himselfe, but afterward in the 6. chapter the matter shalbe more at large discussed. Onely at this presente he de­pelleth from his doctrine false slaunders. And those things the vngodly are ther­fore wont to obiect, because when they are accused, they are alwayes ready to lay vpon God the cause and blame of theyr sinnes, not in deede manifestly, but by circumstances. Some whē they are accused, say, that they are driuen by the starres to commit those things, which they do. But who made the stars? God. Why, then God is accused? So came it to passe in our fyrste parente, when God reproued hym. The woman (sayde he) whiche thou gauest me, she hath deceaued me. The wic­ked de lay vnto God the cause of theyr sins. And by these woordes he wrested the cause of his sinne vnto God. After the selfe same manner do these men deale, whome Paule now speaketh of. We sinne, say they, but the doctrine of the Apostle hath declared vnto vs, that our sinnes are no let vnto the glory of God, but rather pertayne vnto the settinge foorth of his truth, fayth, and constancy of promises. And what other thinge els is this, then to accuse the word of God? As touching the first obiection Paule sayth.

Is God vnrighteous, vvhich bringeth in anger?] As though he shoulde haue sayd: that which ye fayne vnto your selues, that synnes are vniustlye punished, [Page] if by their occasion the goodnes of God be set foorth, is absurde. For then God should iudge vniustlye. But no good vpryght reason can once imagine, that he which is iudge of all men, should be vniust. Therfore he addeth.

I speake as a man.] That is, these thinges I spake, not that I thinke so in very déede: but I speake those thinges, which men both oftentymes thinke, and do also not very seldome obiect vnto vs. But as touching the wordes, it shalbe good to note, that whereas it is sayde: If our vnrighteousnes commende the righte­ousnes of God, by the righteousnes of God is vnderstanded his goodnes and mer­cy. For that word which is in the Hebrue Tsedek, our men haue turned iustice or righteousnes: when as in very deede it signifieth mercy. He also vseth thys word the truth of God, which signifieth nothing els then his fayth or fidelity. For before he sayde, Shall our vnbeliefe make the fayth of God, without effect? Fayth, in that place, and truth, in this place is nothing els then a constancy in promises and couenantes. And when we reade, I speake as a man, we are taught, what maner of thinges those are which we thinke vpon, so long as we are not rege­nerate but are strangers from God. Origen in this place followeth an other rea­ding. For he hath, [...]. And this particle he ioyneth with those things which went before, so that thereof this sentence he gathereth. Is God vniust, which bringeth in anger agaynst man? God forbid. But the common reading, is both playne, and also serueth well to the purpose. The maner which the A­postle vseth in aunswering, when he sayth, God forbid, teacheth vs, how redy God forbid, what it sig­nifieth with the Apostle. we ought to be to repell from our thoughtes and cogitations, whatsoeuer ab­surd thing, reasō inferreth out of the scriptures against God. We ought straight way to answere. These thinges are after the maner of men, and therefore are they not to be harkened vnto. It oftentymes happeneth that our sense thinketh, that God is cruell, and forgetfull of his, an accepter of persons, and such lyke. But then must we call to memory, that the doinges of God, are not to be mea­sured The do­ings of God, are not to be measured by the law of man. according to the law of man, for he is aboue all lawes, neyther ought to be iudged of any other. This thinges haue the flatterers attributed vnto the bishop of Rome, bearing him in hand, that he hath the fulnes of power, where­by he can dispence both with the lawes of man, and also with the lawes of God: so that he himselfe can be iudged of no man. Which fulnes of power, one Baldus a lawyer not the worst of his time, writeth to be the fulnes of time, as which in­uerteth and turneth vpside downe all rightes and lawes. These thinges are a­gréeable vnto God only. Wherefore it is blasphemy to attribute them vnto a­ny man. Only touching thinges of God, it is wickednes to search out the cau­ses and reasons: but whatsoeuer Philosophers or any other kinde of men do set forth vnto vs, it must be exactly examined by the word of God.

And (as we are blamed, and as some affirme that we say) why do we not e­uill thinges that good may ensue? whose damnation is iust.] Now withstandeth he the other obiection, wherein the aduersaryes sayde, that we shoulde sinne, that thereof myght follow some excellent good thing, namely, the iustifi­cation of God, and commendation of his mercy. Whereunto with one words he answereth this, when he sayth, that the damnation of these men is iust. For by that meanes he confesseth, that that so greuous an error is farre strange frō his doctrine, when as he cōdemneth it together with thē, although some expound it, in the passiue signification, as though the condemnation, whereby they are con­demned, were for that they had so euill an opinion of the Gospell. Their obiec­tions are answered, when they are brought to these absurdities which coulde Sinnes are not the true cause that God should be made iuste. Against good en­tentes. not be concluded of these thinges which are spoken of Paule, but of the false sur­mising of these men: whereby they thought that sinnes were the true cause that God should be made iust. For the Apostle also sayth together with them, that euil things are not to be committed, that good should come thereof. Wher­fore let no man pretende for their sinne a good entent as they vse to say. There is of God a law set forth vnto vs, it is our part to be obedient vnto it. Let vs [Page 54] not followe the reasoninges of man, thinking with our selues, if I shall obey the commaundements of the Lord, this discomodity or that inconuenience will fol­low. This were for a man to preferre himselfe before God: as though he had not foreseene what might happen vnto vs by the obseruing of his commaundemēts. Augustine oftentimes citeth this place, when he writeth to Consentius against lieng. And assuredly we also at this time haue much contentiō with them, which defend many euill things vnder the pretence of a good ende. They haue presumed to maime and to dismember the Sacramente of the Eucharist, because they suspected, that the wine might he spilled out of the cuppe, if it should be distribu­ted vnto the laye men. They will haue the people also to praye in an vnknowne tongue, whiche is forbidden by the woorde of God: and they say, that a laudable entente and good ende is sufficient. And so presume they vpon infinite moe other thinges, not weighing, what the holy Ghost sayth in this place. Yea, and they lay the selfe same thinges vnto our charge, which are now obiected vnto Paule. For when we preache iustification freely, and without woorkes, they saye, that we o­pen an entrance, and way vnto losenes of life, & that we condemne good works: Iustificati­on freely geuen is not against good workes. The fam [...] ­lies of the Papists do debilitate good workes. when as yet we teach not these thinges. God indeede forgeueth sinnes freelye: but he doth not therefore geue vnto his, licence to sinne: but together with iusti­fication, is geuen the holy Ghost, and an innouation of life: whereof springeth no small endeuour to good workes. But if agaynst them we would vrge such kinde of cauillations, peraduenture they shoulde be founde to geue farre more greater occasion to loosenes of life: forasmuch as they teach, that if a manne confesse his sinnes, and receaue the Ecclesiasticall absolution, althoughe he haue in his mind no good and holy motions, yet is iustificatiō offred, so that he lay not a let against it, as they vse to speake. But this is a very easy matter to do, and openeth a way vnto sinnes, which thing also no lesse doth theyr purgatory. But we promise not iustification, but where as is a true and perfect fayth, after which continually do followe good woorkes. Wherefore seinge vnto vs are obiected the selfe same thinges, that were obiected vnto Paule, it is manifest, that both he and we haue one and the selfe same cause. But we muste not geue place to these humane rea­soninges. The Ori­ginall cause of the fall of the Nona­tians. So fell the Nouatians: who pretending that they would not minister a­ny occasions to sinne, at length denied repentance. And other many suche exam­ples might be brought foorth.

What thē, are we more excellent then they? No, in no wise: for we haue alredy proued, that all, both Iewes and Gentiles, are vnder sinne. As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one. There is none that vnderstādeth: there is none y ^t seeketh after God. They haue al gone out of y ^e way: they haue ben made altogether vnprofi­table: there is none that doth good, no not one. Their throte is an open sepulchre: they haue vsed theyr tongues to deceite: the poyson of aspes is vnder theyr lippes. Whose mouth is full of cursinge and bitternes. Theyr feete are swifte to shead bloude. Destruction and calamitie, arc in theyr wayes, And the way of peace haue they not knowne. The feare of God, is not before theyr eyes.

What then, do we excell them? No by no meanes.] Now returneth he to his purpose, from whence he had before somewhat diuerted. And although he seeme to ascribe many great thinges vnto the Iewes at this present, yet meaneth he not, that therby should be concluded, that they excel the Ethnikes. But this ra­ther is his entente to make them equall with the Ethnikes. Neyther doth that which he now writeth repugne with that which he before spake: although at the first sight there seemeth to be in woords some contradiction. For before he wrote that the state of the Iewes was very excellent, and that circumcision brought vn­to them great vtility. But here he seemeth to deny those thinges, whiche he then spake. But the distinction which we before made mencion of, doth easly concili­ate [Page] these thinges. For if we looke vpon God, vndoubtedly he hath bestowed vpon the Iewes a greate many thinges, which he hath not geuen vnto other na­tiōs. But if we haue a respect vnto the Iewes, they so abused those good thinges that they had nothing wherein they excelled other nations. Whereby commeth to passe, that either sentence is true. The Greeke Scholies do admonishe vs, that this sentence may be red two manner of wayes. For the Ethnikes, hearinge those things, which the Hebrewes had peculiarly obteined of God to be so much extolled, demaund, What then? Are we ouercome, or haue they the victory ouer vs? So that this woord [...], which we haue englished, do vve excell? may be taken passiuely. The other reading is, to take this verbe in the actiue significa­tion, as though these thinges shoulde be spoken vnder the person of the Iewes. For when as they had now hearde, theyr giftes to be so extolled, they inferre. What then, do we not in dignity excell the Gentils? Vnto whome Paule by negation aunswereth: No by no meanes. And this aunswere hath a great Emphasis, or force: as though he should haue sayd. The thinges which I haue before made menci­on of, pertayne vnto the person geuen you of God: and they are none of yours. And in that he putteth in himselfe amongst them, in saying: do vve excel? he ma­keth his reprehension more gentle, and more tollerable. Neyther yet in the meane time maketh he a lye, forasmuche as he himselfe also was a parte of the people of Israell as touchinge the fleshe. There is in the Church so greate a con­nexion A connexiō betwene the good and the euill. of those which are in it conuersant together, that euen as the euill, which are amongest the good are in certaine thinges pertakers of theyr prayses and benefites (for, for the good sake doth God the longer beare with them, and they haue the vse of good thinges aswell spirituall as temporall.) So contrarilye for the euell sake no small discommodityes redounde vnto the sayntes: forasmuche as they haue a feeling of theyr punishments, and are oftentimes wrapped in the same miseryes that they are: neyther haue they anye thinge whereof iustlye to The sinnes of the wic­ked pertain after a sorte vnto the good. complaine, when as vnto them pertaine after a sort the offences of others. For they haue not eyther admonished, or reproued, or blamed them so much as they ought to haue done. Neyther haue they alwayes shewed them selues an exam­ple of good life as it became thē: neyther praid they for thē so much as they oght to haue done. Wherefore the holy prophets acknowledging in themselues such a communion of sinnes, sayd with others: We haue sinned, we haue done iniquity. Vnto thee belongeth righteousnes, vnto vs confusion of face. Now he rēdreth a reason, why the Iewes haue nothing wherein they excell the Gentils.

Because, sayth he, vve haue alredy proued, and shevved causes, that asvvell the Ievves as the Gentils are vnder sinne.] And now besides his accusations, he al­ledgeth testimonies also of the scriptures, in which were most manifestlye com­prehended the Iewes. For it is not likely, that the prophets and the scriptures, would reproue the sinnes of other nacions, and speake nothing of theyr sinnes vnto whome they chiefely pertayned. Whensoeuer the Gentils are reproued in the scriptures, thou shalte see them expressed by name. The burthen of Damascu [...] (sayth Esay) The burthen of Egipt, the burthen of Tyrus, and such like.

There is none iust, no not one.] This testemony is written in the. 14. psal. and in the Hebrew is redde, En esah tob, non faciēs bonum, not doinge good. The Greeke interpreters haue turned it [...]. which is to do a good dede, or a thinge profitable to our neyghbour. Therin he playnely sheweth, that they were without loue and charitie. It followeth:

There is none that vnderstādeth, ther is none that seketh after God] These words are red in the. 53. psal. And it is a generall oracle, as well against y ^• Gentils as a­gainst the Iewes. For before these wordes it is there writtē: The Lord looked down from heauen vpon the sonnes of Adam, to see whether there were any that hadde vnder­standing, and sought after God. Which thinges are spoken per Anthro popathian: as though God were affected with the selfe same proprieties as men are wonte to be. And this serueth to driue an efficacy into those thinges, which are spoken: [Page 55] otherwise God seeth all thinges, neyther needeth he ether to beholde, or to s [...]rche How God is sayd to looke vpon men. out any thinge. By this kinde of figure in the booke of Genesis, he is sayd to haue descended vnto the Tower, when it was in buildinge: and in the same booke he sayth, that he woulde go to Sodome, to se whither the thinge were so, as the cry & fame had declared vnto him. Althoughe Augustine entreatinge vpon this place writeth that God beholdeth and looketh vpon menne, when he stirreth vp those whom he hath inspired with his holy spirite to do any thinge: according to those phrases of speache whereby he is sayd to tempte or txye, to knowe whither he be beloued or no. For he knoweth also with out any trials: but yet by them he brin­geth to passe that we are admonished, and do know that which before we knew not. So Paule sayth, that the spirite searcheth out the profound thinges of God. For, forasmuch as the holy Ghost is God, he nedeth no searching out for the knowledge How the spirite sear­cheth out the pro­founde thinges of God. of any thing. But y ^• Apostle so speaketh, because by his impulsion we are stirred vp to serch out those things which pertaine to God. But because there is added.

From heauen, least that should be a let, Augustine affirmeth, that no man can vnderstand this corruption of men, vnlesse his mind be conuersaunte in heauen, and inspired with the spirite of God. But the first interpretacion is both easier & redier. And in that men are said, not to vnderstād God, it is not ment of the sim­ple Whether men are truly said not to vn­derstande God. If God be euerye where, why is it sayd that he must be sought for. Faith is not natural in men. and vulgare knowledge, but of the mighty knowledge and whiche is of effi­cacy: so that to vnderstād is as much to say as to feele and to sauour God.

Nor seking after God.] Although all thinges are full of God, yet is he to be sought for of godly men, by reason of the darkenes which cōpasseth our mynds through originall sinne. For both the fleshe, and the senses, and earthly affecti­ons, do let vs from knowing of hym, yea though he be present. And by this se­cond testimony all men are proued to be without fayth. It followeth.

All haue gone out of the way, and are made altogether vnprofitable. There is none that doth good, no not one.] Those thinges are spoken as it were out of the mouth of God, after that he had beheld from heauen the maners of men. And this vndoubtedly is a consequent, that they which are destitute of fayth and charity, do go backward, and do depart from God. For so soundeth this word in the Hebrue, which is here sayd, They haue gone out of the way. And that which is here written, They are become vnprofitable, is in the Hebrue, they are become rotten, and haue brought forth a stinking sauor: which com­meth to passe when sinnes are publikely, and dayly committed.

There is none, no not one.] Some by this word one, vnderstand Christ: because he alone was free from sinne. Which sentence although it be true, yet is not their interpretation agreable with these woordes, when as in the Hebrue it is En gam eched, that is, no not one. And by that meanes, this sentence is of great force to exaggerate and amplify the customable wickednes of men. Par­aduenture this semeth strange, why the holy prophetes, as Dauid and such other like are not excepted. Some aunswere, that herein is vsed the figure hiperbole, because the greater parte of men was so infected. But in my iudgement this se­meth to be more agreeable with the truth, that the holy ghost speaketh of the nature of men, as it is of it selfe. For they which were comprehended in Christ, were exemted out of this number, which thing yet was geuen thē, not by their owne strengthes, or in respect that they were men, but because they were rege­nerate and renued by Christ.

Their throte is an open sepulchre, They haue vsed their tongues to deceite.] These wordes are read in the v. Psal. Hetherto he hath shewed that they were not profitable to their neighbours, neither sought they after God. But now he declareth, that both in tonge, and also in dedes, they were hurtfull toward their neighbours. He compareth their mouth to a sepulchre, because it spake filthy things, and stanke as a sepulchre doth. A sepulchre also sendeth not agayne the The Me­taphore of a sepulchre. deade, whome it hath once swallowed vp. So these men, with their tongues and vncleane mouth vexe men without measure & ende. Further a sepulchre is sayd [Page] neuer to be satisfied. So these mē are not content w ^t the destructiō of one or two: but are redy, if it lay in them, to deuour all men. In sōme, he affirmeth them to be such maner of men, that whosoeuer is once wrapped with the nettes of their words, is as vtterly cast away, as they are which are already layd in the sepul­chre or graue. Neither wanteth this worde, Open, an emphasis. Because sepul­chres being shut receaue not those things which are, brought in: but being open they refuse nothing. To vse their tongues to disceate, is amōg the Hebrues Ieholl kō, which word is deriued of this verbe Halak, which is to part, & to destribute. And that vice is here described, whereby a man speaketh, not as the thing is in dede, but frameth his speach to get fauor, and for his commodities sake. For w ^t one man they talke farre otherwise, then they did with an other man. A man may call them double tonged folkes. Iames reproueth them, for that out of one and the selfe same mouth, they bring forth both sweete and bitter thinges.

The poyson of aspes is vnder their lippes.] This is written in the 140 Psal. These mens wordes he compareth with the most present poyson of serpents.

Whose mouth is ful of cursing & bitternes.] This word bitternes, is in Greke [...]. This may be applied vnto those which by reason of anger are so impotēt, y ^• they are not able to speke a word, but they must curse & banne & fare like mad men. Their wordes are as sharpe as speares, and they seme to speake swordes.

Their feete are svvift to shed bloud.] This is writtē in Esay y ^e 59. chap. After cruel wordes folow murthers. And these wordes seme chiefly to be spoken, be­cause of the death of the Prophets, who were miserably slayne of the vngodly.

Contrition and calamity are in their vvayes.] Some by contrition and ca­lamity, vnderstand sinnes. But it semeth rather to be a phrase, wherby by their wayes may be vnderstanded whatsoeuer they go about, take in hand, and at­tempt. And that is nothing els, but the affliction and oppression of other men.

The vvay of peace haue they not knovven.] For they take nothing in hand to do, which may serue for the commodity and health of their neighbours.

The feare of the Lord is not before their eyes.] This is read in the 36. Psal. In these woordes is touched the summe and head of all euils: which is, not to feare God. Paule mought haue brought other most euident testemonyes also The hed of all euels. agaynst the Iewes. As are those which are written in the fyrst chapiter of Esay, where the prophet calleth them a wicked seede, noughty children, their Prin­ces, Princes of Sodom, and their people, the people of Gomorrha. And there are infinite sentences whiche serue for this purpose. But the Apostle thoughte these sentences onely sufficiente. Whereby we learne, what is the state and condition of a man, which liueth without Christ. First he wanteth God, yea ra­ther the wrath of God abideth vpon him: farther he is a bondslaue of Sathan, and an instrument framed to all maner of wicked workes.

But we know that whatsoeuer things the law speaketh, it spea­keth vnto those which are vnder y ^• lawe. That euery mouth might be stopped, and the whole world might be made guilty before God.

But vve knovv. &c.] The Apostle writeth this, to the ende the Hebrues should not cauell, that these scriptures pertayned not vnto them. Neither could the Iewes deny, but that they were vnder the law, when as vnto them chiefly was it geuen, and they in the couenaunt promised, that they would do all thinges which God had commaunded. Farther in their circumsicion they de­clared a profession to obserue the law. Yea and we also are after a sorte vnder the law. For the morall precepts, forasmuch as they are knowen by the light We are af­ter a sorte vnder the law. The law vnde [...] which we liue how farre it ex­tendeth it selfe. of nature, do continually hold their strength. In ceremonyes also something is alwayes to be considered as chiefe, which a man may call the kernell, sappe, & sinnow, & that cōtinually abideth: only [...], which they cal circumstāces are oftētimes altered. Also the iudiciall lawes cōtain things honest & lust, which are also obserued of vs: although y ^• maner of punishemēts, & certaine other sin­gular things ar with liberty chaunged. And how far y ^• law vnder which we are subiect extendeth it self, y ^e epistle vnto y ^e Phil. declareth, wherin it is writen, That [Page 56] vvhich remaineth brethern, vvhatsoeuer thinges are true, vvhatsoeuer profitable, vvhatsoeuer of good name, if there be any vertue, and if there be any praise, vpon these things thinke ye: the things We must not of pre­ceptes make coun­sels. Workes of supereroga­tion are ex­cluded. vvhich ye haue learned & receiued, & hard, and sene in me, these things (I say) do ye. Hereby is it manifest how they are deceiued, which of preceptes make counsels, & by that meanes do sinne more greuouosly, in that they put works (as they call them) of supererogation. Therfore those things which are here spoken, do touch vs also, if we fall away from Christ. These notes of vniuersality, are diligently to be weighed, which Paule vseth when he saith:

Euery mouth, and the whole world.] For they are of no small force to attayne to the right definiciō of iustificatiō. He would not without a cause y ^• our mouth should The scrip­tures nece­sary for all men. be stopped, forasmuch as we are all to much prone to excuses, & there is none which thinketh not to much of himselfe. Sithē the Apostle hath proued his matter by testimonies of the scriptures, they are much to be reproued, which wil haue the ho­ly scriptures banished out of the hands of the faithfull. Hereby easely appeareth the vtility of thē, when as they both pertaine vnto all mē, and also set before our eyes our sinnes. Chrisostome in his homely of Lazarus & the riche man, exhorteth all mē in general to reade thē, and those men by name, which are geuē to the lawe, which occupie merchaundise, & kepe families. And he affirmeth, that it is impossible, that they should attayne to saluatiō, vnles they occupy thēselues day & night in readyng of the holy scriptures. Yea & he addeth also, that they haue greater nede of readyng the holy scriptures, then haue holier men, for that they are continually in greater daunger. This worde [...], that is, guilty, the same Chrisostome expoundeth of him, which of himselfe hath nothing to bring for his owne defēce, but hath neede of an other. They are guilty before God, which haue nothyng whereof to glory. And the cōfession of our sinnes doth chiefly make vs such. The Apostle hath hitherto to this place laboured much in accusing of sinnes, to the ende he might impell & driue mē vnto Christ. Whom we also to our power ought to imitate, when we haue to Pastors oght aboue all thinges to reproue sinnes. A similitude do with our neighbours. There are some which wil not heare of their pastors and preachers, but only treatises of things deuine, and debatemēts of subtle questions. But they are farre deceiued. For first it is expedient, that they haue a thorow con­sideration vnto theyr owne sinnes. As a Phisition vseth in a rottē sore, first to cut of the corrupt flesh, before he wil geue any plasters to heale it withall. And so com­meth it to passe, that the law openeth the way vnto the Gospel. Neither is this to What is the proper­ty of the law. be maruelled at, that in this place, by the law, are vnderstanded the Prophets and Psalmes. For what soeuer is found in the whole scrpture, serueth to the instituti­on of lyfe, which is peculiar and proper vnto the law.

Because by the workes of the law shall no flesh be iustefied in his sight. For by the law cōmeth the knowledge of sinne. But now is y ^t righteousnes of God made manifest w ^tout the law, hauing witnes of the law & of the Prophets. Namely, the righteousnes of God by the faith of Iesus Christ vnto all, and vppon all that beleue. For there is no difference: for all haue sinned, & are depriued of the glory of God: And are iustefied frely by his grace, thorough the redemp­tion that is in Christ Iesu, whome God hath set forth to be a reconciliation thorough fayth in his bloud, to declare his righteousnesse by the remission of the sinnes that are passed thorough the patience of God, to shew at this present tyme his righteousnes, y ^t he mighte be iust, and a iustefier of hym which is of the fayth of Iesus Christ.

Because by the vvorkes of the lavv s [...]all no flesh be iustefied in his sight.] Hi­therto Paule hath by good argumentes proued, that iustification is not to belooked for by those thinges, which whē we haue obtayned, yet notwithstanding we lyue wickedly. That philosophy and the law were such, he hath manifestly declared: forasmuch as by them were accused both the Gentles and the Iewes, that they were excedingly contaminated with wicked actes. Wherby is concluded, that y ^e mouthe as well of the Iewes as of y ^e Gentiles is stopped, so that the whole world is made [Page] culpable before God. And in that he lastly chiefly inueighed by sundry testimonies of the holy Scripture, it was because he should haue a sharpe conflict agaynst the A sharpet conflict a­gainst the Iewes thē against the Ethnikes. Hebrues. For the Ethnikes were easely ouercome. For they openly liued filthily, neither could they out of philosophy bring any thing but the inuentions and opinions of men. But the Hebrewes pretended the law and the ceremonies, which they had receiued at the handes of God: and therfore it semed, that they might lawfully put confidence in them. And peraduenture they mought haue sayd, y ^• those thinges which were brought against them out of the holy scriptures, pertayned vnto theyr elders, and vnto them which filthily liued in the tyme of the Prophetes, and not to theyr whole kinred. Therfore the Apostle bringeth in a generall sentence, wherby vtterly to represse them, and affirmeth, that no man can be iustified before God by the workes of the law. Where he taketh away the power of iustifieng, not onely An vniuer­sall proposi­tion, that by the workes of the law no man can be iustified. from men or persons, but also from the workes of the law, so that it followeth of necessity, that we must not put any confidence in them. For as they were cōmaunded by the law, no man was able to performe them. For forasmuch as two things were required by the law: First, that workes should procede from fayth, grace, and charity: Secondly, that throughout and exactly they should agrée with the law, and sithen the law ministred not strengthes to do these thinges, there remained onely outward obseruations and ceremonies, of which the Apostle sayth, that they had not the power to iustifie. Afterward by a firme reason he concludeth, that we must not thinke that iustification is receiued by the law, bicause by it commeth y ^e knowledge Forasmuch as the law cōdemneth & accuseth, it absolueth not. Righteous­nes happe­neth with­out the law of sinne. Seyng therfore the law condemneth & accuseth, it absolueth not, nor iustifieth. For these two offices are contrary and repugnaunt the one to the other, And these thyngs beyng thus ordered, he gathereth his chiefe proposition, of which he will in this epistle dispute: namely, that righteousnes commeth wythout the law. Wherby commeth to passe, that it depēdeth not of it. Afterward he affirmeth that the righteousnes of God which hath his testimony out of the law and the pro­phetes, commeth by the fayth of Iesus Christ. And this is all one wyth that which he proposed at the beginnyng: that the Gospell is the power of God to saluation, to Righteous­nes by the faith of Ie­sus Christ. euery one that beleueth: and that in it is reueled the righteousnes of God frō faith to faith, and that the iust man (as Abacuck saith) liueth by faith. Thus much as touching the disposition, now let vs diligently examine euery thing by it selfe. In that he saith, That by the workes of the law no flesh shalbe iustified in the fight of God: It is necessary that we know of what workes of the lawe, the Apostle here intreateth. And here we affirme, that he speaketh vniuersally of all workes: so y ^e those thinges which are here spoken, ought not perticularly to be drawen vnto ceremonies, whē as they include y ^e whole law. We graūt in dede y ^• the controuersy sprōg by reasō of ceremonies. For y ^e false Apostles went about to obtrude thē, as necessary vnto thē They which say that ceremonies are nedelul, af­firm Christ not to be Christ. which beleued in Christ. As though Christ could not w ^tout thē bring saluation to y ^• beleuers. Which was blasphemous, neither was it any lesse irreligious, then to deny Christ to be Christ: which thing they must néedes graunt, that affirme that he cannot saue men without the workes of the law. But as touching morall com­maundementes they contended not. For as well the Apostles as the deceiuers vr­ged them. Neither was there any controuersie about ciuill or (as they call them) iudiciall lawes, for they pertayned vnto the publike wealth. Which forasmuch as it had maiestrates, the church and the Apostles tooke no care of those thinges. But although the contention sprong by reason of ceremonies, yet by the benefite of the Workes ar to be taken vniuersally when they are affirmed not to iusti­fy. The questi­on was moued because of ceremo­nies. holy ghost it came to passe, that Paule reuoked the question from the species or partes vnto the vniuersall genus or generall worde. For if the generall worde be by negation ouerthrowen, it followeth that the species also & euery parte be clene destroyed. For if generally the law iustify not, neither vndoubtedly shall ceremo­nies iustify: forasmuch as they are a certaine species and a part of the lawe. And that the discention began by reason of ceremonies, the Actes of the Apostles do te­stiffe in the xv. chapter. And not much afterwarde in this selfe same epistle, the A­postle when he would proue that Abraham was not iustified by the lawe, bryn­geth a reason taken from Circumcision. And also to the Galathians where he re­hearseth [Page 57] hearseth this selfe same sentence, and in a maner with the selfe same wordes that they are here, when he saith: We are by nature Iewes, and not sinners of the Gentiles: Because we know that man is not iustified by the workes of the lawe, but by the fayth of Iesus Christ. Also, we haue beleued in Christ Iesus: that we mighte be iustified by the fayth of Christ, and not by the workes of the lawe. For no fleshe shall be iustified by the workes of the lawe. And vndoubtedly, Paule reproued not Peter, but onely touchyng ceremonies. And in the same place in y ^• third chapiter he writeth. Haue ye receiued the spirite by the workes of the law, or by preaching of fayth? Are ye so foolish, that ha­uing begonne in the spirite, ye should now make an ende in the fleshe? where by y ^e workes of the law, seing he expoundeth them by the flesh, he manifestly vnderstandeth the ceremonies of Moses. But although therehence sprang the controuersie, yet was it most commodiously done for Paule to reuoke it to the genus or generall worde of workes of the law. Forasmuch, as the tyme should come, that ceremonies being banished, many would in successe of tyme, attribute iustificatiō to moral workes: which is most manifestly confuted by this so pithy a reason of Paule. And this is to be noted, that this is an argument that may be turned. For euen as we may in­ferre that no workes of the law do iustifie: therfore neither do ceremonies iusti­fie: so contrariwise may we conclude: if ceremonies iustifie not, therfore neither a­ny other part of the law: forasmuch, as they were the principall part of the lawe. If ceremo­nies iustefy not neither doth the morall part instefy. For they are the offices of the first and greatest commaundement. I am (sayth the Lord) thy God. Wherfore it is mete, that I be worshipped of thée, bothe in spirite and in outward confession, not only by voyce, but also by rites apointed by me. Neither did those ceremonies any lesse bynde the olde fathers, then do Baptisme and the Eucharist in these dayes binde vs. Wherfore euen as they most greuously sin­ned, when they were not content with the worshipping prescribed them by God, but sought new ceremonies and rites inuented by men (for that was to go aboute to adde vnto the wisedome of God: and that the worshippyng instituted by God was the chiefe wisdome, we rede in Deut. the iiij. chapter) so our men do most greuously sinne, when besides Baptisme and the Eucharist, and those thinges which we haue deliuered vs by Christ, they appoint other thyngs which mē haue inuen­ted, as worshippings of God, and, as necessary vnto saluation. As are the masse, the inuocation of saintes, and such other like. And that by the workes of the lawe are vnderstanded also morall workes, Paule teacheth by that which followeth.

For by the law is the knowledge of sinne.] For although other partes also of the law do after a sort declare sinne, yet is that chiefly the office of the morall part. What groundes or princi­ples the proper workes of the law haue. A distinctiō of the workes of the law. A concilia­tion of pla­ces repug­nant. Which thing is expressedly declared in the vij. chap. where he writeth. For I should not haue knowen what lust had bene, if the law had not sayd, Thou shalte not lust. And this is furthermore to be noted, that the workes, of the law as I before said, when they are taken properly haue ioyned with them fayth and charity, and therfore are they not without iustification. For wheresoeuer is true faith there iustificatiō fol­loweth. But the Apostle by workes of the law vnderstandeth, as they were done of them beyng vnprofitable, and proceding also of hipocrisie. Otherwise the law in dede is spirituall, wherfore the workes therof must nedes be good, if they be consi­dered as they are whole and perfect. And by this meanes may we conciliate those places, which as touching this thing seme in the holy scriptures to be repugnant. Moses said, that he did set before the Iewes, life, when he spake of the lawe. And in the 119. psalme Dauid prayeth oftentimes, that God would quicken him with If the fa­thers at any tyme attri­bute righteousnes vn­to good works, that is to be vn­derstand by reason of faith which they haue as a roote. his commaundements, and with his law. And in this selfe same epistle, the law is called both good and spirituall, and the commaundement holy and good. But on the contrary side Paule calleth it the ministery of death: & in the next chapter he saith, that it worketh anger: and againe, that it sheweth sinne: and therfore condemneth and accuseth. So must we vnderstand the fathers also, when they ascribe so excel­lent thinges vnto workes. For they take them ioyned with faith, grace, and the holy ghost. And so they ascribe vnto them eternall life, and other suche like things which are vnderstanded to be geuen vnto them by reason of faith and the spirite. And to declare the same this is a very apt similitude. We say that man is reasona­ble, vnto whome yet we ascribe reason, not because of the body, but because of the [Page] soule which is included in the body. So when iustification semeth to be ascribed vnto workes, we must vnderstād y ^• that is done by reason of faith, wherunto workes, By faith a­lone we are iustefied, which yet is neuer a­lone. which are in very dede good, do chiefly lene. But we, when we wil speake of iusti­fication, ought to bring forth our sentence prospicuously & expressedly. Wherefore we say, y ^• iustification cōmeth by faith only: which faith yet we confesse is neuer a­lone. For if it be a true faith, it ought alwais to haue good workes ioyned with it. But the holy fathers spake hyperbollically of workes, to the ende to stirre vp The fa­thers spake hyperboili­cally of workes. Fayth as it is a worke iustifieth not. men more and more to vse them. But they are so to be vnderstanded as I haue sayd, vnles we will leaue them without Christ. But some obiect, that fayth al­so it selfe is a worke of the lawe. Therefore we answere, that as it is our worke comming out of our will and vnderstanding, it iustifieth not. Because it is feble and weake. For none beleueth so much as he ought, neyther so strongly clea­ueth vnto God, as he should do. But when fayth is sayd to iustifye, it is taken for his obiect, namely, Christ, and the promises of God. Neyther is fayth that The power of iustif [...]ing is to be r [...]er­red to his ob­iect. A simili­tude. thing which iustifyeth: but the instrument whereby iustification is receaued. Neyther must we thinke, that by the worthynes thereof it is of it selfe suffici­ent to iustifie a man. A most euident similitude may be brought as touching a begger, which with his weake hand, or peraduenture with his hand enfected with leprosy receaueth almes. And that benefite is not weighed according to the weakenes or disease of the hand which receaueth it, but according to the quantity of the monye which is geuen. Wherefore when we are demaunded, whether the workes of the law iustify, we aunswere: if a man vnderstand thē as they are vnperfect and mayned, they haue no strength to iustify. But if a Workes iustify not, because they pro­cede of iusti­fication. man vnderstand the workes of the law, as they are whole and perfect, so are they not strange from iustification, because they haue faith ioyned with them: whereunto they cleaue as vnto the roote. Yet will we not graunt that good workes being taken euen after this maner do iustify: for that they proceede of iustification, & do of necessity require iustification to go before them: and there­fore Why Paule cal­leth those workes the workes of the lawe which are mained and vnperfect. are they not strange from it, because they depend of it. Thou wilt say per­aduenture, why doth Paule by the workes of the law vnderstand those mayned and vnperfecte workes? Because he taketh them as the aduersaries did: which had a respect only vnto them: and were strangers both from Christ and also from fayth in him. And that Paule did not thinke those to be in very deede the workes of the lawe, it manifestly appeareth by that which is before written: He is not a Iew, which is only a Iew outward, neyther is that circumcision which is in the flesh only. Where a man may manifestly see, that he taketh away the nature of the Iewish religion and of circumcision from the obseruation which is only outward. And vndoubtedly the Images of good thinges, if they haue only a shewe, be in themselues vayne, and ought to be counted among thinges A simili­tude. worthy of disprayse. As the art of Sophistry, forasmuch as it hath a shewe of knowledge and wanteth it in very deede, is condemned. Hipocrisy also is to be detested: which although it set forth a shew of holynes, yet is it most farre of from it. Wherefore if a man should, agaynst the proper and true workes of the lawe, vse those testimonies which Paule now alleageth, and which to the like purpose he writeth in an other place, vndoubtedly he should abuse them. As if Another similitude. a man should impute vnto true nobility those reproches, which are iustly im­puted vnto them, which hauing had excellent noble pregenitors, haue degene­rated from them into most filthy vices. Or if a man shoulde reproue eloquence after the selfe same maner, that we are wont iustly to reproue those, which on­ly with fine and eloquent wordes do poynt out foolishe matter, when as they are vtterly ignorant of the sound truth. But as touching this matter let thys suffice at this present. Now is this to be expounded, why he addeth this particle.

Before God.] Vndoubtedly therefore, that by the contrary we myght know, that certayne may sometymes be iustified before men by the workes of the law. Because forasmuch as the sight of man can not perce into the inward [Page 58] partes of the hart, men do geue sentence by the workes. But God as Augustine Before men we may be iustified by workes of the law. writeth in his booke De spiritu & litera, beholdeth the hart: and sometymes be­holdeth them, which outwardly kepe the lawe, and inwardly desire rather to do otherwise: were not eyther that punishementes hang ouer theyr heds, or that they thinke that they should thereby lose their estimation: when as in very dede they want both fayth and charity. Neyther is this to be passed ouer, that by the What is to be vnder­stand by the name of flesh. name of fleshe is vnderstand the whole man. Which phrase of speach is much vsed in the scriptures. The word was made fleshe. All fleshe had corrupted his way. All fleshe shall see the saluation of God. And a greate many other such lyke. And therefore is man so called, that he might be continually admonished of his mi­serable and weake estate: and that he should vnderstand, that vnles the spirite of God should resist it, he should vtterly be caried away with the appetite of the fleshe. To iustify, as we haue before said, is taken three maner of wayes. Some­tymes To iustify taken three maner of wayes. it is to obtayne a righteousnes which sticketh and abideth in our minds. But such righteousnes Paule meaneth not in this place. Otherwise we deny not, but that of true workes of the law, by continuall exercise of them, are in­generated good and holy habites or qualities. To be iustified also is to be pro­nounced or to be counted iust. Which thinges also may be gotten by workes. For so one is sayd to iustifye an other, when he beholdeth his good dedes. God also in the last iudgement shall geue sentence according to workes, and shall pronounce good men iust by those thinges, which they vprightly haue done. Thirdly to iustifye, is as much to say as to forgeue sinnes, to absolue a man, and to impute vnto him the righteousnes of Christ, which thing works by their deserte can not obtayne. And in this sense are those thinges to be taken, which the Apostle here writeth. It followeth:

For by the lawe, is the knowledge of sinne.] This is the reason why we are not iustified by the workes of the lawe. Because the office of the lawe is farre other, then to iustifie. There are some which thinke that these wordes are spo­ken by preuention, as though the Iewes should obiect and say: If the law iusti­fye not, why then was it geuen? Haue we in vayne receaued it? We haue not Although the lawe iustifie not yet was it not geuen in vayne. The propriety to de­clar sinnes is cōmon to all lawes. in vayne receaued it, sayth Paule: the office thereof is to shew sinnes. If a man demaund of what lawe these thinges are spoken, we aunswere that Paule doth priuately entreate of the law of Moses: but the propriety which he bringeth is common to all lawes, to the law of nature, the lawe of Moses, & to ciuill lawes, which we vse in our publike wealthes. As touching the law of Moses, and ours, there is no doubt to be put. As concerning the lawe of nature, the booke of Genesis, doth most manifestly teach that by it was sinne knowen. Which thing Ambrose vpon this place alleadgeth out of the history of Ioseph. And Paule also wyll afterward declare the same, when he sayth. For euen vnto the law, sinne was in the world: but it was not so counted, namely, because, the law of nature was dayly more and more obfuscated. Wherefore it was necessary that by the law of Moses and other lawes, it should be agayne illustrated, And that syn was before Moses time, he thereby declareth, because death raigned all that time ouer all mankind. And in this place in the Greke is red [...], which in latine a man may call Agnitio, that is, an acknowledging: which is, when a thinge be­ing alreadye knowne, is againe called to knowledge. But after what sorte the lawe is sayd to woorke the acknowledginge of sinnes, he hath before taughte, whē as by many testemonies of the scriptures he accused all mankind. Where­fore seinge by those woordes and such like we are accused of the law, the know­ledge of sinne must needes follow. Whiche thing also happeneth an other waye, namely, when we beholde the law of God. For sythen it commaundeth thinges vpright, and prohibiteth thinges vnhonest, it sufficiently declareth vnto vs, how and when we sinne in our doinges. The scripturs also conteineth the threate­ninges forespoken by the Prophetes: and the punishmentes whiche God hath e­uer more inflicted vpon transgressors. All whiche thinges not a little conduce to [Page] the acknowledging of sinne. But this is to be meruailed at, that seing the lawe Why the law is not said to shew honeste and good thinges. doth set before our eyes not onely our sinnes, but also thinges honeste and iuste (For those thinges also doth it commaunde, and therefore they pertayne to one and the selfe same knowledge: euen as it belongeth to one artificer, as to a Geometrician to declare what is a right line and what is a crooked line) it is to be meruailed at (I say) what moued the Apostle, to make mencion onely of sinne Whereunto may be aunswered, that Paule so wrote, partly because the Iewes whiche had refused Christ and his fayth, had no more any parte with the righte­ousnes and vprightnes of the law: partly also, (which is most likely) because that other parte pertayned not vnto the purpose of Paule. For hys purpose was to proue, that the woorkes of the law iustify not. Because forasmuch as it both ac­cuseth and condemneth, it is not to be looked for, that it should iustefy, when as these thinges are both contrary and also muche repugnaunte one to the other: Neither commeth it to the law by chaunce, to declare sinne: but it is such a pro­priety, so annexed vnto it, which cannot be plucked away frō it. But here ariseth What law geuers haue a regard vnto, in geuing of lawes. a doubt: for lawgeuers seme not when they geue lawes to haue a regard to thys thing onely to make vs to vnderstand offences, or things well done: but this ra­ther entend they, by theyr lawes to make theyr citezens good. Which thing if it be ascribed vnto men, much more oughte it to be attributed vnto God: But we A difference betwene the lawes of mā and the lawes of God. aunswere that there is a difference betwene the lawes of God and the lawes of man: because mans lawes require nothinge of vs, but that whiche lieth in our power to do. For as touching the affections of the minde, they are not carefull they correct onely outward thinges. But the lawes of God do cōmaunde those thinges also, which we being as we are weake, are not able to performe. Wher­fore the similitude which they bring concludeth nothinge. Farther this is to be considered, that humane lawes also, by declaring what thinges are to be done, by promising, and by threatninge, may inuite and stirre vp men vnto righteous­nes. But to change the mind, they cannot. Wherfore we ought not to attribut [...] more vnto them, then vnto the lawes of God. And that whiche is sayde of the en­tent and purpose of the humane lawgeuer, we graunte of God also, that his en­tente also in geuinge his law was, to saue men by it: namely, as wherein he did not onely shew sinnes, but also Christe whiche is the ende thereof. And therefore The law is profitable vnto salua­tion. we deny not, but that the lawe is profitable to men vnto saluatiō. And yet can it not iustefy: because the office thereof is not to poure into our harts either faith or charitye. Wherefore the wonderfull wilines of Sathan is to be taken heede oft whereby he goeth about to plucke away from men the fruites of the lawe. And vndoubtedly besides the knowledge of sinne, it brought two other excellent good Besides the know­ledge of sinne, two commodi­ties of the lawe. The deuill hath bene an enemy vnto the law of God. The law aggraua­teth sinne. thinges: First it shewed vnto vs our sauiour: farther it prescribed vnto vs what was best to be done. As touching the first the deuell hath obscured the hartes of men, that they should not behold Christ, whiche is the ende of the law puttinge a vayle before theyr hartes. And as touchinge the execution of good woorkes, he hath hindred them by trieflinge questions, genealogies, and vayne bablinges so that they beinge bent vnto them onely, and vnto outwarde ceremonies, had no farther regard. In wordes forsooth they confessed that they knew God, but in deedes they denied him. Farther forasmuch as by the law sinne is known, it followeth that by it sinnes are after a sorte aggrauated: Whiche thing the Apostle declared, when he wrote, that the law is the power of synne. And in this Epistle the vii. chapter it is written. That synne mighte be out of measure synfull throughe the commaundemente.

By the law (sayth he) is the knowledge of sinne.] This is to certaine, that The groūd o [...] all lawes is a deuine minde. Vniust lawes are not lawes. the deuine minde is the beginning and ground of all lawes. For in any decree [...] whatsoeuer is found either iust or honest, that altogether there hence proceedeth So that we may rightly say that all lawes are nothing els but the ordinances: of the deuine minde. Whereby is concluded, that such lawes which are not iust ought not to be counted for lawes. The knowledge of sinne which is had by the [Page 59] law, is of two sortes: one, whiche is vtterly of no efficacy, and weake, whereby The knowledge of sin two sortes. mens mindes are not made afrayd, nor the consciences deiected: as sometimes we se dronkardes, which euen in the middest of theyr cuppes condemne the vice of dronkennes. The Poets also in theyr verses and meeters most openly repro­ued sinnes: but yet they themselues refrayned not from them, any more then o­thers. But that knowledge of sin which terrefieth, doth not alwayes bringe sal­uation. Because if it be frustrated of hope of remedye, it is hurtefull, as it hap­pened in Iudas, Esau, and Caine: who when they knewe theyr wickendes, fell into dispayre. But as touchinge the electe, vnto the knowledge of sinnes is alwayes ioyned as a companion, hope of obteyning saluation by Christ. The sins whiche How mani­fold sinne is whiche is knowne by the law. are knowne by the lawe, if we rehearse them by theyr partes, are these, firste the sinne which from our birth cleaueth vnto vs, which is called originall sinne, and it is the vice and corruption of our whole nature: of whiche we are toughte in the psalme: In iniquity was I conceaued, and in sinnes hath my mother conceaued me: secondly, the motions and vehement impulsions which the Grecians call [...] do continuallye flowe out of that corruption, and resiste the lawe of God. Of which Paule writeth, that he felt an other law in his members repugnaunte vnto the law of his minde, and leading hym a way captyue into the law of sinne. Then thirdelye commeth the consent of the will, and by that meanes is sinne made more gree­uous. And of this we reade: Let not sinne raigne in youre mortall body. After that followeth custome: and by the bonds thereof are we more streightly bound vn­der the rule of sinne: so that it is in a maner impossible, to ouercome an vse now inueterated: For as Esay sayth, An Ethiopian can not change his skinne. Last­ly the vngodly are sometymes brought to that poynte, that they sinne agaynst the holy ghost: vnto which sinne forgeuenes is vtterly denied, as Christ hath taught vs in the Gospell. And Ieremy was commaunded, not to pray any more for the people. Sinne also might be deuided into thoughts, words, and deedes What sinne is. agaynst the law of God. And of all these the law instructeth vs. And sinne gene­rally is, to stray from the commaundement of the lawe: as archers when they hit not the marke, which way so euer it be, do fayle and misse: wherefore, seing To depar [...] from the Image of God is sinne. man was made vnto the Image of God, in his life and maners to expresse the nature and disposition of him, whensoeuer he misseth of that, he sinneth. But this benefite, to be admonished, and accused of our wicked actes, bringeth not with it an absolute profite: when as of our selues we are not able to auoide those thinges, whereof we be accused, nor to performe those thinges, whereof we be admonished. Therefore we must see, that we haue a regard vnto Christ, vnto whome we are by the law brought. And this is to be marked, that these thinges are chiefely written of the lawe by an antithesis, or comparison vnto fayth. For if the lawe be taken by it selfe, it is so farre of from geuing vnto vs righteousnes and honour, that it maketh vs naked and layeth open whatso­euer filthynes we haue committed: so that by it we get nothing but confusion. Which thing yet happeneth not through the defaulte of the lawe, but through the default of our mynde: because the lawe lighteth vpon it being corrupt and bent to euill thinges. For we are prone to do all thinges which are repugnant vnto the law of God. For it commaundeth, that we should put our trust in god, but we trust to our selues. It commaundeth, that we should be seruisable vn­to our neighbour: but our desire is, that all men might be our seruantes. And when with vnbrideled lust we rushe vpon these and such like sinnes, the law of God setteth it selfe agaynst vs, as doth a stoppe against a strong streame, a­gainst which when the water commeth, it swelleth, and is made more violent: For as the saying is, Nitimur in vetitum, & cupimus negata, that is, we inde­uour our selues to that which is forbidden vs, and couet the thinges that are An exc [...]llēt benefite of the law. denyed vs. All which thinges notwithstanding, yet is it an excellent benefite of God, which is geuen vnto vs by it, namely, to know our selues. Neyther must we thinke, that we want that benefite, for that we are sayde in the holy scriptures, [Page] to be by Christ deliuered from the lawe. For, that is not to be vnderstan­ded simplye. For the abrogation of the lawe is two maner of wayes: One is The abro­gation of the lawe two maner of wayes. whereby we are not bound to performe those thinges which are commaunded: As we see is of iudiciall commaundementes, and ceremonies. Which thing is not to be vnderstanded of the morall commaundementes. Christ sayth, that he came not to breake the lawe, but rather to fulfill it. And Paule sayth: what then, do we by fayth abolishe the lawe? God forbid. Yea rather we establishe the law. There is an other abrogation of the law, whereby the law is letted, that it can not ac­cuse vs as guiltye. And so is the morall part also vnderstanded to be abolished. But if we will speake more vprightly, the law is not abrogated: but the domi­nation In what sense the law is sayd to be abro­gated. How the lawe is not geuen vnto the iust mā. or power, which followeth it: so that we must thinke, that the stinge ra­ther thereof is plucked out, then that it is all whole taken away. That is true indeede, which is written vnto Timothe, that vnto the iust man the law is not geuē: Because, as Augustine writeth in his booke De spiritu & litera, Who woulde pre­scribe a lawe vnto hym, whiche of hys owne wyll and accorde dothe and executeth those thynges, whiche pertayne vnto ryghteousnesse? Wherefore his iudgement is, that iust men vse the lawe towardes others, whome they instruct, in driuing it into theyr hedes, and diligently setting it before them, to stirre them vp to re­pentance: And forasmuch as the Apostle seameth to haue spoken thinges repug­nant, (for on the one fyde he affirmeth, that the lawe is not set vnto the iust mā: and on the other side, he sayth it is good, so that a man vse it lawfully: But none vseth it lawfully, but only the iust man) Augustine conciliateth them after A concili­ation. this maner: that a man may haue the good vse of the law being not yet iusti­fied, but by the helpe thereof tendeth to iustification: which thing he laboreth Two simi­litudes. by two similitudes to proue. It happeneth (sayth he) that a man goyng to a place, is caried in a chariot: and when he is once come to the place, he leaueth the chariot. And children that are yong beginners, haue a scholemaister appointed them: but when they are once perfect, the scholemaister is taken away from them. So (sayth he) whilest a man is called backe from sinnes, and goeth forwarde vnto righteousnes, the lawe is profitable vnto hym. But when he hath once attayned vnto righteousnesse, he is deliuered from it, and extendeth the vse thereof towardes others. But yet ought we not to deny, but that they also whiche are conuerted vnto Christ, are by the lawe dayly more Euen they also that are iustified are instruc­ted by the lawe of God. and more instructed. There still remayneth muche of the fleshe: and ouer­muche darcknes ouer couereth our senses and vnderstandyng, so long as wes lyue here. Wherefore the vse of, the lawe is not superfluous towardes them also, whiche are iustified. And forasmuche as we are not fullye renued, in that there still remayneth so me parte of the olde man, and dayly false do still steale vppon vs, bothe vnwares vnto vs and also agaynst our willes, the lawe fin­deth in vs matter both to reproue and also to accuse: althoughe by the bene­fite of Christe it can not reach to condemnation. Which vndoubtedly it should doo as touching his owne nature, if we were not nowe by fayth iustified. By this place let vs note, what it is with fruite to reade the Scriptures, especiallye those places, wherein the lawe is written. For it is not sufficient diligently and How we must reade the law of God, A simili­tude. curiously to read them: vnles we do in them as it were in a glasse behold with how many and how great sinnes we are oppressed. Otherwise it shall bee all one to bee occupied in them, as to marke what Liui, Aristotle, Salust, Plutarche, and other writers haue left in writing.

But now without the law is the righteousnes of God made manifest, be­yng confirmed by the testimony of the law, and of the prophetes.] Here is expressedly put forth the question, wherof he will afterward entreat. And thereof he putteth two partes. Of which the one is, that the righteousnes of God is with­out the law made manifest. The other is, that it is obtained by the faith of Iesus Christ. And Paule affirmeth, that this righteousnes of God hath the testimonye both of the law and of the prophets. This is it which he proposed at the beginning that by the Gospell is reueled the righteousnes of God from saith to faith. And in [Page 60] that he writeth, that this manifestation is done without the law, he vnderstādeth, without helpe of the law being obserued: but onely by the hearing of faith. Which The righteousnes of God threefold. selfe thing he affirmed vnto the Galathians when he said: Haue ye receiued the holy ghost by the workes of the law, or by the hearing of faith? The righteousnes of God (as I haue in an other place declared) is thréefold. The first is, wherby we are through Christ receiued into fauour, and our sinnes are forgeuen vs, and the righteousnes of Christ is imputed vnto vs. And the second kind of righteousnes followeth this, namely, that thorough helpe of the holy ghost our minde is reformed, and we all whole are inwardly renewed by grace. Thirdly, follow holy and godly workes, for they which are once come thus far, are most zelous and desirous of working well. Now then Paule entreateth of the first righteousnes whiche he saith, is declared in vs without the law. And he calleth it the righteousnes of God, because it is got­ten thorough his power and goodnes, and not thorough our owne workes. And if a man do more narowly consider it, it is the mercy of God which he bestoweth vpon vs thorough Christ. And I haue in an other place admonished, that that which the Hebrues call Tsedech, and our men haue turned righteousnes, signifieth rather goodnes and mercy. And therefore to this day the Iewes call almes by that name. And Ambrose vpon this place is of the selfe same mynd. For he sayth: Therefore is Ambrose. Why the mercy of God is cal­led righte­ousnes. that called the righteousnes of God, which semeth to be the mercy of God, because it hath his originall beginning of Gods promise: and when that promise is performed, it is called the righteousnes of God. For therfore is it the righteousnes of God, because that is rende­red which was promised. Also whē he receiueth those which fly vnto him, it is called rightousnes. For, one not to receiue him that flieth vnto him, it is iniquity. Thus much Ambrose. But we must not harken vnto them, which in this place do interprete these wordes, Without the law, for, without the ceremonies of the lawe. For we haue be­fore shewed, that althoughe the question was moued by reason of them, yet hath Paule, entreated of the lawe generally, so that it comprehendeth all the partes of the law. They seme not much to ouershoote themselues, which by the righteousnes Christ the righteous­nes of God of God vnderstande Christ: for whatsoeuer pertayneth to iustification, that same commeth from him vnto vs, when we beleue in hym. Betwene the righteousnes of God and ours, Paule plainly putteth a difference, when he saith in this self same The mani­festation of the righte­ousnes of God happened chiefly in the tyme of the Apo­stles. The order and maner of the prea­ching of the Apostles. Epistle: Being ignorant of the righteousnes of God, and seeking to establishe theyr owne, they are not subiecte vnto the righteousnes of God. But that we may the better vnderstand, what this manifestation of the rightousnes of God is, which then happened chieflye when Paule wrote these thinges, it must thus be vnderstanded, that we must haue a regarde what manner of preaching the Apostles vsed. As farre as we can gather out of the sermons of the Apostles, as they are set forth in the Actes of y ^e Apostles: First, they preached repentaunce, setting before mens eyes their sinnes, and condemnation wherin men were wrapped: then they gathered together the proprieties and conditions of Christ, which should heale these euils, and that out of the holy scriptures: Thirdly, they applied the same proprieties and conditions vnto Iesus of Nazareth, to allure men vnto his fayth. And suche as hearyng these things beleued the same, obteyned of God remission of their sinnes. Inwardly they were made new, and outwardly they liued moste holily, resembling the image of God, to which mankynde was made. With perseuerance they called vppon God, communicating together in prayers, breakyng of bread, & all holye workes. They stedfastly did put their trust in God, as they which were vtterly destitute of all o­ther helpe. They nothing regarded worldly riches, laying the price of their things and money, at the féete of the Apostles. They stoutely bare a good testimonye vnto Why the righteous­nes of God is said to be made manifest with­out the law Christ, reioycing that they suffred greuous thinges for hys names sake. Lastly, in this quarell they cherefully shed theyr bloud & bestowed theyr life. And the world seyng those thinges, could not but be moued, and acknowledge, that a new kynde of righteousnes appeared on the earth. And because amongest them were Ethe­nikes, which had no knowledge at all of the law, therfore the Apostle sayth With­out the law. Also many of the Hebrewes were called, who although they knew the [Page] law, yet they nothyng at all regarded it. And it was all one, as if they had not had the law. There came some also, which liued very vprightly, and were moste ze­lous in the study of the law: as Nathaniell, whome Christ pronounced to be a true Israelite, in whom there was no guile. And these were iustified without the law: for that obseruation of the law which they performed, was not the cause why they were iustified. The lawe in déede may be a helpe vnto iustification, because it ad­monisheth vs, and accuseth vs, by whiche meanes we are dryuen vnto Christe. But for as muche, as it hathe not the strengthe to forgeue synnes, to geue the The law helpeth vn­to iustifica­tion but it is not the cause there­of. A concilia­tion. holye Ghoste, to suggest faythe into the hartes of the hearers, therefore Paule saythe righte well, That we are iustified wythout the lawe. Augustine in hys booke de spiritu & litera, saith, that the Apostle seemeth to speake thynges repug­naunt. For he affyrmeth that the righteousnes of God, whereof he nowe speaketh, had his testimonye of the lawe and the Prophetes: and yet be saythe, that it was made ma­nifeste without the lawe. But he aunswereth, that there is here in verye deede no contradiction, if a man rightly distinct those thinges which are here spoken. For therefore Paule excludeth the law, because it poureth not in grace, neither is the cause of iustificati­on: although this righteousnes, whereof he speaketh hath his testimony of it. Wherefore in his first booke and 8. chapt (De gratia Christi, contra Coelestium & Pelagium, he sheweth that this sentence is thus to be pronounced, namely, The righteousnes, of A sondry distinction in this sen­tence. God without the law. and then to adde seuerally by it selfe, is nowe made manifeste. So that this particle, without the law, is referred vnto righteousnes, and not vn­to these woordes, made manifest. But this doth not verye well agree with the woordes of Paule: although that which he sayth be most true. But this is woor­thy of notinge, that Augustine in the same place sayth, that this aduerbe of time now, is not so to be taken, as thoughe the olde fathers in the lawe of nature, and This ad­uerbe of time, Now howe Au­gustine vn­derstandeth it. An erroure of the Pe­lagians. in the law of Moses, had not saluation by Christ, and obteyned not this righteousnes without the law. The Pelagians vndoubtedly were of this opiniō, that ma­ny had saluation before Moses time by the lawe of nature, whiche shined moste brightly in theyr hartes: which being afterward obscured, the law of Moses suc­céeded, like vnto the Moone: because it brought light, but not altogether absolute. Last of all came Christ, whose light shineth as bright as the sunne. And so they affirmed, that the old fathers wer saued without Christ, and without his grace: because Christ was not as yet come. But they were muche deceaued: for that The elders were iuste­fied not without Christ but by hym. they thought, that the fayth of a thinge to come, serueth not to saluation: when as yet we at this day beleue the resurrection of the dead, the last iudgement, and life eternall, which are thinges to come, and by this fayth are we holpen. So the elders by theyr fayth in Christ to come, receaued as much benefite, as touching iustification, as we now do which are born after his comming. For the merites of the crosse of Christ, and of his bloude, are not thinges duringe but for a time. Wherefore Christ sayd of Abraham, that he desyred to see his day, and saw it, and re­ioysed. Farther Paule sayth, As in Adam all men dye, so in Christ all men are made on lyue. And he most plainely writeth vnto Timothe, that Christ is the onelye mediator betwene God and men. Therefore then also before his comminge into the sleshe, he gaue righteousnes without the law vnto men whiche beleued in him. And thys woord, now, which the Apostle here hath, is to be referred vnto the manifestatiō. For indeede this righteousnes was before, but it lay hiddē, and very few had it. In the olde time righ­teousnes was by fayth: but now it is declared more amply and a [...]ertly. Fayth is the instru­ment wher with righ­teousnes is comprehended. But now is it publikely and openly knowne vnto the whole world. And this is it, that at the death of Christ the vaile of the Temple did rente, and was made open, so that those things which before were hidden, were now made manifest. The Apostle, hauing in this place put foorth a question most largely to be entre­ced of, vseth therein great perspicuity. And that whiche he purposeth, is deuided into two partes. For in the one he denieth, that by the lawe commeth our righ­teousnes: And in the other he affirmeth, that it is geuen vs by the fayth of Iesus Christ. Wherefore his meaning is, that fayth is the instrument, whereby thys righteousnes is apprehēded. And he excludeth the law, from which sentence the world excedingly abhorreth: for that the world knoweth of none other righteousnes, [Page 61] but of that which commeth by good woorkes. But men ought to consider, The world is offended bycause the Law is ex­cluded frō iustificatiō. The prin­ciples and groundes of good woorkes in men are corrupt. Christ is vulgarly thought to be the mos [...] excellent lawgeuer. from whence those good woorkes do procéede, which they would so fayne haue to iustify. They will say, from reason, and the will. But if these twayne be viti­ated and corrupted, by whom shall they be corrected? They haue nothing to say, but by God. But before he wil correct it, it is necessary, that he be merciful, and pacefied towards vs. But he is not pacefied, but by the death & bloud of Christe. Of which things, when we through fayth take hold, we are truely said (as Paule affyrmeth) to be iustified by fayth without the law. Commonlye it is thought, y ^• that Christ is a lawgeuer, which hath by his appointed, and decreed thinges of most excellency, and most profitable. And how excellent the things are which he hath commaunded, they gather out of the 5. 6. and 7. chapters of Mathew: where is red, that not onely murther is prohibited, but also wrath, and anger against our neighbour. And commaundement is there geuē, that he which hath any of­fence agaynst an other, should leue his gift at the altar, and go and reconcile himselfe vnto his brother. He commaundeth also, that we should in the way be at agreemēt wyth our aduersary. Neither forbiddeth he periury onely, but also any othe. And although in the law be permitted, An eye, for an eye. A tooth, for a tooth, yet Christ commaundeth that we should not resist euell. Also in the law, adulte­ry is prohibited: but Christ hath also forbidden the lustfull lookinge vpon a wo­mā. And he restrayned those, which would for euery slight cause, put away theyr wynes. Of these thinges they inferre, that Christe in his lawes hath commaun­ded things more perfect, thē the law of Moses commaunded. And that his lawes were more commodious then the lawes of Moses, hereby they proue, because he abrogated ceremonies, which were very hard to be obserued, neither could they easely be obserued of all nations. We graunt indeede, that by the comminge of Christ ceremonies were taken away, because the signification of them is nowe fulfilled, But that Christe gaue new lawes, we vtterly deny. He indéede did in­terprete the law of Moses, and reproued the error of the Scribes and of the Pha­risies: which thought, that none but the grosser kind of sinnes, were repugnante vnto the law: & he teacheth y ^• the commaundemēts of God ar far otherwise to be vnderstāded, thē they ether vnderstood thē thēselues, or expoūded thē vnto others Wherfore he left the law as he found it, and executed that which belongeth vnto hys office, which was, to be made an oblation, and sacrifice for sinnes, and to geue What was the office of Christ. remission of sinnes: and righteousnes by imputatiō: and the holy ghost, and grace. Wherfore Iohn Baptist declaring the office of Christ, when he shewed hym with hys fynger, sayed: Behold the lambe of God, which taketh away the sinnes of the world. These things make against the Anabaptistes, whiche make the Gospel to be no­thing but good workes, and a most absolute conuersation. These men know not An error of the Anabaptistes. the chief and principall benefite of Christ, neyther make they any difference bet­wene the law and the Gospell. The law in deede commaundeth: but the Gospell ministreth strengths to accomplishe those thinges whiche are commaunded. The law accused the: The Gospel absolueth: The law maketh a sound outwardly: The Differēces betwene the Law and the Gospel. Gospell is grauen in the bowells: The law worketh anger: The Gospell maketh God pacifyed, and reconciled vnto vs: The lawe by making afeard, deiecteth the mind: The Gospell by comforting, erecteth it: The law is the ministery of death: The gospel, of life: The law, is a, schoolemaster: The gospel, is a perfect instruc­tion: The whole lawe consisteth in this, that we should woork: The Gospel herein chiefly consisteth, that we should beleue: The law bringeth a curse vnto thē which­lyue vnder it: The Gospel bringeth blessing: The law bringeth bondage: The Go­spell, spirituall liberty: The lawe, is the letter: The Gospell, is the spirite: The lawe hath promises, but with this condition, if ye shall doo all those thinges: The promises of the Gospell, are free, and therefore firme. There mought be rehersed also other differences, whereby these two differ very much, a sunder. But at thys tyme we thinke these to be sufficient. Whiche thinges yet are not iudged true by humaine reason. Neither is it any maruayle, for as Plato sayd in his second booke: [Page] De legibus. What soeuer we behold a farre of, we know it not thoroughly. For there co­meth betwene our sight and it, a dissines, and by farre distāce of place, darknes shadoweth The cause why many iudge so ill of the Law and of the Gospell. our sights. But when we come, and behold them more nighly; thē we iudge of euery thing a right. These, things spake he, bycause voluptuous and corrupt men could not be perswaded, that a good and innocent life is pleasauntest. For they iudge of it farre otherwise: for that they are very much distant from it. But if they would drawe nere vnto it, and make a triall therof, they should then iudge vprightly. So do we at this present pronounce of these men. For asmuch as they a far of looke vpon the holy scriptures neither do with any diligent heade taking, consider the Gospel and the lawe, thereof it commeth to passe, that they iudge so ill of them. The Apostle addeth of this righteousnes, which he speaketh of, that it hath the testimony of the law and of the Prophets. Which he therfore addeth, because that doctrine whiche he set forth, mought haue semed new and strange. But in the Gospell, newnes is Newnes must be re­moued a­way from the Gospel. in any wise to be auoyded. Therfore he euery where testifieth of the Gospell, that it is of antiquity, and instituted by God, before all worlds. And in the beginnyng of this Epistle he wrote, that God promised it by hys Prophets in the holy Scrip­tures. At this day also there is a strife betwene vs and the aduersaryes, about doc­trine, whilest they contend, that we bring in new things, but they abyde stil by the old doctrine. But now by the Apostle we learne, how this controuersy may be en­ded. What doc­trine is cal­led new & what olde. The doc­trine of the Papistes is new, foras­muche as it hath no te­stemonye out of the holy scrip­tures. That doctrine vndoubtedly is old and auncient, which hath hys testimony by the lawe and the prophets: that is, by the holy scriptures. And that is to be iudged new, wherof there is no mention made in them. They haue set vp the Masse, wherin one alone doth communicate for others whiche are standers by. This hath no testimony thoroughe al the scriptures. We affirme, that the supper of the Lord ought to be common vnto all the faythfull: which thing is most playnely declared by the institution therof, as it is set forth in the Gospels, and in Paul. They geue vnto the lay men the sacrament of the Eucharist mayned: which is, not only not in the scriptures, but also is playnly agaynst the scriptures. They defend the inuo­cations of the dead: for the confirmacion wherof they haue nothing out of the holy scriptures. They compel the Clergie frō matrimony, they defend purgatory, they maintayne Images, they vse a strange tongue in their holy seruices, they obtrude the choyse of meats, garments, shauings, vnctions, and a thousand such like trum­peryes, as things necessary vnto the worshippinge of God: and that vtterly with­out any testimony of the scriptures. Let them learne of Paul, who endeuouring to teache righteousnes to come by Christ, sayeth, that it hath testimony of the law and of the prophets, and not that he made it of his owne head. But the doctrines of these men do aduaunce impietye. For they obtrude the fayned inuētions of men, as necessary worshippinges of God. And forasmuch as they haue no testimony out of the scriptures, it must follow of necessity, that they are new. But the reason, Why new­nes is to be taken hede of in religi­on. why newnes ought to be auoyded in religion, is because the Lord commaunded in Deutronomy, that from his commaundements and rytes they should nether take away any thing, nor adde therunto. Euen Plato also in his lawes and Pub. welth forbiddeth, that there should be any innouation in thinges pertayning vnto religi­on. In deed mens laws may sometymes be changed, for that the form of the Pub. Humane lawes may be chaun­ged. welth is sometymes altered. Neyther do those lawes which serue for a kingdome, serue for that gouernemente, which is executed by the noble men, or a Pub. welth, that is ruled by the people. Farther the lawgeuers, forasmuch as they are men, can not se all things. And there happen daily many cases, for which they are fayne both to correct, and to change laws. And euē as in artes throughe continuance of tyme, somewhat is found wherby they are made more perfect, so lawes also, in successe of tyme, are oftentymes amended, and brought into a better forme. But none of al these rases taketh place in the lawes of God. For as touching the Church, it chaun­geth The politi­call gouernment of the church chaungeth not his forme. not his forme, it is alwaies one and the self same Pub. welth: and there is no­thing hidden from the vnderstanding of God, which is the author of those lawes: He fors [...]th all thinges, neyther is his knowledg increased by successe of tyme. [Page 62] Wherfore it is not mete, that men should attempt to alter any thing in his lawes. But now let vs se, what testimonyes there are of this righteousnes in the lawe and the Prophets, which Paul asserteth. And although Christ sayd generally, that Moses wrote of him, and Luke declareth, that Christ beyng apparelled like a stran­ger, and talking by the way with the twoo Disciples, began at Moses, and then tought them by the prophets and psalmes: yet is there no certayne place brought forth, wherin is expressedly made mention of the Messias. And yet neuertheles, if we will speake peculiarly of Christ: we haue in Genesis, that the sede of the woman Peculiar testemonies of Christ & of faith. that iustesi­eth. should treade vnder foote the head of the serpent. And to Abraham it was sayd: In thy seed shall all nations be blessed. And of the same Abraham it is written: He beleued God, and it was imputed vnto him for righteousnes. Moreouer Paul citeth, Say not in thine hart, who shall ascend vp into heauen, or who shall descend downe into hell? The woorde is nighe at hand, in thy mouth, and in thy harte. Paul also addeth: And this is the woord of fayth, which we preach, If thou beleue with thy hart, and confesse with thy mouth, Again: The Scepter shal not be taken away from the tribe of Iuda, neyther a cap­tayne out of his loynes, tyll he be come, whiche shalbe sent: and he shalbe the expectation of the Gentles. Ieremy writeth of Christ: He shalbe called God our righteousnes. And in the same prophet we reade, that God appoynted to geue a new Testament: not ac­cording to that which he made with the Fathers, but in describing his law in their harts & bowells. Abacuk saith: The iust shall liue by fayth. Esai saith: I am found of them, that sought me not. Also, God hath layed vpon hym all our iniquityes. Dauid also: Blessed are they whose iniquityes are forgeuen, and whose sins are couered. Blessed is the man, vnto whome the Lord hath not imputed sinne. An other kind of testimonyes also is had out of the dedes of the old fathers, whiche were certayne forshewinges, that Christe An ether kind o [...] te­stemonies are the actes of the Fathers. should come to redeme mankinde. For as he is sayd to lyue in vs (for that we are his membres) so also both was he, and liued he in the old fathers. Wherfore they were no les his members then are we. But how the head suffereth, and is recrea­ted in his members, it is most apertly declared in Paul, whē it was sayd, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And in the last iudgemēt, Christ will pronoūce, that what­soeuer hath bene geuē vnto the least of his, was geuen vnto him: wherfore, so of­ten as we reade, that the elders were ouercome, brought into captiuity, oppressed with calamityes, we must vnderstand, that Christ in them suffred these self same things. And agayne whē we heare, that they got the victorye, & were restored and A shadowe of the death and resur­rection of Christ. delyuered, let vs thinke that Christ also was in like sort affected in them. And in the one we haue a shew of his death begon, and in the other, a shadow and begin­ning of hys resurrection. And that this thing is so, we are tought by that whiche Christ sayd, that he should be in the hart of the earth thre dayes, and thre nights, lyke as was Ionas the prophet. He likened himselfe also vnto the brasen serpente, which Moses set vp, vpon which whosoeuer looked they obteyned health, be inge o­therwise in daunger to dye of the venemous stinginge. And in Oseas the prophet we reade: Out of Egipt haue I called my sonne. Which oracle the Hebrews contend to wreste vnto Pharao, which was destroyed, and vnto the people of Israell deliue­red from his tyrannie. Which thing if we should in the meane time graunt thē, yet would I aske of them, of whence that nation had the preeminence, to be cal­led by the name of the Children of God. That vndoubtedly coulde not be proued The [...]lders were not the childrē of God but by Christ. to come by any other meanes, then by Christ, which is the Sonne of God, being the first begotten amongest many brethren. By whom others also, as manye as are nombred to be the children of God, haue aspired to suche a deuine adoption Wherefore the Apostle sayth, that Christ was the first fruites, and pronounceth that he hath the principalitie ouer all thinges. Wherfore not without cause hath our Euangelist cited this place of the Prophet touching the Lord, forsomuch as he al­so was, by the admonishment of the Angell, called backe out of Egipt. Lastly the The thirde kinde of [...]e­stemonies are sacrifi­ces. sacrifices, oblations, and ceremonies of the Elders, bare witnes of this kinde of righteousnes. For in those beastes which were slayne, the death of Christ was manifested vnto the fayth of the Elders. For euen as the thing sacrificed, which o­therwise had nothing offēded, was slaine for y ^e sin of an other, which escaped frée, so [Page] was thereby shewed, that Christ should be flayne for vs, which were guiltie of death, that by the pacefieng of the heauenly Father, we might escape the punish­ments which we had deserued. Neither let any man say, that the sacraments of The sacra­ments of the elders how they had saluati­on ioyned with them, and how they had not What was Paules meaning to y ^• Hebrues touching the rites of the Iewes. the Elders had not saluation ioyned with them. For, that thing will we also graunt, as touching the outward woorke, which commonly is called the woorke wrought. But the fayth, which in those rites embraced Christ, brought saluation vnto the Elders: euen as at this day also the outward exercises of the sacraments or commaundementes doo nothing profite: but onelye fayth bringeth saluation, which seeth that vnder the infoldinges of sensible signes, are set forth vnto vs hea­uenly giftes. And if at any time the Apostle, vnto the Hebrews, or in anye other place, seeme to affirme otherwyse, wee must thyncke that hee hath to doo a­gaynste the Iewes, which seperated Christe and hys fayth, both from the lawe, and also from ceremonies. Which two things being seperated, he firmely and strongely concludeth, that they haue not saluacion by such rites and sacrifices.

The righteousnes of God by the fayth of Iesus Christ.] Now is it meete to tell what fayth is: Fayth therefore is an assente, and that a firme assente to the What is fayth. wordes of God, obteyned not by reason, or by naturall demōstration, but by the authority of the speaker, and by the power of the holy Ghost. And this definicion disagreeth not from that, which Paule putteth in the .xi. to the Hebrues. Hereby we may see, about what thinges faith is occupied, namely, aboute the woordes of God. And it is manifest, what is the chiefest principle & ground, vnto whiche all thinges pertayning to God are referred: and that is, The Lord hath sayd. But the authority of the speaker cannot be of force with vs so much as it ought, vn­lesse the perswasion of y ^e holy Ghost be therunto adioyned. In Greeke it is called Whence [...] is deriued. [...]: which word is deriued of [...]: for we ar not accustomed to beleue, but that which we are fully perswaded of. Basilius, as touching fayth, when he ex­poundeth this place of the Psalme, I haue beleued, and therefore haue I spoken, wri­teth, Do not contend to see those thinges which are layd vp a farre of, neither make those thinges doubtfull which are hoped for. In which wordes he sheweth, that two prin­cipall thinges are to be auoyded: The one is, that we be not with to much cu­riositie Two prin­cipal things to be taken hede of. stirred vp to seeke out the proofe of thinges, which we ought to beleue, which proofe, so long as we lyue here, cannot be had: the other is, that though they be obscure, we shoulde not yet doubte of the truth of them. And the same writer, entreating of the confessiō of fayth, thus writeth: It is manifest a falling a­way Basilius sayth that they erre from the faith which adde any thing to the scriptures. from the fayth, and a poynt of pride, either to refuse anye of those thinges which are written, or to bring in anye thing, that is not written: forasmuche as our Lorde Iesus Christ sayd, My sheepe heare my voyce: and before that he sayde, but a straunger they will not follow, but wyll flee from him, because they haue not knowen his voyce. The A­postle also hath, by an humaine example, straightly forbidden, either to adde, or to dimi­nishe any thing in the holy scriptures, when he sayth: And yet no man disanulleth the Testament of a man, when it is confirmed, neither addeth any thing thereunto. In which place a man may perceiue, how warely this man affirmeth, that as touching fayth, nothing ought either to be added, or diminished in the holy scriptures. Which maketh chiefely against those, which obtrude inuencions and traditi­ons of men, as necessary to be beleued. Farther, the same writer plainlye set­teth forth the certaintie of fayth, when he declareth the propertie thereof in Moralibus the. 80. Summe, and, 22. chapiter. Where he writeth, What is the propertie of fayth? He aunswereth, An vnseperable certaintie of the truth of the wordes of God, which is not attayned to by any kinde of reasoning, nor any naturall necessitye, neyther, being framed to pietie, can euer be shaken. And he addeth, That it is the duty of one that beleueth, to be in such a certaintie affected, according to the power of the woord Basilius sayth that whatsoeuer is with out fayth and the holy scriptures is sinne. spoken, and not to presume, either to dissanull, or to adde any thing. For, if whatsoeuer is not of fayth, is sinne, as sayth the Apostle, and fayth commeth of hearing, and hearing by the word of God: then whatsoeuer is not of fayth, being not contayned in the scripture, inspired by the spirite of God, the same is sinne. This Father confirmeth together with vs, the certaintie of fayth: and sheweth wherehence it dependeth, when [Page 63] he calleth it inseuerable: for that when we beleue, we doo not examine by our own reasons, what is possible, or what is not possible to be done. And he semeth to allude to those wordes which Paul speaketh; of the fayth of Abraham, that he doubted not through incredulitie, where he vsed this verbe [...]. Wher­fore, certaintie, is contrarie to doubting, which commeth of the examination of humane reason. Moreouer, that which in an other sentence he had spoken, he a­gayne playnly repeateth, namely, that those things, which are out of the scrip­tures, are not to be beleued. And this place of Paul: Whatsoeuer is not of fayth, is Note how Basilius vnderstan­deth what­soeuer is not of fayth is sinne. Fayth dif­fereth from opinion and suspicion. sinne, he vseth in his natiue and proper sense, as we also vse it: which thing our aduersaries can not abide. Faith differeth from opiniō: for opinion, although it make vs leane vnto one part, yet it doth that, both wyth reason, and also not without feare of the truth of the other partie. And suspicion doth engender yet a weaker assent, then opinion doth: for that it both wanteth reason, and also leaueth men doubtfull of the truth of the other part. It is true in deede, that science engendreth a firme assent: but that is brought to passe by adding of demonstrations. Seing now we sée playnly, both what fayth is, and also howe it differeth from opinion, science, and suspicion, let vs sée, howe manye wayes fayth is taken. For there is one kinde of fayth which is mightie, perfect, and of efficacie, whereby we are iustified: there is an other which is voyde without fruite, during but for a time, & vayne, which bringeth not iustification. Which thing is manifest by the parable of the Gospell, where the séede, the woorde of God (I say) is written, to fall sometymes vpon good ground: and sometimes vpon stony ground, vpon thornes, and by the high way side, where it is lost, and Fayth which ius­tefieth is not in all men equal. bringeth forth no fruite. Agayne, that fayth which is good and profitable, is not in all men a lyke: for according to the greater or lesser infirmitie of the fleshe, it hath degrées. Wherfore Paul saith: Euen as God hath deuided vnto euery man the measure of fayth. And in the selfe same parable, the seede falling on the good ground, bringeth not forth fruite alyke in all partes. For in some place it bringeth forth thirty fold, in other some place, lx. folde, and in other some an hundreth folde. In sūme, the entent of Paule in this place is, to make the righ­teousnes of God (whereof he entreateth in this place) proper vnto fayth, to the ende he myght vtterly take it away as well from our merites, as from our workes. But I meruayle, that forasmuch as this is his scope, how the Greke Scholies affirme, that we are not so iustified, that vnto the obtaynment of righ­teousnes, The Greke Scholies and Chry­sostome are noted. we bring nothing our selues. Fayth (say they) is brought of vs: for that to beleue, it behooueth vs to haue a valiant mynde. And this selfe thinge signifieth Chrisostome. These thinges must be vnderstanded warely, neyther can they be admitted in that sense, as though fayth proceded from vs: when as vn­to the Ephesians it is playnly declared, that it is the gift of God: neyther if it were of our selues could all boasting be excluded. For we should bring much, if out of our selues should come the power to beleue. And this place playnely teacheth, that it is not so to be vnderstanded: for the Apostle addeth: Being iusti­fied freely. But it should not be fréely, if fayth, as it is our worke, should bring righteousnes. I graunt indede, that our vnderstanding and will, do assent vnto the promises of God. But that it doth, or maye do the same, it muste of neces­sity come of God.

Vnto all and vpon all that beleue.] There are three thinges now put in this proposition, which the Apostle entendeth playnly to declare. The first is this. That the righteousnes of God is made manifest: the second, that it is without the law: the third, that it is by fayth. As touching the first he sayth, that thys righteousnes of God is declared vnto all, and vpon all. Which is not so to be Righteous­nes is not in all men but only in the elect and in the beleuers▪ vnderstanded as generally spoken: when as in all men there nether is, nor ap­peareth any such righteousnes. But his wordes are contracted vnto those which beleue, vnto the elect (I say) and sanctified: Which thing the words of the Apo­stle sufficiently declare. If this sentence should be vnderstanded altogether vni­uersally, [Page] then this manifestation could not be referred but vnto the preaching, This vni­uersality may haue a respect vnto the preaching. which is set forth vnto all men, hauing no respect either of persons or estates: for so Christ warned the Apostles to preach the Gospell to all creatures: and ge­nerally addeth whosoeuer beleueth and is baptised shalbe saued. But the first sense, is both true, and also more perspicuous. He afterward addeth a reason, why this righteousnes is made manifest vnto all, & vpon all that beleue. Because sayth he.

All haue sinned, and are destitute of the glory of God.] That forasmuch as they want righteousnes of their owne, they might receaue it at the handes of God. There are none so holy, but that as sayth Ambrose, this place conuinceth them to be sinners: forasmuche as this righteousnes geuen of God hath place in all, and vpon all. But this phrase is to be noted.

Are destitute of the glory of God.] By it, some thinke is to be vnderstāded, the The glory of god som­times signifieth, his dwelling in vs. dwelling of God in vs: bycause men were seperated from him, nether had they him ioyned vnto them by grace. And that the glory of God expresseth this ma­ner of dwelling, hereby it is manifest, for that the Arke of the couenant is cal­led the glory of God. Wherefore when it was taken by the Philistians, the glorye of God was sayd to be taken away. Others thinke that Paule, by the glorye of God vnderstandeth the perfect and true righteousnes: which comming from God, is iudged glory, or that whereby we glorifye God. And forasmuch as glo­ry What glo­ry is. is nothing els, but a prayse most aboundantly published, Paule by a figu­ratiue kinde of speach calleth the most singular giftes of God, the glory of God for which giftes we both prayse and celebrate his name: so that the thing hath (by the figure Metonomia) the name of the propriety which followeth it. But in my iudgement it semeth, that Paule would declare by these wordes, that all men in theyr corrupt nature were reiected: and that he chiefely reproueth rites, sacrifices and workes of the lawe, in which they thought the glory of God chief­ly to consist. For he sheweth, that they in very deede were destitute of the glory of God, although they were altogether full of their ceremonyes.

And are iustified freely by his grace.] Here we haue what that meaneth, the righteousnes of God to be made manifest without the lawe, namely, to be geuen freely. And Paule laboring to shew that in iustification is no considera­tion had of our workes, semeth to shew that he neuer satisfieth hymselfe. So many wordes heapeth he vp which signifieth one, and the selfe same thing. For We mea­sure the righteous­nes of God by our own righteous­nes. he saw what a hard thing it is to be beleued of vs, which will our selues do nothing freely, and by our owne measure do measure the righteousnes of God, as though he also would not geue his righteousnes freely. Out of this kinde of speach ought to be gathered this common sentence, that, by fayth only we are iustified. And although this word only be not found in the holy scriptures, yet is it necessarily inferred of those things, which we there reade: as Ambrose most Ambrose sayth by fayth onely. playnly noteth in this place, writing vōp these words, saying: We do nothyng, we recompēce not, by fayth only are we iustified, which is the gift of God. He was not con­tent to say that we are iustified by fayth only, but he addeth also other clauses whereby he might more playnly declare the same. The selfe same thing writeth Basilius also in his booke De confessione fidei. We (sayth he) haue nothing whereof Basilius was of the same iudgement. we may make our boast concerning righteousnes, forasmuch as we are iustified only hy fayth in Christ. Which wordes are not so to be vnderstanded, as though the fayth wherby we are iustified, were alone, that is not adorned with good & holy works: but because our workes though they be neuer so holy, are not causes of the true righteousnes. The like similitude is shewed in water, wherin moistnes and coldnes are ioyned together but to washe away blots and spots, properly belongeth to moistnes and not to coldnes. Wherefore this is a false argument ab accidente, whē as two things being ioyned together, that which belongeth to the one is ascribed vnto the other. But as touching this word [...], that is, being iustified, being a participle of the nominatiue case, it is to be refer­red vnto that which was a little before spoken. For all haue sinned and are desti­tute [Page 64] of the glory of God: as though he should haue sayd, they which were such, are iustified freely.

By his grace, by the redemption, which is in Christ Iesus, whome God hath set forth a propitiator by fayth.] Here Paule expresseth those thinges, which by fayth we embrace, when we are iustified, and sheweth, that by fayth he vnder­standeth the obiectes, which by it are apprehended. And when he sayth by grace, he sheweth, that he entreateth of a farre other maner of righteousnes, then is that which is gotten by workes: and he most manifestly excludeth the conditi­ons We are not iustified rashely or by chaunce. of the lawe. And when we heare, that we are iustified fréely, and by grace, we must not thinke that the same is done rashely or by chance: forasmuch as it is tempered by the rule of the election of God. The causes and reasons where­of although they be vnknowen vnto vs, yet are they knowen vnto God. And se­ing that in respect of hym the same is not done by chaunce, we ought not to af­firme, that men are iustified b [...] chance. And euē as chaunce is to be takē away so also ought we to banishe necessitye, least we should seeme to admitte fate or desteny. For God is not compelled, to chuse this man, more thē that man. But whatsoeuer he geueth, he geueth it freely and without compulsion.

By the redemption.] Hereby appeareth, that we are manumitted by Christ and made his free men. For we were bond men cast into the prison of sinne, Who are redemed. death, and the deuill. But Christ hath fully payd the price for vs: and that no small price, for he hath shed his owne bloud for vs, and geuen his life. That is sayd to be redemed, which before was both free, and also pertayned vnto vs. We were the peculiar people of God, and through our owne default we were sold vnder sinne. This phrase here of the Apostle manifestly declareth, how litle we ought to ascribe vnto free will before we be, by the redemption of Christ set at liberty. And forasmuch as so great a price is payd for our saluation, we By the vse of the sacra­mēts we are put in minde of the benefit receaued. The wayght of sinne is to be waighed by the price of our re­demption. ought not to suffer, so great a benefite lightly to slippe out of our memory. For the auoyding whereof, we are holpen not only by doctrine and the scriptures, but also by sacramentes. For euen as among the elders, the often sacrifices shadowed Christ to come: so now the often vse of the misteries, bringeth to me­mory his death and bloud shed for vs. And by this price of redemption may we perceaue the greeuousnes of sinne: forasmuch as the waight thereof was so great that it kindled agaynst vs the iust wrath of God, and such a wrath as was not rashely conceaued: which wrath being an appetite or desire of ven­geance, by a most iust consideration, required a most excellent sacrifice, vpon which might be transferred all our sinnes. And forasmuch as the same wrath is by no other thing asswaged, but by the bloud and death of Christ, they are to be coūted most greeuous blasphemers, which dare attribute the same either to our workes, or to outward rites.

VVhome God hath set forth a propitiator.] In that Christ is sayd to be set forth vnto vs by God, thereby is shewed, that the doctrine of the Gospell is God two maner of wayes set­teth forth Christ vn­to vs to be beleued. The me­rite of the death of Christ de­pendeth of the predes­tination of God. no new thing, nor inuented by men. But in what sort Christ is set forth vnto vs, is declared by two principall pointes. First, because God by reuelation set­teth forth vnto vs thinges to be beleued, vnto the knowledge whereof, by the light of nature we could neuer attayne. Secondly in that he causeth vs to haue a pleasure in thinges shewed vnto vs, and to geue our assent vnto them, and moueth and stirreth vp our mynd, inspiring vs with fayth. This may also be referred vnto the good pleasure, and blessed predestination of God, wherehence dependeth the merite of the death of Christ. Otherwise God mought by any o­ther thing haue redemed vs, and deliuered vs from sinnes. Wherefore we must count that by his determination and purpose only, haue we receaued that he would vouchsafe to accept the death of Iesus Christ his sonne, and by it recon­cile vnto him the sayntes. Of this purpose and good pleasure, is mencion made vnto the Ephes. in the first chapiter. Where it is thus writtē. According to his good pleasure, which he had purposed in himselfe, euen vnto the dispensation of the fulnes of [Page] tymes, that he might set vp all thinges perfectly by Christ (both the thinges which are in heauen, and the thinges which are in earth) in whome euen we also are by lot called, be­ing predestinate according to his purpose, which worketh al things according to the coun­sell of his wil, that we (which before hoped in Christ) should be to the prayse of his glory, in whom also we hope, forasmuch as we haue hard the word of truth, euē the Gospell of your saluation. &c. And in an other place oftentymes, and in this selfe same epi­stle is mencion made of the purpose of God. Although this reason of the will and A proba­ble reason of the coun­sel of God. counsell of God is not to be contēned, yet as I thinke this reason may be assig­ned, that by him it was mete the world should be restored to his olde estate, by whome all thinges were created. This word [...], which is here put, may signifye these three thinges, a propitiator, propitiation, and propitiatory. I rather allow the latter signification, because Paule semeth to allude vnto the How Christ is our propitiatory. oracle of the olde Testament, and couering of the arke, which is there called the propitiatory, or mercy seate. For vpon the arke of the couenaunt, there was layd a board or table for the oracle of the arke, at whose endes stoode two Che­rubins: but the midle place was empty out of which were answeres geuen vn­to them that asked, and God was made fauorable vnto the people, and was sayd to dwel there. It is playne and manifest, and not to be doubted, but that all these things may aptly be referred vnto Christ, as in whom dwelleth the whole fulnes of the godhed corporally (as Paule sayth vnto y ^e Collossians) and therehence are most certayne oracles geuen of the will of God, as touching our saluation. And that by hym God is pacefied and reconciled vnto vs, there is no doubt: we may also interprete it, a propiciator, as though that word were put in the mas­kuline gender, that euen as we call Christ, [...], that is a sauior, so we may call him [...], that is, a pacefier. Neyther paraduenture is this farre from the true and proper sence, if we vnderstand Christ to be our pacification. For Iohn in his epistle the 2. chapiter calleth Christ [...], that is, our pacification, where he thus writeth, My little children, these thynges I write vnto you, that ye sinne not. But and if any man sinne, we haue an aduocate with the father, Iesus Christ the iust: and he is the propitiatiō for our sinnes: and not for our sinnes only, but also for the sinnes of the whole world. But as I haue sayd the first exposition pleaseth me best, and that for this cause chiefely, because a little afterward is sayd,

By his bloud.] For the maner of the high priest of the Hebrues was, once euery yeare to sprinkle the propitiatory or mercy seat, with bloud, when he en­tred into the place which was called Sancta sanctorū, that is, the holy of holyes. Nether is it without a cause that the Apostle here straightway addeth, By faith: forasmuch as our aduersaries also do graunt y ^• by Christ commeth rightousnes vnto vs, but they will not once declare, by what meanes we apply the same vnto vs, How Christ is sayd of the Papistes to be our re­demer. and make it ours: which thing Paule now plainly expresseth. They seme alwaies to tende this way, that Christ therfore hath redemed vs, because he is to be coun­ted the chiefe and hed of our merites: as though (as their common phrase of speache is) Christ deserued for vs onely the first grace, and afterward leaueth vs wholye to our selues. But this is to muche niggardly and maliciously to vse the benefite of God. Wherefore seing now we vnderstand hym, we wil continually oppose vnto the iustice of God, the death of Christ, as a full satisfaction of our sinnes.

To declare his righteousnes.] Hitherto we haue spoken of the efficient cause of iustification, which is, God, and his mercy. But those whiche are iustified, & per­taine to the materiall cause, are men of all sortes being guilty of sinnes, and desti­tute The order of iustifica­tion. of the grace of God. The instrumentes also haue bene declared. The one in­strument is as touching God, and the same is Christ, whome the goodnes of God hath vsed for a sacrifice: the other instrument as touching vs, is faith, whereby we take hold of the mercy of God, and of his promises. Now speaketh he of the ende. The end of iustification God would to no other end in such sort iustifie vs, but to declare his righteousnes: which commeth not to passe, but by communicating it with others. For thē doth a man declare his riches, when he enricheth others: then declareth a man his know­ledge, [Page 65] when he enstructeth others: then also sheweth he his strength, when he strēg­thned others: as Ambrose also saith: That the righteousnes of God is made manifest in iustifieng of vs, because he rendreth according to his promises which he hath made. But there is no smal emphasis in this, that vnto righteousnes he addeth this word, His, Iustificati­on by faith hath t [...]o com­modities. to declare that there is vtterly no righteousnes of ours. Chrisostom vpon this place saith: Be not afearde, for this righteousnes consisteth not of workes, but of fayth, and he addeth, that in it are two excellent commodities: First, for that it is easy: secondly, be­cause God by it declareth his owne proper righteousnes.

By the remission of the sinnes that are passed.] I knowe not what moued A strang reding and interpreta­tion of Ambrose. Ambrose, not to read, remission, but, purpose. And in his interpretation he saith: be­cause God purposed to deliuer not onely those which dwell in heauen, but also those which were in hell. Whch thinges seme not to serue for this place. Erasmus supposeth y ^• he red not [...], which signifieth, remissiō, but [...], which signifieth purpose, & this reading also doth Augustine follow in his boke de spiritu & litera, y ^e xiij. cha. But it is best, we rede, as the cōmō readyng hath it. For so is expressed vnto vs, in what thyng chieflye consisteth iustification, namely, in the remission of sinnes. Whiche thyng Dauid setteth forth expressedly when he saith: Blessed are they whose iniqui­ties In what thing chief­ly consisteth iustificatiō. are forgeuen. It commeth in deede by the benefite of the holy ghost, that besides the forgeuenes of sinnes, followeth an instauration or renewing of the whole mā. But in the first principall pointe consisteth the summe of iustification, namelye, the forgeuenes of sinnes. This particle which is added,

Of the sinnes passed.] accordyng to the opinion of some is put, to take away licentiousnes of sinnyng, that men should not thinke, that after they haue obteined righteousnes at Gods hand, they should then liue losely. But it is to be thought ra­ther, that the Apostle would hereby shew the infirmity of the lawe, and of philoso­phy, & of humayne strengthes, as thinges which were not able to put away sinne. Sinne vndoubtedly continueth and abideth, vntill righteousnes be by faith com­municated vnto vs. And that it did still abide, we shall afterwarde heare of Paule, when a little after he sayth: that sinne raigned from Adam euen vnto Moses: and that he therby proueth, for that death did spread abrode into all mē. And yet cānot by this place be proued, that men after iustification can not fall, which falles through After iusti­fication we still fall. An error of the Noua­tians. fayth, must be forgeuen by iustification agayne obteined. Wherfore the Nouatiās did hereof vnaptly gather, that after baptisme, forgeuenes of sinnes should not be geuen vnto them that fell. Althoughe they beyng compelled by the force of argu­ments confessed, that God in dede can geue remission of wicked actes after bap­tisme: but to vs in the church, it is not lawfull to exercise or to promise any suche forgeuenes. But they very ill weighed what was said to Peter, that he should for­geue his penitent brother, not onely seuen tymes, but also seuenty tymes seuen tymes. Paules meanyng in this place is to declare the state of man, before he at­tayneth vnto iustification, namely, that he is altogether in sinne. Iustification em­braceth What ma­ner ones we be when the righte­ousnes of God first findeth vs. Against woorkes preparato­r [...]. Christ is perpetually one, and the selfe same medi­ator. vs when we are in that state, that we bring nothyng vnto God from our owne selues, but onely sins to be forgeuē. Which vndoubtedly, whē they are forge­uen, it followeth of necessity that they went before. Wherfore by this place are ra­ther cōfuted workes (as they call thē) of preparatiō, thē that it maketh any thyng on Nouatus side. And without doubt theyr opinion is vtterly to be reiected, which thinke, that the first iustification in dede commeth vnto vs fréely, and y ^e we should be by baptisme regenerated, are not required good workes to go before. But if we chaunce afterward (say they) to sin, then is it necessary, that we make satisfaction. As though Christ were not the self same mediator at one tyme, y ^e he is at an other time. Iohn most manifestly cōfuteth those mē, saying, Little children, these thinges I write vnto you, that ye sinne not: but if we sinne, we haue an aduocate wyth the father, Iesus Christ, whom he calleth [...], that is, our propitiation. By which wordes we gather y ^e after baptisme also, if we chance to fal, Christ is our iustification, and not our workes. Neither is it conuenient to thinke, that the estate of them, whiche by greuous falles haue turned away from Christ, is better then theyrs, which are not as yet cōuerted vnto him, so that though before they could not iustifie themselues, [Page] they are afterward able to do it. Wherfore we must nedes thinke, that by repen­taunce is againe obtained the selfe maner of iustificatiō, y ^e was before in baptism, or to speake more vprightly, whē we were first regenerate by faith. Wherfore, I The same maner of iustification after bap­tisme which was before can not inough wonder, what came in their heds of Cullen, those moste great de­fenders of abuses, in that their booke called Antididagma, where they gooe about to put a difference betwene that repentaunce which we preach vnto infidels, and y ^• repentaunce which is to be done of Christiās that haue fallē into greuous crimes. They graunt, y ^e as touching infidels, we should by y ^e law of Moses, vpbraide vnto thē those wicked factes, which they haue committed: and then set forth Christ vn­to them, as a remedy and medicine of so great euils. But they affirme, that vnto those which being Christians haue contaminated themselues with sinnes, are to be inculcated the giftes and benefites, from whiche they haue fallen: and to be set forth vnto them the exercises of the spirite, by which they may be agayne holpen. And for this their sentence they cite certaine places of the Scripture. First, that which is written in the Apoc. Remember from whence thou hast fallē, and do the first workes. Otherwise I come vnto thee. And vnto the Galathians, Paule saith: O ye foolish Galathians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, to whome Iesus Christ was before described, and before your eyes crucified. Farther to the Hebrewes we reade, And if any mā shal make voyd the law of Moses, he is vnder the witnes of two or thre without any mercy slain. How much more greuous punishmēts abide those which haue troden vnder foot the bloud of the sonne of God. Lastly, they bring a place out of y ^e latter Epistle to the Corrint. the 7. chapter, Where Paule seemeth to haue made mencion of satisfaction to be made after crimes committed. They thinke also that Ambrose maketh on theyr side, when he interpreteth these woordes oute of the 11. chap. to the Romanes, The giftes of God are without repentaunce. Because (sayth he) grace in baptisme seeketh not sighinge or mourning or any woorke, but onely profession from the harte. And a little afterwarde he sayth, that in the first entraunce of fayth, is not required repentaunce, for the gift of God freely forgeueth sins in baptisme. And they faine, that they speake these things, that we should not geue our selues to slouthfulnes or sluggishnes, and least some should imagine an idle iustificati­and a repentance without fruite. Repentance (say they) whiche is added after baptisme, is of that kinde, that it hath ioyned with it most feruent prayers, and mourning, and sighing, and almes geuing to our neyghbours, and spiritual ex­cercises, There is but one maner of true repentance. by whiche maye be washed away sinnes committed. But whatsoeuer those men say, there is but one manner of true repentaunce, whiche is, that we shoulde from the hart be sorry for the sinnes whiche we haue commited, whiche haue alienated God frō vs. Vnto which sorrow is added, a desire of forgeuenes, and thereunto also are adioyned prayers to attayne the same, with a full pur­pose not to runne any more into the like sinnes, and wyth a wyll to mortefy the old man, and to put on the new man. And all these thinges oughte to leane vnto Vnto Christians repentance is a perpe­tual compa­nion, how be it it is sometimes grea­ter and somtimes lesser In the bap­tisme of them that are of full age is required repen­tance. faith, for without it they cannot consiste. And in a christian man is perpetuallye this kinde of repentance, so long as he liueth here: although we graunte, that it is greater, when we haue committed greuouser sinnes: whiche thinge then vn­doubtedly cōmeth to passe, when after grace once receaued we fal againe. But as the common sayinge is, more and lesse chaunge not the nature and kinde of thinges. But whereas these men fayne, that in baptisme is not required repen­taunce, and especiallye when they that are of full age are baptised, it is both vayne, and also manifestlye repugnaunte vnto the holye scriptures. For in the Actes of the Apostles, when the people had heard the sermon of Peter, they were smitten in the hart, and sayd, Ye men & brethern, what ought we to do? Vnto whom Peter aunswered, that they should repent them. And when the Iewes were bap­tised of Iohn, they were smitten with such a sorrow of repentance, that of theyr owne accord also they confessed theyr sinnes. Which selfe thinge the Ephesians also did, when they brought foorth their wicked bookes to be burnt. And as tou­ching Ambrose, vnles he be vnderstanded of Ecclesiasticall satisfactions, for that [Page 66] the church requireth not them for sinnes before baptisme, that which he writeth, is not true. For in very déede it is not possible, that a man should from the hart Before baptisme wer not requi­red ecclesi­asticall sa­tisfactions. be conuerted vnto God, and come vnto Christe, to be washed in baptisme, but that he must ernestly repente him of his former life. Neyther can I see, why it is not conueniēt to vse the ministery of the law, to preach it vnto those which haue fallē away frō Christ, as well as vnto those, which are not as yet cōuerted. For it is certayne that Christ entreated with the Apostles touching the lawe in the. 5 and 6. chapters of Mathew, when yet notwithstandinge they had nowe both be­leued in him, and also followed him. Paule also in this self same epistle, which he wrote vnto the faithfull, in the 7. chap. vseth a testimony of the law to the decla­racion of concupiscence. And in the first to Timothy, he pronounceth the law to be good, so that a man lawfully vse it. Neyther do those places of the Apocalipse, & vnto the hebrewes, and vnto the Galathians teach any other thinge. For the vp­brayding of benefites receaued, forasmuch as it reproueth men of ingratitude, layeth before them the transgression of the law. For to sinne is nothinge els, but to violate the commaundementes of God, which are contained in the law. Nei­ther is there anye mencion made of satisfaction in the latter Epistle to the Corrinthians, as these men fayne there is. For, that word which Paule there v­seth, A place in the latter epistle to the Corrin. is in Greeke, [...]. Neither mente the Apostle in that place any thinge els, then to declare, that he was very glad that his first letters had brought forth in the Corrinthians a study, [...], that is, & an indignatiō. For that they had excommunicated the incestuous person, whom Paule had noted vnto them, and had declared that they were not a little sory for that, which Paule had repro­ued in them. So vtterlye far of is it, that that place commendeth vnto vs Eccle­siasticall satisfactions: of which yet there is no suche cause why these men should so much boast of, when as in theyr churches they now are vtterly cleane out of The true ecclesiasti­call satisfac­tions ar ba­nished out of the Church of the Pa­pistes. How the fathers as­signed re­mission of sinnes to good woor­kes. God bea­reth with sinnes. vre: neither nowe haue they any other satisfactions, then those whiche they en­ioyne men after auricular confession, and which no manne can fully performe, vnles he be already before absolued of the priest, whiche is vtterly contrarye to the vsage of the elders. And if at any time we reade, that the fathers attributed remission of sins or righteousnes vnto almes geuing or vnto other good works, eyther they are vtterly not to be harkened vnto, or els they are to be vnderstan­ded to speake of woorkes, as they are effectes of fayth. They may also by the name of sinne sometimes vnderstand the paines and punishmentes whiche are due vnto sinnes: which punishmentes oftentimes are either mittigated or takē away, if woorthy fruites follow repentaunce.

Thorough the patience of God.] By these woordes is signified, that God remitteth those sinnes, which he hath long time before borne with: when as o­therwise men as touching themselues, deserue to be punished, euen straightway so soone as they haue sinned. But God is mercifull, and slow to anger: whiche thing he declared when he sent the floude, when he destroyed Sodom, and ouer­threw the publike wealth of the Iewes. And we finde him also to be euen suche a one towardes euery one of vs perticularly. For he wayteth long that we should repent vs. Which thing if we do not, we heape vnto our selues wrath in the day of wrath, & of the reuelation of the iust iudgement of God. And by this pacience of God, we knowe that that is true, whiche Ezechiel sayth, that God will not the death of a sinner, but rather that he should be cōuerted and liue. Neither here ought We must iudge by the will of God reue­led and not by hys se­cret will. we to haue a respect vnto the secret will of God whiche vnto vs is vnknowne & obscure. For we oughte to iudge of it as by the holye scriptures and by daylye experiēce it is setforth vnto vs, and may be known. For he suffreth long, and by scriptures, sermons, scourges, and finally by all manner of meanes and wayes calleth backe sinners vnto him.

At this present time.] Chrisostome interpreteth this of the cōming of Christ in the flesh. For that then was he most chiefly geuen, & the pacience of God was declared to be so muche the greater, for that then all manner of vices were rife: [Page] and when men séemed to haue deserued to be moste gréeuouslye punished, euen then did the mercye of God most chieflye shine vpon them. And it seemeth that When sins semed most worthy to be punished then most of all shined forth the mercy of God. The f [...]lnes of time. Paule, euery where wonderfully extolleth this time, wherein God so singularly declared his beneuolence toward men, that he gaue his onely begotten sonne for our saluation. And that time wherein God came vnto vs, he calleth the fulnes of times.

That he might be iuste and a iustifier of him, vvhiche is of the fayth of Iesus Christ.] Here is touched the reason why God appoynted after thys manner to forgeue sinnes: namelye, that his righteousnes moughte, the more appeare, we vse to say, that in a manne there is a notable qualitye, when as out of the same fountayne others are pertakers thereof. But there is an Emphasis or strength in this forme of speaking, That he might be iust.] Wherby we vnderstād that he is of himselfe iust, neither ought we to presume to chalenge the same to our selues. And he addeth, Of the fayth of Iesus Christ, because by that meanes the righte­ousnes of God doth better appeare, then if we shoulde clayme it vnto our selues by workes.

Where is then thy glorying? It is excluded. By what law? By the lawe of workes? No, but by the lawe of fayth. Therefore we conclude that a man is iustified by fayth, without the workes of the law. God, is he the God of the Iewes only, and not of the Gē ­tiles also? Yes euen of the Gentiles also. For it is one God who shall iustifie circumcision by faith, & vncircumcision through fayth. Do we then make the lawof none effect? God forbid, yea rather we establishe the law.

VVherefore thy glorying is excluded. By what lawe? By the lawe of workes? No, but by the lawe of fayth.] After that he had declared his proposition, now Epiphone­ma. as it were by a conclusion he geueth a definitiue sentence of that, which he put forth at the beginning of the chapiter, when he sayd, what is then the preferment of the Iewe? or what is the profite of circumcision? In this place he maketh answere, that as touching iustification the Iewes had nothing aboue others, whereof they might glory, for that by those thinges which haue bene now spoken, their glorying is excluded. In the Greke booke is not reade this woord, thy. And Ambrose thinketh that these thinges are spoken against the Iewes. For against thē peculiarly contēded he now. So farre is it of, that the law of works exclu­deth glorying, that rather it ministreth matter to glory of. And by this woorde lawe, the Apostle vnderstandeth doctrine, for it hath the power to moderate and The Law of woorkes ministreth matter of boasting. What this woord law, signifieth. gouerne our strengthes and willes to the executing of any thing, as touching knowledge & doctrine or instruction. And in other places he applieth this worde lawe to diuers thinges, as, The lawe of the spirite, The law of the fleshe, the lawe of the members, the lawe of the minde, and such other like. The lawe of workes is, that which decreeth that righteousnes oughte to be gotten by workes. But the lawe of fayth teacheth, that it is to be hoped for of the mercy of God. And Chri­sostome sayth, that the lawe of fayth is, that by grace we are saued: and he thin­keth, that the Apostle vseth the name of the lawe, to the ende he would the lesse offend the Iewes, which much delighted in that worde. For by that meanes he semed to attribute some honour vnto the lawe, which had not ill deserued of What glo­rieng is. The contrariety be­twene the law of faith and the law of workes. Where me­rites are there is glorieng. men. Glorying, according to the definition thereof, is a boasting of some good thing. And how repugnāt these two lawes are one to the other, we ar manifest­ly tought in the Gospel, where the Pharisey speaketh thus to God: I geue thankes vnto thee, that I am not as other men: I fast twise in the weake. &c. Here he maketh mencion of workes only: ouerhipping the grace of God, as much as lay in him. But the other, namely the Publicane, prayd with fayth, God be mercifull vnto me a sinner. In which words he maketh no mencion at all of works. And seeing that God will haue all glorying excluded, it is manifest, how they erre, which [Page 68] defend merites. For where they haue place, there wanteth not glorying. They which glory, thinke that both saluation, and righteousnes, and eternall life are dew vnto them. But he which leneth vnto the lawe of fayth, ought not in any Debte may be taken two maner of wayes. wyse to perswade himselfe of any such thing. Although we mought make such a distinction, that debt may sometymes be taken as it is referred vnto our la­bours, and so it hath a respect vnto reward, as the Apostle will playnly after­ward declare when he sayth, that vnto hym which worketh, are ward is imputed, not according to grace, but according to debt: and debt may be taken an other way, as it hath a respect vnto a promise: when a thing is dew vnto a man, not that he hath deserued it, but because by our promise we haue bound our selues to geue it vnto hym. Of which thing we haue an example in those giftes, which are con­firmed by contractes and hand writinges. And agaynst this kinde of debt, the lawe of fayth is not. But of it springeth no glorying: but our aduersaryes doo not vndoubtedly exclude glorying, when they say, that vnto the repentaunte is graunted remission of sinnes, so that she repentaunce be mete, and (as they call it) sufficient. In this their saying they of purpose resiste the will of God: which vtterly tendeth to this, that all glorying should be excluded from vs. Yea Chri­sostome affirmeth, that Christ for no other cause so long tyme differred his com­ming in the flesh, but to kepe downe mans proude Pecoks tayle. For if he had come straight way at the beginning vnto vs, men would easely haue sayd, that Why the sonne of god diffe [...]red his com­ming so long. they had not then so great neede of hym, that without him they could not be sa­ued: wherefore he would, that mankinde should so long tyme be oppressed with the seruitude of sinnes, and burthen of the lawe, vntill they should vnderstand, that they had vtterly nede of a redemer. But why God so much laboreth, to de­stroy our glory, the holy scriptures aboundantly inough declare: namely, that Why God will haue our glory to be repressed his glory might the more brightly sinne forth. Wherefore it is manifest, that whatsoeuer glory we claime vnto our selues, all that do we robbe from the glo­ry of God. Neyther nedeth it any greate exposition, what Paule meaneth by the lawe of workes. For by that word he vnderstandeth as well the lawe of na­ture, as the lawe of Moses, and also mans lawe. For that all these lawes do en­gender glory, if a man can vaunt that he can fulfill them.

VVe conclude therefore that man is iustefied by faith without the vvoorkes of the lavve.] Those thinges which he before sayd, he confirmeth with a briefe conclusion: which by a reason thereunto annexed he will afterward proue. And where as he sayth Arbitramur, that is, we think, in Greke it is [...], which signifieth not to thinke or to suppose, but in this place it is to conclude, to in­ferre, and certaynly to demonstrate, namily, of those thinges which before were spoken. In which signification it is taken in the 6. chapter: when the A­postle sayth, So thynke ye also, that ye are dead vnto sinne, but are alyue to God in Ie­sus Christ our Lord. Where this word, thinke ye, is [...], and that which is thereby signified is, to haue for certayne. And as touching this thyng, Ambrose is of our mind, and he vnderstandeth these words, man is iustified without works, of the Gentiles. But Chrisostome contrary wyse thinketh, that by this word, man, is ment nature, to make the sētence of the Apostle more ample and large: whose iudgement I mislike not, for it agreeth as well with the Iewes, as with the Gentiles, not to attayne vnto sound righteousnes by workes, but by fayth. Further seing the Apostle so expressedly sayth, that man is iustified without the workes of the lawe, h [...]reof is inferred that which we before also tought, namely, that it is fayth only which iustifieth: which thing not only Origine, vpon this place, but also Chrisostome acknowledgeth, who fayth, that fayth only Faith only iustifieth as Origē and Chrisostōe vpon thys place con­fesse. is required to obtayne this righteousnes. But I heare our aduersaries say, that whē we reade in the fathers, That fayth only iustifieth, that word, only, is to be vn­derstanded principally, for that it hath in iustification the chiefest partes. And they bringe a place or two, where this word only so signifieth. But vndoubtedly if a mā weigh Pauls words well, they wil not agree with this interpretatiō: For [Page] he putteth righteousnes without y ^e works of the law: which is not true, if works do so follow fayth, that with it they bring forth iustification in the elect of God. An obiectiō of the aduersaries. Simple men some­times here­in gaue place vnto the papists, but when they vnder­stood theyr guile, they returned. againe into the right­way. Dangers may be a­noyded by an vprighte interpreta­tion. The aduersaries cry out, that if we teach mē after this sorte, we then open a win­dow vnto sluggishnes and flouthfulnes. Vnto which their coloured pretēces, some of our men haue sometimes simply and without guile consented: who when they saw, that true faith whiche iustifieth, hath alwayes ioyned with it good works, ab­steyned in their sermons from that worde Onely. But afterward, when they vnderstoode the fraude of the aduersaries, whiche obtruded this deuise, to the ende they might at the length teach the people according to their owne fayned inuentions, that men are not onely by faith, but also by workes iustified, they returned vnto their olde forme of speaking, that the people should not be any more deceiued. And seyng Paule, most warely alwayes eschued flaunders and offences of the hearers, so much as he might by the truth of the scriptures, and we sée, that he most mani­festly teacheth those things, wherof most plainely followeth, That fayth onely iu­stifieth, we ought not to be afeard of such daungers, which may easily be auoyded, if we aptly adde an vpright interpretation of that which we speake. They agayne obiect vnto vs, that workes of the law in this place signifie ceremonies. Vnto whō we aunswer, as we haue before already said, that the question in dede began about ceremonies: but Paule dissolueth it vniuersally, and answereth in suche sorte, that he concludeth of all kinde of workes. Wherfore the reason which he bringeth in, in the first place, That God is the God not onely of the Iewes, but also of the Gentiles, hath a respecte vnto ceremonies. For the Ethnikes had not receiued the ceremonies of It is pro­ued that here is en­treated also of morall workes. the Iewes. But afterward when he addeth, that by faith the lawe is not abolished, but rather established, he declareth that his exposition is chiefly to be vnderstanded touchyng morall workes, which faith abolisheth not, but rather confirmeth. Which thing we cannot affirme of ceremonies, whiche we sée are by Christ, and his fayth taken away. Farther, in that he before sayd, that all men haue sinned, and were desti­tute of the glory of God, and by that meanes euery mouth is stopped, and the whole world made guilty vnto God, it sufficiently declareth, of what law he speaketh. And so doth that also where he sayth: that the law sheweth sinne, and that also which he citeth out of Dauid. No liuing creature shall be iustified in thy sight: and many other thynges which afterward in their places we shall sée, do sufficiently shew, that the wordes of the Apostle comprehend also morall preceptes. Wherfore workes are excluded, Woorkes ar excluded from the cause of iustification, but not frō the effect therof. but they are excluded as from the cause of iustification: but not as from the effect. And Christe to declare this to be true, in Luke sayde, When ye haue done all these thinges, say ye, we are vnprofitable seruantes, vnto whom neither is this in deede due, to haue thankes geuen vnto vs. But if by workes, we should attayne vnto iustificati­on, then should we not be vnprofitable in doyng well, and vnto vs should be farre greater things due, then geuing of thankes.

God, is he the God of the Iewes onely? and not of the Gentles also? Yes, euen of the Gentles also.] He proueth now his proposition: namely, that men are iustified without the workes of the law. For if righteousnes should depende of them, God mought seme to haue bene the God onely of the Hebrewes, and to haue left the Gentles without hope of saluation, as though he were not their God. This reason leadeth to absurditie, as though God were a taker of partes, which thing is The idols of the Eth­nikes were [...]diuerse partes or sides. God fauo­red the Iewes, but yet he for sooke not other nations. An error of Aben Ezre. by no meanes to be attributed vnto him: as the Ethnikes ascribed vnto their idols, when they fayned y ^• some toke part wyth the Troyans, & some with the Grecians, so that they fought also one against an other, and lamented when things went not with thē as they defired. But with the true God, is no such acceptiō of persōs. It is true in dede, that some singuler giftes were geuen vnto the Iewes, but yet not in such sorte, that other nations were forsaken. Howbeit Aben Esdra durst take vpō him to define, that Gods prouidence reacheth not vnto euery singuler mā, but one­ly as touching the Israelites, vnto the other he faith he looked onely generally, but had ouer the Iewes a peculiar care, as touchyng euery perticuler thing by them done. But Paul [...] here testifieth that God is the God as well of the Gentles, as of [Page 68] the Iewes. And forasmuch as God is (as it is most certayn) the chiefest good thing, he communicateth himselfe vnto others, after the best maner that may be, whiche is most chiefly done, in iustifieng them. Wherfore Dauid fayd: Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord. But what blessednes can there be, wythout the gyft of iusti­fication? And vndoubtedly, God deliuereth from all euill, those whose God he is. Wherfore he suffreth them not, either to be oppressed wyth sin perpetually, or to Blessednes can not be without iustification From whence is concluded the resur­rection of the dead. be obnoxious vnto eternall punishmentes. By this meanes Christ concludeth the resurrection of the dead, for that in the scriptures is written. I am the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Iacob. For if he were their God, then is it necessary that he at the length deliuer them from euill, and from the payne of death: which thyng by y ^• resurrection he will performe vnto them, when he shall redeme them from death. And it is manifest, that that ought to be graunted vnto all men, whereby all men are iustified. And forasmuch as this commeth to passe by the benefite of God, ther­by is concluded that God is the God of all those, vnto whome he geueth his righte­ousnes, from which number the Gentles can not be excluded, when as in the time of the Apostles, they both came vnto Christ, and also most manifestly receiued the holy ghost, as did other which beleued in Christ and were of the Iewes. And for as much as God hath created all maner of thinges vniuersally, and by his prouidence gouerneth all thinges, and formed the first one man, from whome is spred abrode Places by which is proued that vnto the Gentiles also pertai­neth the true God. all our whole kinde, shall not he be thought to be the God of al men? Which thing also is hereby proued, for that in the holy scripture it is written, That euery one that calleth vpon the name of the Lord shall be saued. And againe it is sayd, They which be­leue and are baptised, shalbe saued. And vnto this tendeth that which is sayde of the prophet, All flesh shall see the sauyng health of God, where by fleshe we vnderstande man. And this thyng also do all those oracles testifie, in whiche is intreated of the callyng of the Gentles: as is that which was said vnto Abraham: In thy sede shall all nations be blessed. And Iacob affirmed, that the scepter should not be taken away frō Iuda, vntill he came which should be sent: and he (sayth he) shall be the expectatiō of the Gentles. In Esay also we reade of the roote or féede of Iesse, that in him the Gentles should hope. And it were an infinite labour to rehearse all the places, which serue to this purpose. The Hebrewes boasted, that the lawe was geuen for them. But yet, that as touchyng thys parte the Gentles were not neglected, hereby is testi­fied, The Gen­tles were not exclu­ded from the Law. in that there moughte come vnto the publike wealthe of the Iewes and vnto theyr lawes as manye Proselites as woulde. And when the Israelites were called oute of Egipte, there followed them no small multitude of the Egiptians, vpon whome God in the deserte bestowed the selfe same bene­fites and giftes, that he gaue vnto the Iewes. And he made a promise in his lawes, that straungers also shoulde be admitted to the eatinge of the paschall Lambe, so that they woulde be circumcised. By all whiche thinges it is manifest that the Gentiles were not neglected of God euen as touchinge the benefite of the lawe. Farther we knowe, that Melohisedech, who hath a singular prayse in Ethnikes praised in the scrip­tures. the lawe, was commended as iuste, and the priest of the moste [...]ygh God. Also Iethro, y ^e father in law of Moses, & Iobe, being Gentiles are notably cōmended in the holy scriptures. It is certayne also, that Queene Saba is commended, be­cause she came to heare the wisedome of Salomon. Nether were the Niniuites o­mitted, who when they had repented, were saued. By these thinges it is mani­fest, that before the comming of Christ amongst the Gētiles, were some, which had the true God, and worshipped him for God. Further after Christ was now come, there is none but playnely seeth, how it was declared, that God had a care ouer the Gentiles. He disdayned not the woman of Samaria, nor the wo­man of Chanaan, which were Ethnikes: and Cornelius the Centurion, before he had receaued baptisme, was accepted of God: and when he had beleeued, he receaued the holy ghost in a visible forme, before he was baptised. Neyther came Peter vnto him without an assured oracle of God, when as vnto him was shewed a vessell let downe from heauē, wherein were contayned both serpents, [Page] and all kind of vncleane beastes: of which it was sayd vnto hym, that he should kyll & eate. This also last of all is cōfirmed by the history of the Eunuch, which longed vnto Candaces Queene of the Ethyopians, who was by a singular mi­racle instructed of Phillip, & baptised. This thing wōderfully yrked the Iewes, that they sawe the Ethnikes admitted vnto grace without the lawe. But they ought to haue remembred, as sayth Tertullian in his booke agaynst the Iewes, that whereas they so much boasted of the lawe, the lawe was not first geuen vnto them. For before them. Adam first receaued it in paradise: and in that which was geuen vnto hym, was contayned, whatsoeuer was afterward by Moses commaunded in the morall preceptes, especially as touching the princi­cipall The Law was geuen vnto Adā, wherefore not the Iewes onely had the law but all men in Adam. poyntes. For if Adam had loued God with all hys hart, how could he haue transgressed his commaundement? And if he had beleued him, when he threatened death vnto him, he would not haue bene so vnaduised, to comitte that which was the cause of death. And he also, if he had loued his neighbour, as he was bounde to do, woulde not by his transgression haue throwen all his whole posterity into death. And if he would haue delt iustly, he would in no case haue taken away an other mans fruite, which pertayned vnto him. These thinges hath Tertullian excellently well noted, of the law geuen in paradise vn­to the first man and woman. And he also affirmeth, that after this law succe­ded that lawe, which is called the lawe of nature. I will not speake, that Noe The law of nature. The law geuen vnto Noe. receaued some preceptes, which were common vnto all mankind. And if God would afterward by Moses more plainly expresse the lawes, which he had before geuen, there is no cause, why the Iewes should contemne the Gētles, as though they were left without the lawe. For it is most manifest that whē Christ came, he did set forth a most perfect explication of the doctrine, which was then set a­brode amongest all men, & of all lawes: whereby playnly appeareth, how fow­ly The rash­nes of the Iewes. the Hebrues are deceaued which are so rauished with the loue of theyr owne stocke, that they will rather haue God to want of his glory, that he should not be the God of all mē, nor his prouidēce reach vnto all mē, then they will confesse, that they alone are not the people, whom God hath a care ouer & loueth. In this Why God is sayd to be the God of some. place let vs note, that the Apostle bringeth a reasō, why God is chiefly called the God of some, namely, because he iustifieth them. For straightway he addeth:

VVho shall iustify circumcision of fayth, and vncircumcision by fayth.] What is vnderstand by circumcision, and vncircumcision, we haue elswhere declared: they at to be vnderstand by the figure Metonomia, so that by the signe Metono­mia. we must vnderstand those thinges which are by it signified. These prepositions of and by, in this place, signifie one and the selfe same thing. They serue to am­plifie the matter, as in an other place Paule sayd of God, All thinges were made of hym, and by hym. The difference of these prepositions bred sometymes a gree­uous contencion betwene the Grekes and the Lattines. The Lattines sayd that the holy ghost proceded not only of y ^e father, but also of y ^e son. On the cōtra­ry, A contenciō of the Grekes & the lattines toching the holy ghost. the Grekes affirmed, that he proceded of the father: but by the sonne, & not of the sonne. But after they had long tyme contended, they saw that their conten­cion was only about wordes. By these thinges which haue now bene spoken, we euidently see, that, as touching iustification, the Gentles are made equall with the Iewes: which is a very great comfort vnto vs. Neyther ought we to be any thyng moued, that Paule here vseth a verbe of the future tense, when he faith, Shall iustifye. For although in the olde time, very many both of the Iewes and of the Gentiles were so iustified, yet because that rarely happened, and a­mongst fewe, it was counted as not done, if we haue a respect vnto the gene­rall benefite, which happened after the comming of Christ. Neyther is the em­phasis or strength of this sentence following to be passed ouer,

For it is one God, vvho shall iustifye, &c.] For thereby is signified, that euen as there is but one God, so also to iustifye men he will vse but one waye, namely, By fayth. Those thinges which are here spoken, ought much to moue [Page 69] vs, not to contemne our neighbours. For whē we shall cōsider with out selues, One God vseth one way to ius­tefy al men. A reason why we [...] ought to loue our neighbors. An error sprong of the wordes of Paule. Woorkes that goe be­fore iustifi­cation are excluded & not those that follow. Why Peter sayd that in Paul are certaine hard thing: s. Iames se­meth tobe agaynst Paule. Conciliati­on. A place of Augustine declared. that our God, is their God also, we cā not but embrace them with a great loue, honor, & beneuolence. Neither ought we to flatter our selues touching singular benefites, which we haue receaued: forasmuch as the holy scriptures do ad­monishe vs, that many are fyrst, which shalbe last: and contrary many last, which thalbe fyrst. And Augustine in hys booke of 83. questions in hys 66. question admonisheth, that this sentence of Paule which is now proued, name­ly, that man is iustified without workes of the lawe, was peruersly vnderstand of many: which thought that men, when they beleued and were iustified, had no more any nede, to liue holily & iustly: not weighing, that Paule here speaketh of works that go before iustificatiō, & not of those which follow it. This indede is true, that there go no works before, which are y ^e causes why we should be iustified. But after we haue once obteined righteousnes, it is necessary that good works follow. And hereof he saith it came, that Peter said, that in the epistles of Paul, are certaine harde thinges, which men would peruerte accordyng to their owne lust. Iames also semeth to haue bene led so farre, that in a maner he wrote thinges con­trary vnto Paule, namely. That a man is iustified by workes: who also required, y ^e we should declare our faith by workes. Wherunto also Iohn & Iudas in their epi­stles seme to tend. But all these things are wel inough, neither ar they any thyng repugnant one to y ^e other. For Paul speaketh of workes that are done before iustificatiō: but Iames speaketh of those workes which ought to follow it. These things haue I brought out of the place of Augustine, before cited, and out of hys booke of faith and workes, the 14. chap. Who yet in the 66. question which we haue nowe alleaged, hath a certain sentence, which must be warely and aptly vnderstanded: otherwise it should not be true. For he sayth: That it is impossible, that we shoulde by workes goyng before obteyne iustification: but afterward (sayth he) it is necessarye that they follow, so that we remayne in life. And if a man beginne to beleue in the last houre of his lyfe, whē he shall streight way die, he hath nether good works going before, nor good workes followyng after, but there followeth him onely a righteousnes of fayth, and by it he is saued. Augustine semeth by those wordes to affirme, that it is possible, that true fayth which iustifieth may be had without works, which in very dede is false. For when a manne at the extremitie of death beleeueth, it is not possible but that he loueth God and his neighbour, and calleth vpon him, and is sory for those thinges, which he hath before wickedly committed. Wherfore these kindes of good workes which at the least haue place in the mynde, follow his faith. But I thinke Augu­stine vnderstoode by good workes, those workes which are done outwardly, & may be sene of men.

Do we then thorough faith make the law of none effect? God forbid. Yea rather we establishe the law.] Here is vsed the figure Occupatio, or a preuen­ting. For a man mought haue said, If the law bring not righteousnes, why then did God geue it? Why may we not then liue losely, and follow our lustes? Not so vndoubtedly, saith Paule. For the law is not abolished by faith, but rather confir­med. He dispatcheth himselfe of this question briefly, but afterward he entreateth of it more largely. These men thought that Paule had made voide the law, seing he had abrogated ceremonies. But in abrogating them, he exercised the liberty which was graunted him in the Gospell. But vnto the lawe, he did no iniury. For God in God hym­selfe aboli­shed ceremonies and not Paule. Pa [...]alogis­mus accidē tis. Ceremonis are acciden­ces of the Law. very dede would not, that the olde ceremonies should continue any longer. And yet notwithstanding Paule lieth not, when he sayth, that he in no case by fayth maketh the law voyde. And they which reason, that it is abolished, bicause ceremonies are made of none effect, do make a false argument of the Accident. For though the Ac­cidences of any thing be taken away, it doth not follow, that the thing it selfe is al­so streight way abolished. But that is counted accident vnto the law, which hath not his force as touching all places and all tymes, and all men. And that ceremonies are so, it is not to be doubted. For when the people were in captiuitie, they were not obserued. Wherfore the Israelites being among the Chaldeans sayd, That they [Page] could not sing their song in a strange land. And Daniel complained, that in that capti­uity the people wanted both a captayne and sacrifice. Circumcision all the whyle they were in the desert, was not obserued: and they fought on the Sabboth day, as we rede in the bookes of the Machabées. Which bokes if a mā reiect, we haue again in the booke of Iosua, that God commaunded the Israelites, to go about the citie of Iericho by the space of seuen dayes, and to cary aboute the arke with them, and to sound with trompets. Which workes could not be done seuen dayes together, but that the Saboth day must nedes be one. But if a man demaund, if these be the acci­dences There was in ceremo­nis some principall thing which should al­wayes a­bide. God is in all thinges to be ac­knowled­ged. of the law, what was then the principall, fyrme, and perfect thing in these ceremonies, which should alwayes abide. To aunswer to euery perticuler thyng, would now require too long a tyme. In summe this I say, God would, that men should not forget him. And therfore by certaine outward signes he prouided, that he might alwayes be set before their eies, and come into their thoughtes, that by that meanes they might euermore both worship him, and call vpon him. If they had lo­ked vpon their body, Circumcision was before their eies: If they beheld their gar­ment, they had their hemmes to consider: If they came to the table, then had they to consider of the choyce of meates: If they entred into their house, their thresholds and postes had the commaundements of God writen in them: If they had brought forth children, they had to consider, that the first borne should be redemed, and that the woman was long tyme vncleane: if they had turned themselues to their flocks or cattaile, then were the first borne to be offred vnto God: if they had gone into the fieldes, the first fruites and tenthes should be gathered and offered: If their fruites gathered should be layd vp, then had they to celebrate the feast of the Tabernacles. The reuolutions of euery wéeke, of euery month, of euery yere, or seuen yeares, or fifty yeares, had certaine rites appointed vnto it. Wherefore that which was the chiefest and principallest thing in the law, was confirmed by faith: and is now al­so retained of godly men: namely, in euery thing to remēber God, & to thinke vpon him: which now ought to be obserued without outward signes, neyther is that a­brogated either by Paule or by faith. But that God would no longer haue these out Wherby he gathereth that God would not haue hys ceremonies any lenger obserued. ward ceremonies obserued, may therby be gathered, that he hath ouerthrowen the publike wealth of the Iewes, and hath caused the citie of Ierusalem to be cleane de faced, so that now there is neither temple nor tabernacle standing, neither is the propiciatory or mercy seat to be found, from whence the voice of God was wonte to geue oracles, and the brestplate is lost, where were the precious stones, out of which, aunswere was geuen of thinges to come. The annointyng also is cleane gone, wherby he sometymes chaunged men, when they were consecrated to exe­cute any functions. For Saule prophecied when he was now annointed. Neyther is fire now had from heauen, wherewith the sacrifices were consumed. And Pro­phecies are now cleane out of vse: which thing God would not haue permitted, if his will had bene, that the ceremonies of Moses should haue continued any longer. And this chieflye is a let to the continuing of them, that it was lawfull to exercise them no where, but onely in the land promised vnto the fathers. And when the A­postle affirmeth, that by faith he establisheth y ^e law, this is chiefly to be vnderstan­ded as touching the morall partes therof. For faith bringeth with it the obedience The Law can not be obserued without sayth. of the law. Wherfore of this thing our mindes ought to be setled, y ^e without faith the law cannot be obserued: & contrariwise that by faith an obedience begon maye bée accōplished which thing also may by reasons be cōfirmed. The law cōmaūdeth y ^• we should loue God & that w ^t all our hart, w ^t all our soule, & wyth al our strēgths. But who is able to performe this, vnlesse he know God throughly, whiche thyng can not be done without faith. And if any man shall set God before him as a lawe geuer, as a most seuere iudge, and an auenger, he will rather abhorre him, & flye from him of hatred, as from a cruell slaughterman, then that his minde can ther­by be induced to loue him. But who cā without faith in Christ perswade himself, that God is vnto him as a father, or mercifull, or louing? Farther, the lawe com­maundeth, that we should call vpon him: which without faith we can neuer per­forme. [Page 70] For it is sayde, How shall they call vppon him, in whom they haue not beleued? Moreouer, we are commaunded to loue our neighboures as our selues. Whiche thing, forasmuch as it is a most hard matter to be done, we neuer accomplishe, yea rather we oftentymes therin fayle. From whence therfore shall we haue for­geuenes, that y ^• which wanteth of our righteousnes may be imputed of the righte­ousnes of Christ, vnles we vse the benefite of fayth? Augustine iudgeth, that the law is two maner of wayes cōfirmed by fayth. First, because by it we obtaine the holy ghost: whereby are ministred vnto vs strengthes, to obey the lawe. But a man may paraduenture doubt, how this can be, that by fayth we haue the holy ghost, when as of necessity he alwayes goeth before fayth. For fayth The holy ghost goeth before fayth in vs. Betwene causes and effects are certayne circuites. The holy ghost both goeth before and also fol­loweth fayth. The Law maketh vs vncertaine­of the good will of God The Law with out fayth is weake and can not con­siste. is both his gift, and also commeth from him to vs. But we answere, that be­twene the causes and the effectes seme to be certayne circuites, as it is manifest by cloudes and showers. From cloudes discend raynes, & out of waters which are in the inferior places are taken vp vapors by the heate of the heauēs, which are thickened into cloudes, out of which againe discend showers vpon the earth But in this circute, we must alwayes haue a recourse to the first, according to the order of nature: which is, whē there is supposed an humor, of which cloudes may encrease. So also must we do here. We will graūt that fayth by the bene­fite of the holy ghost springeth in vs. By which fayth, is increased the aboun­dance of the selfe same spirite, whose encrease the former fayth hath preuented: and of a greater fayth is still made a greater encrease of the spirite. But yet notwithstanding we constantly affirme, that there is but one thing chiefely, from whence all these good things flow, namely, the holy ghost. Secondly, saith Augustine the lawe is by the helpe of fayth otherwise confirmed. Because, by fayth we pray, and calling vpon God with prayers, we do not only obtayne remission of sinnes, but also so greate a portion of the spirite and of grace, that we haue strengthes to obey the lawe. Vndoubtedly the lawe if it be taken by it selfe, maketh vs both vncertayne of the good will of God, and after a sort brin­geth desperation, vnles fayth come and helpe, which both maketh vs assured, that God is pacefied and mercifull towards vs, and also by grace obtayneth the renuing of strengthes. And the Apostles phrase, whereby he sayth that by fayth he establisheth the lawe, is to be noted. For thereby he signifieth, that the lawe, if it be left vnto it selfe, and without fayth, is weake, so that it can not consiste. And therefore, vnles it be vpholden by fayth, it shall easely fall. And The woon­derful sharpnes of wit in Paule. The Law and sayth helpe one an other. this is the poynte of a singular artificer, not only to depel from him, that which is obiected, but also to declare that the selfe same maketh most of all for hys purpose. The lawe and fayth helpe one an other, and as the common saying is, geue handeseche to other. For the lawe doth as a scholemaster bring men vn­to the fayth of Christ, and on the other side, fayth bringeth this to passe, that it maketh them after a sort able to accomplishe the lawe. For strayght waye, so soone as a man beleueth in Christ, he obtayneth iustification, and is liberally endued with aboundance of the spirite, and with grace. The entent and pur­pose of the lawe, was, that a man should both be made good, and also be saued. But this thing, it was not able to performe. Then succeded fayth, and did helpe it: for through it, is a man renued, so that he is able to obey God, and his com­maundementes. Chrisostome sayth, that Paule here proueth three thinges. First, that a man may be iustified without the lawe. Secondly, that the lawe can not iustify: Thirdly, that fayth and the lawe are not repugnant one to the other. Ambrose teacheth, that therefore by fayth is the lawe established, because that those thinges, which by the lawe are commaunded to be done, are by fayth de­clared to be done. And we haue alredy before heard, that this righteousnes, which Paule here commendeth, hath testemony both of the lawe, and of the Pro­phetes. And if any man obiect, that therefore the lawe is made voyde by fayth, because by it ceremonies are abolished, he answereth that this thing therefore so happeneth, because the lawe it selfe would haue it so, and foretold, that it [Page] should so come to passe. In Daniell we reade, that after the comming of Christ, and after that he was slayne, the dayly sacrifice should be taken away, and the The Law Would and fortold that ceremonis should be made voide. Testimo­nis witnes­sing that the ceremo­nis of the Hebrues should cease holy anoynting, and such like kinde of ceremonies. Wherefore Christ did not without cause saye, The lawe and the Prophetes endured vnto Iohn baptistes tyme. Ieremy also most manifestly sayd, that an other leage should be made, farre diuers from that which was made in the olde tyme. The epistle vnto the Hebrues thereby concludeth, that that which was the olde leage and was so called, should one day be abolished. Zachary the Prophet in his 2 chapter sayth, that the city of Ie­rusalem should be inhabited without walles. Which signified that the Church of the beleuers should so be spred abroade and dispersed through out the whole world, that it should not be enclosed in by any borders or limites. Which selfe same thing Esay semeth to testefy, when he sayth, That mount Sion and the house of the Lord should be on the toppe of the hilles, so that the Gentiles should come vnto it out of al places. And Malachy the Prophet pronounced, that the name of God should be called vpon, frō the rising of the sunne to the going downe of the same, so that vnto God should euery where be offred Minchah, which many haue transferred vnto y ^• Eucharist, as though it were a sacrifice: when as yet the prophet thereby vnderstādeth pray­ers, and the offring vp euen of our selues: as Tertullian testefieth in his booke a­gaynst the Iewes, and also Ierome when he interpreteth that place. Wherefore when the Prophets seme to affirme, that ceremonyes should be transferred vn­to y ^e Ethnikes, they are so to be vnderstād, as though by the signes they ment the thinges themselues. The Ethnikes being conuerted vnto Christ, receaued that which was represented by the ceremonies of the elders. But they reiected the How the Ethnikes receued the ceremonis of the He­brues. outward signes, and thys was by fayth to confirme the lawe. And forasmuch as the Prophetes foretold, that ceremonyes should be abolished, the same is to be taken, as if it had bene spoken of the lawe, for that the Prophetes were inter­preters of the lawe. And that Christ when he should come, should chaunge the ceremonies, euen the Iewes them selues doubted not, whych thing is manifest by Iohn Baptist shewed that cere­monis should bee abrogated. the historie of Iohn Baptist, which we reade in the Gospell. For when he would purge menne conuerted vnto God, he sente them not vnto sacrifices, and vnto the ceremonies of Moses. by whiche, sinnes were sayd to be purged: but baptised them into repentaunce, to the forgeuenes of sinnes, adioyning therunto doctrine, wherein he made mention of the Father, and of the Sonne, and of the holy Gost. Which thing vndoubtedly the high Priestes, and Scribes, and Phariseys coulde in no case abyde, that he reiecting the ceremonies, which were receaued, shoulde put in their place a new maner of purging. Wherefore they sent a Messenger vnto him, to aske of him, whither he were the Messias, or Elias, or the Prophet: as it were confessing, that vnder the Messias it should come to passe, that the cere­monies of y ^e law should be abolished: & y ^e the same was not lawfull for other mē to doo. And if a man demaūd, why God gaue ceremonies, which should afterwarde be abolished, Chrisostome hath thereof a very apt similitude. If a man haue a wyfe very prone to lafciuiousnes, he shutteth her vp in certayne places, in chambers, I say, and parlers, so that shee cannot wander abroade at her pleasure. He appointeth vnto her moreouer Eunuches, wayting maydes, and handmaides, most diligentlye to haue an eye vnto her. So delte God with the Iewes. He tooke them vnto him at the beginnyng as a spouse, as it is said in the Prophet, I haue wedded thee with mercy, and with loue. And by this natiō his wil was at cōueniēt tyme to enstruct the whole world. Which thing he did by the Apostls, when Christ was now departed frō the earth. But that people was ve­ry weake and feble, and aboue measure prone to adulteries of idolatry. Wherfore God se­perated them from other nations, and would haue them to dwell in the land of Chanaan aparte by themselues, and to be kept in on euery side with ceremonies and rites, as it were by scholemaisters, vntill this spouse was so strengthened and confirmed, that her fayth was no more had in suspicion. Which thing when husbandes perceiue in their wyues, they suffer them to go at their pleasure, whither they will, and to be conuersant with menne, neither do they any more, set any kepers to watche them. So God, when he had nowe by Christ geuen vnto the church the holy ghost, he remoued away from it the custodye of [Page 71] ceremonies, and sent forth his faithfull to preach throughout the whole world. The selfe same father proueth in an other place, that the ceremonies and rites of the Iewes were not instituted of God, of a principall entente and purpose. For God woulde haue a people which should worship him in spirite and in truth. But the Israelites, which had bene con­uersant in Egipt, and had contaminated themselues with idolatry, woulde needes in any wise haue both sacrifices and ceremonies, so that if these sacrifices and rites had not bene permitted vnto them, they would haue bene redy to turne to idolatry. Wherefore God so A simili­tude. delt with them, as the maner of a wise phisition is to do, who lighting vpon one sicke of a burnyng agew, whiche by reason of his wonderfull great heate requireth in any wyse to haue some colde water geuen him, and if he haue none geuen him, he is redy to hang him­selfe, or by some other meanes to destroy himselfe, in this case the phisition beyng by ne­cessity cōpelled, commaundeth to be brought a viole full of water, which he himself hath prepared, and geueth the sicke man leaue to drinke, but yet with suche a charge, that he drinke out of nothing els, but out of that viall. So God graunted vnto the Hebrewes, sa­crifices and ceremonies, but yet so, that they should not exercise them otherwise, then he himselfe had commaunded them. And that this is true, he hereby proueth, For that God gaue not ceremo­nies, vntill alter they had made the golden caife. God prescribed not ceremonies, but when he had made open his wrath against the Israe­lites, who hurling in theyr braselets, earinges, and ringes, caused a calfe to be made for them, which they worshipped. And seyng it is so, Paul saith rightly, when he sayth, that the law is not by faith abolished, although those ceremonies be taken away. Which sentence Christ also confirmeth, when he saith: that he came not to take a­way the law, but to fulfill it. The sence of which wordes, may easely be gathered out of those thinges, which we haue before spoken. The reasons which afterward fol­low, are brought to confirme this proposition now alledged, namely, That man is iustified by faith, and that without the workes of the law. Hetherto when as at the beginning Here is re­peated the methode or order which the Apostle hath hether to kept. the Apostles had set forth, that by the Gospell and the faith of Christ commeth saluation, and righteousnes, he vsed this reason, that whersoeuer the Gospel and faith want, there is most great vnrighteousnes and vncleannes of life: but on the contrary side where these haue place, there is both righteousnes and true ho­lines. Therfore by them (saith he) come saluation and iustification. The Minor, or second proposition was proued chiefly as touching the first parte. For first the Gentles liued most filthely, although they knew God by the nature of things. Farther the Iewes were not in their conuersation one whit better then the Gentles. And this done, he declareth, wherehence the true righteousnes should be sought fort namely, of faith without workes. Which thing before he would proue, he thought it good to confute an obiection, namely, that by faith he ouerthroweth not the law, but rather by faith confirmeth it. This selfe same thing is obiected vnto vs in our dayes, that by faith, which with the Apostle we affirme to iustifie, we ouerthrowe all honest and holy workes. Of this thing do they cry out, which defend the worke wrought in the sacramentes, which boast of workes of supererogation, whiche de­fend purgatory, inuocation of saintes, and obtrude vowes and sole life. What shall we answer to these things? Paul sayth, y ^• he by faith abrogateth not the law, but ra­ther confirmed it. In which wordes he geueth a reuerence to the ceremonies insti­tuted of God, & which for their tyme were of necessity obeyed, especially for y ^e they were founded vpon y ^e word of God. But we can not so say as touching those things which we are accused to haue ouerthrowen. Bicause they are abuses and mere su­perstitions, In this dis­putacion the conditi­on of Paul and ours is diuerse. which are vtterly repugnaunt vnto the worde of God. Wherfore, we confesse, that these thinges we ouerthrow by the fayth of Christ and doctrine of the Gospell. Now haue we heard the purpose and state of the question which shall be entreated of, which we ought continually to haue before our eyes, so that vnto it must we referre, whatsoeuer is sayd in this whole discourse. And this shal be with fruite to heare those thinges which the Apostle writeth.

VVHat shal we say then, that Abraham, our Father hath found concerning the flesh? For if Abraham were iu­stified by workes, he hath wherein to reioyce, but not with God. For what sayth the Scripture, Abraham beleeued God, and it was counted to hym for rygh­teousnes.

VVhat shall we say then.] The summe of those things, which are contay­ned in this. 4. Chapter, is deuided into these partes. The first is, that we must be iustifyed after the selfe same manner that Abraham was iustifyed. The seconde, that our iustifycation commeth by the imputacion of God. The third, that it cō ­sisteth The sum of the things that shall be spo­ken of in this chap­ter. in the remisson of sinnes. In the fourth, is set foorth the time, wherein A­braham was iustifyed, and so is declared, that he attayned vnto righteousnes, before he had put in vre, any woorke of the law, namely, the worke of circumci­sion. Farther he plainely sheweth, that righteousnes is therfore had by fayth, that the promise of God mighte be firme and sure. Moreouer there is set foorth the example of Abraham and that with an amplification declarynge, howe that he considered not hys owne infyrmitye, neyther those thinges, whyche by na­ture had bene able to hynder that, which God had promised him, Lastly is she­wed, y ^• these things were not written for his sake only, but also for vs, which by faith do follow y ^e steps of y ^e self same father Abrahā Chrisostome bringeth in these things which are here spokē, after this maner: That it might seme peraduenture to It is an honorable thing to be iustified by fayth. The Apo­stle doth very well in vsing an ex­ample. some, not to be very mete & glorious, that we should by fayth be iustified witohut works. But (saith he) the matter is far otherwise: Because partly we may se, how excellent a thing this is, for Paul calleth that thing righteousnes, which we attayne vnto by faith, & here declareth, that God by this means sheweth forth & declareth his goodnes, & righteousnes: and partly bycause Abraham so great a Patriarche was after this maner iustified. It is not with out a cause that Paule placeth an example before his other arguments For the thinge that is here chefely sought for, is that the truth which is layd be­fore vs, might be made manifest, and playne. And this is the proper vse of examples, The digni­ty of Abra­ham. most manifestly to lay a thing before our eyes. And although there were greate plenty of examples, yet Paul did choose this example of Abraham, because he was both a man of God, and also one endued with most excellente vertues, & because the Hebrues continuallye boasted of him, as whome they acknowledge and craked to be the father and prince of theyr kindred. And of suche force was his authority amōgst them, that the place of the blessed was called the bosome of Of how great a va­lue iustification is. Abraham. Which name Christ would not haue vsed in his Gospell, vnlesse it had bene receaued amongst the commō people. Neither ought we to meruayle, that the Apostle so diligently and exactly bendeth himselfe to dispute of this iustifica­tion. For it is not a slight thing, nor a matter of small weight, but the principall ground of our felicitie: wherin if a mā be throughly instructed, I dare be bold to say, that he shall easely put away all abuses. And bycause our aduersaries, in it, as in the first entry, do fowly stumble and erre, therefore in other partes of religion also, are they most filthily deceaued. But in this example this is chief­ly to be marked, that, for as much as in it, is entreated of Circumsion, and A­braham is sayd to haue bene iustified, before he receaued it, some suppose, that hereby they haue a firme argument, that Paul excludeth not all woorkes from iustification: but onely ceremonies of the law. Vnto whom we answere, that Paul therefore in especial reasoned touching these ceremonies, for that for them the controuersie happened. But yet in the discourse of hys reasoning, he ming­leth many thinges, which cause that the question must of necessitie be taken ge­nerally: which thing we shall in his place note. Wherefore we graunt, that the argumentes chiefly tende to that end: but yet are they so handled, that to­gether he concludeth vniuersally of all workes. Farther, it is to be noted, that in the tyme of Abraham, and of the old law, for as much as these ceremonies [Page 72] were founded vpon the word of God, men were bound no lesse to obey them, then the other commaundementes. And yet the Apostle affirmeth that by that obedience men were not iustified. Wherefore we conclude, that those selfe same men could not be iustified by the obseruing of the other cōmaundemētes. In this place is deiected the dignitie of good works, but not vniuersally. Wherfore those thinges, which are here spoken, ought not to be drawen vnto a loose­nes of life, and to licentiousnes to sinne, but rather are to bee applied vnto the scope and meaning of Paul. Paul onely entendeth this thing, to shewe, that in good workes, is not set the cause of our iustification. Other praises and com­mendacions he aboundantly geueth vnto them. For it is not to bee thought, that by hys doctrine he would bring into contempt the most excellent vertues Paule con­temneth not the ver­tues and good works of Abraham. The temp­tacions and victories of Abraham. of a man of such estimation. For, as the Iewes make mention, Abraham was very often tempted, and yet neuertheles he continually ouercame. God called him out of his land and kinred, to lyue as a straunger in the land of Chanaan. But there he could not lyue by reason of the famine: wherefore hee was con­strayned to go downe into Egipt, where he was tempted the third tyme, when Pharao tooke away hys wyfe from him. The fourth temptacion hee suffered, when he was compelled to depart from Loth for the auoyding of contencions. Finally he was tempted, when he made warre agaynst so many kinges, and a­gaynst so victorious an host, when as he him selfe had with him but a very few. The sixt temptacion was, when he being now a very old man, was commaun­ded to receiue Circumcision. The seuenth, when king Abimelech in Gerara a­gayne tooke away hys wyfe from him. The eight, when Agar, which had conceaued by him, was constrained to flee from Sara, who afflicted her greuouslye. The ninth, when he was compelled to send away his sonne Ismael, being nowe of good age, together with hys mother. The tenth, when God required of him, to sacrifice vnto him hys onely bogotten sonne Isaack. With these & other such most excellent workes was Abraham adorned: which thinges Paule contemneth not, but only sheweth, that these were not such, that they could be opposed and set agaynst the wrath and iudgement of God, so that for theyr sakes he should haue God fauorable and mercifull. For in this place, is not entreated of the righteousnes, which is obtayned by workes, which is in vs a quality cleaning vnto vs: but only of that righteousnes, whereby we are iustified before God. The reason of the Apostle may thus be knit together: We are iustified after The argu­ment of Paule. the same maner, that Abraham was iustified: But he obtayned righteousnes by fayth, without workes: wherefore we also ought to be iustified by faith, with­out workes. The minor, or second proposition is thus proued: For if Abraham shoulde haue bene iustified by woorkes, he had glory, or merite (whiche is all one) before God. But that is not possible, that any man should haue glory be­fore Abraham obteyned righteous­nes, not by works, but by imputa­cion. God. Wherefore neyther is that possible, from whence it is deduced. And that Abraham was not iustified by workes, the seripture declareth vnto vs. For it sayth, that Abraham obtayned righteousnes by imputacion. For it sayth, Abraham beleued God, and it was counted vnto hym for righteousnes. This is the summe of Paules reason. After Chrisostomes mynde this is worthy to be noted. If any man not hauing good works should be iustified, that assuredly might seme Wherby the dignity of sayth doth chiefly appeare. The foun­dation of the example is, that all men are iu­stified after one and the selfe same manner. to be a great thinge. But this is a thing farre greater, y ^e he, which was most rich in good workes, coulde not for all that be iustified by them. Vndoubtedly hereby most manifestly appeareth the worthynes of fayth.

VVhat shall we say, that our father Abraham found.] Forasmuch as he bringeth an argument from an example, to this ground leaneth he, that it be­houeth all men to be iustified after the same maner, that Abraham was iustifi­ed. For it is the selfe same God, which iustifieth, and there is one and the selfe same nature of them which are iustified, and the righteousnes, which both then was geuen, and also is now geuē, is one and the selfe same, & it is the selfe same Christ, by whome both they and we obtayne righteousnes, Wherefore it follo­weth [Page] that all men are iustified after one and the selfe same maner. God in dede The out­warde in­strumentes which God vseth to iu­stify by, may be di­uers. may vse to it sundry instrumentes as well the scriptures of the olde testament, as of the new, and the simboles or signes also aswell of the newe sacramentes, as of the olde: when as the thinge whiche is geuen, is vtterlye one and the selfe same. Further it is necessary, that the thinges which followe, haue a similitude with the types and signes which went before. And that the fathers were formes and shadowes of our times, no man doubteth. Here let vs call to remembrance, with what mynde thinke we, toke the scribes and pharisyes, these woordes of Paul, vnto whome it appeared, that he tooke away the power of iustifieng from these excellent workes of Abraham. I doubt not, but that they were therewith all thoroughly offended, and paraduenture they resisted Paul, as though they would put away such iniury from so great a prophet, and defend his excellent good workes. We haue at this day an experiēce of their furious rage in them, which so soone as euer they heare vs speake any thing othewise then the fathers haue written, are set a fire, and counte vs not worthy to be harkened vnto. But Paul nothing passed vpon the euill reportes of the Scribes in his tyme. For they may be answered by an easy and manifest distinction: namely, that there is one righteousnes ciuile, outward, and attayned vnto by workes, and is a quality cleaning in our myndes: but there is an other righteousnes which is imputed vnto vs of God.

Our father (sayth he) peraduenture alluding vnto the name. For Abraham is called the father of many nacions. And although in the booke of Genesis, where these things are written, he was not as then called Abraham, but Abram: yet when the Apostle wrote this, he thought mete to call him by that name, by which he was commonly called.

When he sayth, our, he includeth himselfe, that he mighte not be thought as an vnnaturall sonne, to haue cast of his father.

To finde, in this place signifieth to obtayne, by what meanes soeuer it be, whether it be by gift, or by any other meanes.

According vnto the fleshe.] may be adioyned eyther vnto this word, father, wherby to geue vs to vnderstand, that he was the progenitor of the Iewes, as touching theyr naturall originalli and by that meanes he semeth to reproue the Iewes, for that they boasted of the nobility of the fleshe only, and endeuored not to imitate the piety and religion of Abraham. Wherefore in the Gospell Christ sayd, that they were not the children of Abraham, but the children of the deuill: For if they had hene of Abraham, they would haue done his workes. But they contra­rily wholy applied themselues vnto lying, and murthering, which are most cer­taynly the workes of the deuill. And after this maner he is called father accor­dinge to the fleshe, whereby is gathered (as some say) that only their bodies, and not theyr soules were traduced from him. Or according to the opinion of other men, these words, according to the fleshe, fleshe, are to be ioyned vnto the verbe, found: so that the sence is: By the flesh, that is, by the workes of the flesh: such as are ce­remonies, & circumcision. This interpretation Ambrose followeth, who peculi­arly vnderstādeth circumcisiō. Neither am I much against it, so that we vnder­stād, that although this questiō, & the argumēts that are put forth, be touching What are the princi­pall things that Abra­ham found. Righteous­nes to be imputed & to be iusti­fied by woorks are opposite one agaynst the other. Freely and not freely are repug­naunt. ceremonies, yet by y ^t spirite of God is brought to passe, that those things should be generally entreated of, as we shall in his due place declare. And the thinges which Abraham found were chiefly, that he was called iust, and the Father of all beleuers. For this is to be the father of many peoples: and lastlye this also, that he was the heyre of the wōrld. But here is chiefly entreated of the obteyning of that righteousnes, which is sayd happened not vnto hym, but by fayth. For righteous­nes to be imputed, and to be iustified by works, are cleane contrary the one vnto the other, which is hereby manifest for that to be iustified by imputation, is to haue righteousnes fréely. And to be iustified by woorkes, is not to haue righteous­nes fréely. But to haue righteousnes fréely, and not to haue it fréely, are manifest­ly repugnaunt one agaynst the other. And in that he sayth,

If Abraham were iustified by workes, he hath whereof to boast, but not before God.] It is as much as if he had sayd, that he shoulde not haue righteous­nes before God, and that all other righteousnes is of no value. For it is God, at whose becke we ought either to stand, or to fall. Wherefore we nothing passe vp­on the righteousnes, which is had of men, especially as touching this present pur­pose. And it were fond, to acknowledge any other righteousnes, for the true per­fect righteousnes, then that which God himselfe, and the holye scripture calleth righteousnes. Wherefore no man can now doubt, but that the Apostle speaketh not of ciuill righteousnes, which we get by workes, and which cleaueth in our mindes as a qualitie: but onely of the righteousnes which is geuen vnto vs fréely, and is imputed vnto the beleuers. Wherefore Paul expressedlye added this par­ticle, Before God. Whereby is manifestly gathered, that the woorkes of men, are not of that nature, that they can be layde agaynst the wrath and seueritye of God, and that they can appease him, and make him mercifull vnto vs. Moreouer,

To haue whereof to boast before God.] Is to obtayne anye thynge as an excellente and noble gifte, whiche we may boaste, that we haue receyued of God: and not to haue obtayned it of our selues, or of our owne strengths. For he which leaneth vnto workes, commendeth hymselfe, and hys owne, But hee which is iustified by fayth, commendeth the liberalitie of God, and setteth foorth hys giftes. Whereupon Chrisostome noteth, that men haue much more to glorye of, when they leane vnto fayth, then when they féeke to glory in their works. The giftes of God which fayth taketh hold of, farre excell all our workes. They which glory of workes, doo magnifie a thing which is séene, and felt: but he which glori­eth in fayth, conceiueth a noble opinion of God, so that he is perswaded, that he wil performe euen those thinges, which can not be done by nature, neither boasteth he of those thinges, which he hath done: but extolleth those thinges, which God hath done: namely, that he loueth him, that he hath forgeuen him his sinnes, and counteth him in the number of the iust. This is in a maner the whole glorieng What is the glori­eng of the godly. Glorieng is righteous­nes freely & liberally geuen. What is to beleue. of the godly. By this kinde of speache we sée, that the Apostle, by glorieng, vnder­standeth righteousnes, fréely geuen of God. Whereby is easelye expressed, what Paul ment, when before he sayd, All men haue sinned, and want the glory of God. In which place, by glory, he vnderstode nothing els, then righteousnes freely geuē of God, bycause by that chiefly shineth forth y ^e glory of God. This oracle is writtē in the 15, chap: of y ^• boke of Genesis. Vehaamin beiehonah veiahashbo lo tfad­dicka. Abraham beleued in God, and he imputed vnto him righteousnes. To beleue in this place is, assuredly to thinke, that God of his mercy loueth vs, which mercy by hys mere promise is set forth vnto vs: and we not to suffer our selues by rea­son of our vnpuritye or vncleanes, to be plucked awaye from this perswasion. Wherefore it wholy consisteth in the embrasing of the grace and promise of God offred vnto vs. In very many places Abraham is highly cōmended and praised. But he was neuer called iust, but then onely, when he beleued. Hereby may we Onely in thys place Abraham is called iuste. How dili­gent & depe a handler of scriptures. Paul was. know, with what great diligence Paul did both handle, search and weigh the holy scriptures. He declineth not to allegories, nor to mens inuentions. He especially weigheth two wordes, which he compareth together: by which the whole reason is knit together, which wordes are, To beleue, and righteousnes to be imputed. But in the historie of the booke of Genesis, which we are now in hand with, it is had after this maner. God appeared vnto Abraham and sayd, that he was his buckler, or protection, and his plenteous reward. Which things when he heard, he begā to complayne, for that he had no children. For the elders▪ had an exceding greate de­sire to haue children: and that for two causes, partlye bycause they desired the in­crease of a people which might worship God, and partly bycause they had heard, that the Messias should take flesh of theyr nacion: Therfore they desired, by hauing Why the elders wer so desirous of posterity of children, to light at the length vpō that Messias. But God vouchsaued, not onely to geue vnto him posteritie, but commaunded him also to number the starres of heauen: which thinge when he could not do, God promised, that the aboundance of his sede should be as greate. Abraham beleued God, and it was imputed vnto him for [Page] righteousnes. That which the Grecians haue turned in the passiue significatiō [...], that is, was imputed, in the hebrue is written actiuely, he imputed, namely God imputed vnto him righteousnes. But in the sence, there is no difference. And Paul therefore followeth the seuenty interpreters, bycause theyr translation was not vnknowen vnto the heathen: where let vs note, that that which in the hebrew is in Deum, that is, in God, the same both Paul and y ^e seuenty haue turned [...], that is, to God. wherfore they obserued not that difference of Augustene, of beleuing God, and beleuinge in God. But here ariseth a doubte, how Abraham semeth to How that the fayth of Abraham was in Christ. haue obtayned righteousnes by fayth. For, that fayth was not of Christ, but one­ly of an infinite yssue and posteritie. But vnto this may answere be made many wayes. First, that Abraham beleued not onely touching issue, but chiefelye tou­ching those thinges, which at the beginning of the chapter were promised vnto him, namely, that God would be vnto him both a shield and a reward. And more­ouer then this, he foresaw Christ in his posterity. Wherefore in the Gospell it is saide of hym, that he saw the day of Christ, and reioyced. And Paul to the Gala­thians referreth all thys vnto one seede, whych is Christ. Farther, hee whyche talked wyth hym, was the sonne of God. For no man hath sene God at anye tyme. Therfore whatsoeuer thinges we haue either seene or knowen of hym, the Sonne, which is in the bosome of the Father, he hath declared it vnto vs. Wherfore if he beleued God, he beleued in Christ. We haue oftentimes Christ the roote of all promises. also declared, that in all promises was wrapped and infolden as the roote and foundacion, that promise, which was touching Christ. Neyther seeme they to thinke amisse, which affirme, that alwayes the obiect of faith, is the mercy and goodnes of God, which sheweth forth it selfe in singular giftes, eyther tempo­rall or spirituall. Wherefore when the elders conceaued a hope of victory, of deliuery from enemyes, and from other calamityes, they chiefely did put their confidence in the deuine goodnes, because by it God was moued, mercifully and appeasedly to geue vnto them these singular giftes. And he coulde not be appeased towardes them, but by Christ. Wherefore, in that they beleued any of y ^e promises of God, they beleued in Christ. Which thing also we ought to be myndfull of, when we aske our dayly bread, & we ought to beleue y ^• we shal not want such thinges as pertayne to our liuing. Some thinke this to be repug­naunt vnto the argument of Paul, which is written in the 106 Psalme of Phi­nees the sonne of Eleazar, who when he had thruste thoroughe the Madianitishe Whither Phinees were iuste­fied by his worke. harlot and the Israelite, not only repressed the plague inflicted by God, but also got this thereby, that euen the selfe same thinges with like number of wordes were written of hym, which Paule here citeth of Abraham out of the booke of Genesis. And it was imputed vnto hym for righteousnes. Which wordes seing they are spoken of him by reason of his worke, it might seme, that iustification is not After iusti­fication the saintes do workes which God counteth for iust. Paule en­treateth of the first righteous­nes, and the psalme of that righte­ousnes which follo­weth iusti­fication. Good workes al­so are sayd to be impu­ted for righteous­nes. so proper vnto fayth, that Paule should firmely auouch, that righteousnes com­meth vnto vs by it only. But we answere, that we deny not, but that after fayth and iustification are of good men wrought excellent workes, which are of God counted for iust, especially when they haue their ofspring out of fayth. Wherfore Augustine vpon the 31. Psalme: when he commendeth Abrahams fact, in that he would haue sacrificed his only sonne, sayth, that he commendeth the building, but in the meane tyme he considereth the foundation, which was fayth: he sayth that he alloweth the fruite, but in the meane tyme he hath a regard to the roote. But Paule now entreateth not of those thinges, which follow righteousnes: but of the very roote and hed: what that is, for which we are counted iust. Where­fore the Psalme speaketh of the worke, and Paul of the fyrst righteousnes. Ne­ther ought we to maruayle, that good workes are sayde to be imputed for righ­teousnes: forasmuch as it is necessary it should be so. For they haue not in thē ­selues so much perfection, that they can in all pointes satisfye the lawe of God. Wherefore it is nedefull, that God for his mercy sake receaue them as accep­table, in imputing that part of goodnes and of righteousnes which wanteth in [Page 74] them. They also are not to be harkened vnto, which interprete this sentence so, that they vnderstand, that Paul speaketh of fayth here, as it is a worke: so that Fayth is not here ta­ken as it is a worke. Two man­ner wayes of imputing the sence should be, that God imputed vnto righteousnes that acte of Abraham, whereby he beleued: as though he would count that for iuste. That is not in­treated of at this present, to dispute of a iust worke. But that is sought from whence we are iustified. And to make the matter more playne, to be imputed vnto righteousnes, is taken two maner of wayes. Sometymes it signifieth some acte to be ratified and to be allowed, and to speake briefely, to be accep­ted for iust: and after this maner we graunte, that that acte of Phinees, and the good workes of holy men are imputed of God vnto righteousnes. An other way it signifieth that, by which we our selues are counted in the number of the iust: and that Paul attributeth only vnto fayth, as though he should haue said: Abraham beleued, that he was acceptable vnto God, and that he was counted with him for iust, and lastly, that he should attayne to blessednes: and as he be­leued, so he receaued. For it came to passe vnto hym, according to his fayth. Wherefore by it he receaued that which was offred vnto him of God, as it is written in the beginning of the 15. chapter. For God had sayde vnto hym, I am thy protector, and thy exceding great reward. But that which is sayd of Phinees, and of the workes of goodmen, pertayneth vnto the dutyes, whiche follow them that are iustified. But forasmuch as many promises are made vnto workes, and God in this place calleth himselfe a reward, and eternall life, is oftentimes If eternall life be sayd to be ren­dred vnto workes why is not also sayd of righteous­nes. Good woorkes may go before eternal life, but not before iusti­fication. Eternall life is cal­led a re­ward by a similitude and not properly. in the holy scriptures called a reward, as though it were rendred vnto workes, why may we not by workes likewise obtayne righteousnes, seying that it is as great a matter to glorifye, as to iustify. But two thinges are here to be consi­dered: first, that good workes may go before glorification, but not before iusti­fication. Because after that we are iustified, we may do such thinges as are acceptable vnto God. But before we are iustified, we are able to do nothinge that is truely good, and which can please God. Moreouer we graunt not, that eternall life is had by workes, as though it were by them merited. But when it is called a reward, it is in this respect, because it is rendred after the worke done: euen as that which we deserue by any ciuile actions, is not wont to be rendred, till the worke be full done. And in such sort, eternall life may indede haue some similitude of a reward: but yet properly and as touching the nature of a reward it is most farre of, and that for thrée causes. First, because those thinges which are geuen, and which are receaued, are not alyke: but that is required to the nature of merite. Secondly, because the workes, which we offer, are not our owne. For God geueth them vnto vs, and woorketh in vs both to will, and to performe. Wherefore if there were any merite, it should not be attributed vnto vs, but vnto God, as to the author of all good workes. Lastly, when a reward or merite is properly taken, it behoueth, y ^e that which is geuen of vs, be not bound of duety vnto him vnto whom it is geuē. But we, although we shoulde not obtayne felicitye, yet ought we to doo all our thinges vnto the glory of God. Wherefore eternall lyfe can not be called a reward, but by a certaine similitude. But many say, that these sentences of Paul are to be vnder­stand by a figure, as though it were the figure Synecdoche, that faith is therefore said to iustifie, because it in iustifieng obteineth the chiefest place: and so they will Sinecdo­che which y ^• aduersaries vse. not that good works, which are ioyned with faith, should vtterly be excluded from y ^• power of iustifieng. They are in dede content, that we should commend faith, but yet in such sort commend it, that we shoulde say that it iustifieth together with o­ther good workes, which workes they say Paul vnderstādeth in it by the figure Sy­necdoche. And by this meanes they thinke may be conciliated very many places in the scriptures. For vndoubtedly in the xx. chap. of Genesis. God for a worke, pro­mised many thinges vnto Abraham. Bicause (saith he) thou hast done this thing, thy seede shall be increased, it shall obteyne the gates of his enemies, and in thy sede shall all nations be blessed: and other such like. And Iames semeth to expound this Synecdoche [Page] when he affirmeth, that Abraham was iustified by workes. Vnto these men we aunswer, that the wordes of Paul will in no case suffer any suche trope or figure: whose wordes are so playne and perspicuous, that they neither can be violated, nor yet ouerthrowen. For he saith not onely, that we are iustified by faith: but also he excludeth workes. For he saith, without workes, and that it mighte the playnlier and Here is no Synecdo­che vsed. easeliar be vnderstand he addeth, freely: and other wordes, which apertly are repugnant with tropicall kindes of speach: And vndoubtedly this is to be considered, that the man, or (if I may so speake) the person it self be first both iust, and also accepta­ble vnto God: and then afterward shal good workes follow. But those things which are written in the xx. chap. of Genesis, are nothing at all repugnaunt vnto this sen­tence. A place of Genesis. For there it can not be shewed, that Abraham for that worke was counted iust before God. For, that, had he before obteined. But he receiued promises of hys posteritie, that God would also geue them many and excellent thinges. And we de­ny not, but that God very oftentimes promiseth vnto good workes diuers rewards as well spirituall as temporall, both as touching the elect themselues, as also tou­ching their posteritie. Neither was Iames meaning, that Abraham was iustified A place of Iames. by workes, after that maner that Paul here speaketh of iustification. For he spea­keth of that iustification, which may be known of men, and according to which, we are pronounced iustified. For this spirituall iustification, wherof we now intreat, we can not know in other men, but by those thinges which are done by them out­wardly. And in summe, whatsoeuer places of the scripture do attribute righteous­nes vnto workes, they speake of that righteousnes which followeth iustification.

But to him that worketh, the reward is not imputed according to grace, but accordynge to debte. But to him that woorketh not, but beleueth in him that iustifieth y ^e vngodly, his faith is coun­ted for righteousnes. Euen as Dauid declareth the blessednes of a man, vnto whome God imputeth righteousnes without workes.

Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgeuen, and whose syns are couered, blessed is the mā vnto whom y ^e Lord imputeth not sin.

But to hym which worketh, &c.] He goeth about now to shew, that Abra­ham could not be iustified by workes, forasmuch as now it is manifest by the holye scriptures, that he had righteousnes by imputation. For these thinges are so con­trary, that both of them cannot consist at one time. And in that Paul saith: To hym that worketh, &, to him that worketh not, we ought not so to vnderstand it, as though they which beleue, worke not. For he speaketh of that working onely, wherby we deserue, or desire to deserue righteousnes. And in this place, this is worthy of no­ting, which among the deuine scholemen is now common: to say that Paul calleth A saing of the Scholemen. merite, debt. Wherfore seyng Paul here excludeth debt from iustification, he also of necessity taketh away merite, if we will speake properly and truely of it. But now I do so speake of it, not as it is referred vnto the promises of God, but as it is compared with our workes. In summe, Pauls meaning is, that imputation, and debt are vtterly repugnant the one to the other. By this place we may very mani­festly Imputa­cion and debt are contraries. perceiue, that this is the foundation of the Apostle. But it shal appeare more plainly afterward, where it is said: And if of grace, then not of workes, and contrari­wise, if of workes, then not of grace.

In this place are thrée antitheses or contrary positions. One is, of hym which woorketh, and of hym whyche woorketh not: the seconde, of debte, and of grace: Thre Antitheses. The thirde, of rewarde, and of imputation. Whyche antitheses we oughte by no meanes to lette slippe. And by thys place it manifestlye appeareth that the question put forth concerning ceremonies, is entreated of generally. For here the Apostle without any contraction entreateth of him whiche worketh, and of hym which worketh not: of grace and of debt: of reward, and of imputation of righte­ousnes. Which extend much farther then to ceremonies, For they comprehend all [Page 75] the good workes that may be done.

But beleueth in him, which iustifieth the vngodly.] By the vngodly, he vnderstandeth This rea­son of Paul is vniuer­sall. Vngodli­nes the h [...]d of all wic­ked actes. a sinner which is a straunger from God: for impietie is the head of all wickednes. And where as God is said, to iustifie the vngodly, it is not so to be vn­derstand, so long as he abideth vngodly: or as thoughe God should accepte wicked actes for good, or shoulde pronounce them iuste. For that he forbad in the law: & al­so pronounced y ^• he wil neuer at any tyme so do. But he is sayd to iustify y ^• vngodly, bicause he forgeueth him his sinnes, and of an vngodly person maketh him godlye. Hitherto we haue heard, that Abraham was iustified by faith. And moreouer, that What it is to iustif [...] the vngod­lye. his righteousnes consisted in imputacion. Now followeth,

Euen as Dauid declareth the righteousnesse of a man vnto whome GOD imputeth righteousnesse wythout workes.] By these wordes also it is manifest, that by woorkes are generallye vnderstande all good actes, and not This also is a gene­rall reason. onelye ceremonies. Whiche thynge the Antithesis dothe well declare. For when he had sayd, that we haue blessednes without works, he opposeth and set­teth vnto them as contrary, sinnes and iniquities, whiche in iustification are for­geuen. But iniquities and sinnes haue not place onely in ceremonies. And that in this place hee allegeth Dauid, it serueth very much to his purpose. For Dauid was endued with many good workes, euē as was Abraham. And yet he thought he could not be iustified by them: but onely for that that hys sinnes were forgeuē hym. And by this testimony of the Scripture, it appeareth, that iustification and Why he v­seth the testimony of Dauid. Iustificati­on and bles­sednes are taken for one and the selfe same thing. Iustificati­on is felici­ty begon. Basilius affirmeth that the thinges which are done before iustificatiō, are sinnes. blessednes are one and the self same thyng. Otherwise the conclusion should not be strong. And vndoubtedly iustification, if a man rightly consider it, is nothyng els, then a felicitie begon. And Dauid testifieth, that this blessednes or iustifica­tion, doth not onely herein consiste, that sinnes should not be imputed, but also to expresse that thyng more playnly, he sayth it consisteth herein, that sinnes should be forgeuen. And hee whiche is in hym selfe assured, that iustification is the re­mission of sinnes, the same man I say shall easely vnderstand, that we bryng not good works vnto God, that by the workyng and merite of them he should iustify vs, but rather that we bryng sinnes vnto hym, to be pardoned. Basilius expressed­ly sheweth, that the workes, whiche we do, whilest we are straūgers from God, can not please hym. He of purpose demaundeth that question in his second booke De Baptismo, the seuenth question, and bryngeth this sentence of the Prophet: A sinner whiche sacrificeth vnto me a calfe, is like vnto hym whiche killeth a dogge: and whiche offreth fiue swete cakes, like vnto him whiche offreth the bloud of swyne. But no man doubteth, but that the workes, whiche we worke, are in a sorte, sacrifices. Wher­fore if sinners offer them vnto the Lord, they are displeasant vnto hym. He addeth also an other reason: He whiche worketh sinne, is the seruant of sinne, because when we be seruaunts vnto sinne, it suffreth vs not to do any thing that is acceptable vnto God. Last­ly hee maketh thys reason, that Christ said, No man can serue two maisters: neither is it by any meanes possible, that we should serue both Mammon and God. Wherupon hee concludeth: that it is not possible that the wycked shoulde do good woorkes. Wherefore the woorkes of preparation whyche our aduersaries fayne, are What sins to be coue­red signi­fieth. are vtterly excluded. Augustine interpretyng the 31. Psalme, sayth: That sinnes to be couered, is nothyng els, then that God will not consider them. And if (sayth he) hee consider them not, then will he not punish them. Wherefore sinnes are sayd to be couered before God, because God will not punishe them: They ought not so to bee vnderstand to be couered, as though they were ouer couered, and yet neuertheles remayne li­ning in vs. Their bonde and guiltines, whereby punishment was due vnto vs, is by forgeuenes taken away. And for this thing the Prophet prayed when hee sayd: Turne away thy face from my sinnes. When Dauid made this Psalme, hee was sicke, and was troubled with a grenous disease. For he maketh mencion that hys bones were withered away, and that he felt the hand of God heauy vpon him, and that the moystnes of hys body was in a maner all dried vp: and manye other such like thinges. Wherefore being by the disease admonished of his sinnes and of the wrath of God, he brast forth into these woordes: by which hee testified [Page] those to be blessed, whose sinnes God had forgeuen. And he taketh blessednes, for instification. For iustification as we haue sayde, is a blessednes begon. For Sins one­ly are a let that we are not blessed. sins are onely a let, that we are not now already blessed: which whē they shall vt­terly be taken away, they shall no more hinder blessednes. But men, though they be neuer so good and holy, yet so long as they lyue here, are not vtterlye without sinne. Therefore they alwayes aspire vnto blessednes, that is, vnto the forgeue­nes of sinnes. Wherefore in that selfe same Psalme it is afterward added. For So longe as we liue here we pray for iu­stification. He which prayeth not for the for­the forgeuenes of sins prayeth ill. this, shall euery one that is holy pray vnto thee. Which thing our Sauiour also hath taught vs. For in the prayer which he made, which euen the best and most holye oughte to saye, he commaunded vs to saye, Forgeue vs our trespasses. And they which pray for other thinges, and make not mention of this, let them take hede, that thyng happen not vnto them, which happened vnto that Pharisey, whom Luke sheweth to haue praid after this maner: I geue thee thankes O God, that I am not as other men are, &c. And for that cause (saith Christ) he departed not home to his house iustified, bicause he rehersed before God his good workes onely. But contrariwise, the Publicane acknowledging his misery, durst scarcely lift vp his eies vnto heauen. And so being vtterly deiected in mynd: he said, Lord be mercifull vn­to me a sinner. And by this confession he acknowledged that he brought nothing vnto God but sinnes, and therfore prayed, that they might be forgeuen him. He (saith Christ) returned home iustified. Where as Dauid here, as the Apostle citeth hym, maketh no mencion of good workes, yet some will obtrude it vnto vs out of these things which follow. And in his spirite is no guile. But vnto these mē August. very well aunswereth, In him (saith he) there is no guile, which as he is a sinner, so acknow­ledgeth himselfe to be: and when he seeth himselfe vitiated with euill workes, dissembleth What it is not to haue guile with­in one. them not, but manifestly confesseth them. Therfore it is added in the selfe same psalme: I haue said, I will confesse mine owne iniquitie agaynst my selfe. But yet againe suche whyche woulde so fayne weaken thys reasonynge of Paule, obiecte vnto vs, that there is vsed the figure Synecdoche, so that wyth those thynges which Da­uid setteth foorth, wee shoulde also ioyne good woorkes to iustifye. And to make their sentence of the more credite, they gather other testimonies out of Da­uid, in which blessednes is also attributed vnto workes: as, Blessed are the immacu­late, which walke in the law of the Lorde: Blessed is the man which feareth the Lorde: Blessed is the man, which hath not gone in the counsels of the vngodly: and many other Whether blessednes be attribu­ted vnto woorkes. Here is en­treated of the first blessednes and not of the last. such like places, in which they say, that blessednes is as expressedly ascribed vnto workes, as it is in that place, which Paul now citeth, vnto the remission of sinnes. But forasmuch as these men doo recite againe the same argument in a manner, which we haue a little before dissolued, they shall also haue euen the selfe same an­swer: Namely, that here is not intreated of that blessednes or felicitie, whiche fol­low the first iustification, but here is disputed of the very first and principall iusti­fication. And why we can not here admit the figure Synecdoche, we haue before alredy shewed: bicause Paul expressedly affirmeth, that this righteousnes cōmeth without workes. And bicause it should not be said, that he spake these things only of ceremoniall workes of the law, he afterward addeth, that the promise therefore consisteth of grace, that it might be firme, & not wauer: which excludeth not onely ceremonies, but also morall works. And a little before we reade, forasmuch as iu­stification is geuen by imputation, it cannot then be of workes. And that he confirmed by a generall reason of working, and of, not working: which vndoubtedly ex­tend much farther, then to ceremonies. For we worke no lesse in morall workes, then in ceremoniall workes. He said moreouer, that they which are iustified, haue wherof to glory before God, as though they had of him obteined righteousnes, and not of their works. Whiche reason remoueth from iustification eyther kynde of woorkes both ceremoniall and also morall. Wherefore we moste manifestlye sée, Ambrose saith we are iustifyed by faith onely. that the figure Synecdoche canne by no meanes stande wyth the reasons of Paul. Ambrose expounding these wordes oftentimes writeth, that we are iustified by faith onely: and he addeth, without labour, and any obseruation. But that which he [Page 76] afterward addeth, when he interpreteth this sentence of Dauid:

Blessed are they whose iniquityes are forgeuen.] he sayth, Vnto whome ini­quityes are forgeuen without labor, or any worke: and whose sinnes are couered, no worke of repentance being required of them, but only that they should beleue: This his inter­pretation (I say) if we so vnderstand it, as though repentance were not ioy­ned with the first fayth, whereby we are iustified, is most absurd. For howe can any man being endued with a true fayth, whereby he shoulde be iustified A place of Ambrose made plain. want repentance, so that he shoulde be nothing sory for his euill life past? But, if Ambrose vnderstand ether that Ecclesiasticall satisfactions are not requi­red, or els that that repentance, which of necessity followeth fayth, ought in­dede to be had, but is not required as a cause of iustification, then sayth he well. Vndoubtedly this sentence pleased him so well that he also wrote it before as we haue mencioned, and also vpon the xi. chapter (as we shall afterward see) The fa­thers must [...] be red war [...] lye. he repeteth the selfe same. Hereby we see, how warely we must reade the fa­thers. For they speake many thinges sometymes, which if they be not well vn­derstand, can in no case be allowable. Yea and sometymes somethinges es­cape them, which a man can scarsely interprete soundly: as that which the selfe same Ambrose writeth vpon this place. Wherfore (sayth he) he setteth forth the blessednes of the tyme, wherein Christ was borne: as the Lord himselfe sayth: Many iust men and prophetes desired to see the thinges which ye see, and to heare the thinges which ye heare: and haue not heard, neyther haue they sene. As though euen before the cō ­ming of Christ also, God iustified not his after the selfe same maner, that he now iustifieth vs. It is manifest, that this diuersity of tyme is vtterly repug­nant vnto the meaning of Paul. For he sayth that Abraham was iustified by sayth. Yea and Dauid also, whose testemony this is, felt that he was after the same maner iustified. And y ^e same Ambrose before, whē he expoūdeth this place.

But to hym which worketh a reward is not imputed according to grace, but according to debt, thus writeth: It is for certayne, that vnto him which is subiect vn­to the lawe of workes, that is, vnto the lawe of Moses, or vnto the lawe of nature, merite is not counted vnto reward, to haue glory before God. For he is debter to do the lawe, for necessity is layde on hym by the law, so that will he or nill he, he must do the lawe, least he be condemned. As in an other place he sayth: but they which contemne, do get vnto thē ­selues damnation, because presently they are guilty. But to beleue, or not to beleue, pertai­ueth to the will. For a man can not be compelled to a thing, which is not manifest, but is thereto allured, and is thereunto perswaded: for it may not be by violēce vrged vnto him. But this difference betwene the workes which are commaunded by the lawe of nature and the law of Moses and betwene fayth (which Ambrose here putteth) is nothing at all. For by the necessity of the commaundement of God, we are no les bound to beleue, then we are to do good workes. And as to do good works, is not violently vrged of men agaynst their willes, no more is to beleue also. And as vpon the transgression of the lawe of nature, or of the lawe of Moses de­pendeth condemnation, so also dependeth it vpon the transgression of fayth. Thus we sée, what maner of things sometimes we reade in the fathers. I will adde also, how Chrisostome interpreteth this self same place.

But to him which worketh a reward is not imputed according to grace, but according to debt.] Thus he writeth: But this thou wilt say is a greater matter. Not so vndoubtedly. For vnto him that beleueth it is imputed. But it should neuer be imputed, vnles he himselfe also had brought somewhat with him. &c. Here he sayth that he which is iustified by fayth, bringeth something of himselfe. And that is (as we before noted in his sayinges) fayth. And that this is not true he him­selfe vpon this place declareth. For he sayth, that this is the principallest thing, that maketh a faythfull man to be notable, namely, that he is by God endued with so much grace, that he is able to shew forth such so great a fayth. In this place he affirmeth, y ^• faith cōmeth not of our selues, but of the grace of God. So y ^• before he wrote not so soundly, when he sayd, that we do ether geue, or els bring somewhat, to be iustified, and make God our debter. These thinges I therefore rehearse, [Page] that we should not thinke, that the fathers alwayes spake all thinges firmelye and constantly: or that out of them we should at all tymes seke the sure exposi­tion The Fa­thers do not alwaies speake like to them­selues. By the scriptures ought we to be setled as tou­ching doc­trine. of the scriptures. First we ought out of the very scriptures, soundly to de­fine of doctrines. Then afterward may the fathers be reade with iudgement. But that the scriptures should of necessity be subiect vnto y ^• expositions of thē, it nether can, nor ought to be. For it were absurd, to make subiect the iudge­mentes of God vnto the iudgementes of men. And seing they also are often­tymes obscure, and in their expositions diuers, and manifold, this were to de­part frō the scriptures which are certayne, to things vncertayne. These things I haue spoken by the way, but for our times I hope not vnprofitably. Augustine in the preface of his declaration vpon the 31. Psalme, writeth: Many boast of woorkes, and a man shall finde manye Paganes or infidels, whiche therefore will not be come Christians, because that they suffice thēselues with their vpright life. We must of necessity liue well, saith he: and what shall Christ require of me? To liue well? I lyue well alredy. Wherein then shall Christ be nedefull vnto me? I committe no murther, nor theft, nor rapine: I desire not other mennes goodes, I am not contaminated with any adul­tery. For let there be founde any thynge in me that is worthy to be reproued, and he whiche reproueth me, let him make me a Christian. This man hath glory but not with God. Sée how the ignoraunce of this hidden iustification, whiche is not of They which are ignorant of this iusti­fication do abhorre frō Christian religion. That is chiefly cal­led felicity, which com­meth with­out labour. workes, called men backe from Christian religion. Wherefore at this day also, they that are ignoraunt of it, and do iustifie themselues by workes, are both farre from Christ, and also haue no vnderstanding of the benefite that commeth by him And in this sentence of Dauid, let vs this consider also, that there is no mention made of good workes: whiche thing also this worde blessednes geueth vs to vnder­stand. For when we attaine to any thing, wherein we haue spent great labour, we are not for that counted very happy. But if we attayne vnto the selfe same thing without labour, and in a maner without any our trauaile, then are we coū ted happy and blessed.

Came this blessednes then vpon the circumcision, or vpon the vncircumcision? For we say that fayth was imputed vnto Abraham vnto righteousnes. How was it then imputed? when he was Cir­cumcised, or vncircumcised? not when he was circumcised, but whē he was vncircumcised. Afterward he receiued the signe of circum­cision, the seale of the righteousnes of fayth which he had when he was vncircumcised, that he should be the father of all them that beleue, not beyng circumcised, that righteousnes mighte be imputed vnto them also. And the father of circumcision, not vnto them one­ly which are of the circumcision, but to them also that walke in the steppes of the fayth of our father Abraham, which he had when he was vncircumcised.

Came this blessednes then vpon the Circumcision, or vpon the vncircumcision?] The Latine interpretation hath this worde Manet, that is, abideth, ad­ded to this sentence, which is not in the Greke bookes. Neither doth y ^• verbe which the Latines haue, much agrée with the phrase which is by the accusatiue case, and by the Greke preposition [...]. Rather (as Theophilactus admonisheth, we must vn­derstand this verbe [...], which signifieth, lighteth it, or belōgeth it, or some such lyke thinge. Neither do I disalow the coniecture of Erasmus, who thinketh that insteade of this verbe Manet, was first written Manat, whiche signifieth to come or to spread abrode.

And thus muche as touching the woordes. But this is the meanyng. A man might thinke, that although Dauid made no mention of workes, when he set forth the blessednes of those, whose sinnes are forgeuen, yet because he himselfe was both circumcised, & also vsed sacrifices, he thoughte that this forgeuenes of sinnes is ob­teined by these things, although he expressed them not. And for that cause Paul taketh [Page 77] againe the example of Abraham which he at the first vsed. And so returneth Why Paul returneth againe to Abraham. to the ground and beginning of circumcision, and considereth the very time, wher­in Abraham receiued it: and proueth, that long time before he was circumcised, he was both iustified, and also pronounced the father of many nations, that is, of all them which beleue. Wherof it followeth, that we without ceremonies and o­ther workes shall by faith be counted iust, and be admitted into the people of God, and placed among the mēbers of Christ. This argument may thus be made more The forme of the Ar­gument. The order of the cau­ses and the effectes in the iustifi­ca [...]ion of Abraham. Of what greate waight is the diligent marking of the scrip­tures. Circumcisi­on was had in greate e­stimation. euident. That which yet was not, coulde not bring righteousnes vnto Abraham: But when Abraham was pronounced iustified, circumcision was not yet. Wherefore it could not iustifie Abraham. Let vs in this maner set the order betwene the causes and the effectes. First, God did set forth vnto Abraham his promises. Secondly, followed faith: And thirdly, iustification. Lastly, came obedience, which caused him to circumcise himselfe, and to do many other excellent good workes. We may not peruert this order, that by obedience and circumcision whiche are the last ef­fects, we should bring forth iustification which went before. Againe in thys place y ^• Apostle teacheth vs, with how great study and diligence the Scriptures are to be red, and the times and moments in stories are throughly to be considered. He en­treateth of circumcision, bicause all that controuersie sprang first by reason of cere­monies: and bicause also they had circumcision in no lesse estimation, thē we now haue baptisme. For they counted it for a noble worke, and an excellent worship: pyng of God. Wherfore we may inferre or conclude, that if we be not iustified w ^t that kind of workes, wherin consisted the worshipping of God, vndoubtedly much lesse shall we be iustified by other workes. For these are counted more excellent & more acceptable vnto God, then are other workes.

For we say that faith was imputed vnto Abraham vnto righteousnes.] These wordes serue wonderfully to depresse the pride and hautines of the Iewes: which continually cried, that righteousnes could by no meanes stand without circumci­sion. But Paul contrariwise affirmeth, that it was in Abraham before he was circumcised. For Abraham was as yet vncircumcised, when he was pronounced iustified. Wherfore it is no meruaile, if many mo of the vncircumcised then of y ^e Iewes were saued after the comming of Christ. Here it semeth that there are set before our eyes two fathers, the one of the vncircumcised, the other of circumcision. And if we more depely consider the matter, we shall see that the father of the vncircumci­sed is set in the first place. For Abraham was not yet circumcised, when he was of God counted iust. What thē is there remayning for the Iewes, that they should so aduance themselues aboue the Gētles. Nothing vndoubtedly but the signe. And euē as Abraham is not y ^e father of the vncircumcised for y ^• cause only, bicause they haue vncircumcision, but bicause of faith: so also is he not the father of the circum­cised, bicause they are circumcised, but bicause they beleue. By these things it is manifest, Circumcisi­on and vn­circumcisiō are conditi­ons com­ming by chaunce. that both circumcisiō & also vncircumcision are conditions cōming by chance and of thēselues helpe nothing to the obteinment of iustification. Very aptly doth the Apostle bring in these two men Dauid, and Abraham. Of which the one that is, Dauid, being now circumcised, bare testimony of iustification. And Abraham being not yet circumcised, obteined neuertheles iustification. Wherfore it suffici­ently appeareth, that Circumcision is not a meane necessarily required to obtain righteousnes.

And he receaued the signe of circumcision.] He receaued I say circumcision which was a signe.

The seale of the righteousnes of fayth.] This is a preuention, for they which heard these thinges, mought thus haue thought with themselues: If Abraham were iustified before circumcision, then was circumcisiō superfluous, vnto this obiection Paule answereth, saying, that circumcision was not vayne or vnpro­fitable: for it was the seale of the righteousnes of fayth. In this sentence Paule Circumcisi­on was not a thing ge­uen in vain hath two woordes, namely, [...], that is, a signe, and [...], that is, a seale which woordes althoughe they be of very nighe affinitie the one to the other, [Page] yet ar they not both of one & the selfe same significatiō For this woord [...], that is a sign, is more general then his word [...], y ^• is, a seale. An image is a signe, but it can not be a seale. But we vse to put seales vnto such things, as we wyll haue with greate fidelity kept, and remayne vnuiolated. And therefore are letters sealed, & letters patentes of princes are confirmed with seales, y ^• no man should doubt of the authority or truth of thē. So God deliuereth vnto vs sacra­mentes Sacra­mentes are not onely signes but sealinges. What cir­cumcision signifyed & what it sealed. as seales of his promises. Wherfore circumcision signified two thinges both that euill lusts should be cut of out of the minde and also that the children of Israell should be seperated from other nations. Farther it was the seale of the will and promise of God, which was offred vnto Abraham concerning righ­teousnes, the remissiō of sinnes thorough Christ, and the league with God, and a greate many mo such like good things. This promise (I say) was sealed with the signe of circumcision. And besides these significations of the sacraments ar two other cōmodityes not to be cōtemned. For the things which ar so marked, Sacra­mentes also are notes whereby we are knowen to pertaine vnto God, as vnto our owner and Lord. By these notes also is shewed how muche God ma­keth of vs. are therby appoynted to be theyrs, who are their owners as in horses, oxen, & other suche like thinges, the markes and notes, which ar burnte in them, declare vnto whome they pertayne. So the Sacraments when they are receaued do beare witnes that we belong vnto God. Farther such outward notes declare, of what value and estimation the thinge that is sealed ought to be counted, as it is manifest in coynes of gold, and also in horses. For the best and excellent horses, are marked with one marke, and dull Iades with an other marke. Far­thermore, the sacramentes which God hath commended vnto vs, declare how much God setteth by vs, For the notes and markes of circumcision and of o­ther sacramentes are as it were admonishers of the will and promises of God. For forasmuch as we are weake, neyther do we easely beleue the promises of God, it was nedefull that his good will towardes vs shoulde not only be signi­fied by wordes, but also shoulde be sealed by thinges which might be offred to our senses. Wherefore Augustine very aptly sayth, that the Sacramentes are visi­ble wordes. And Chrisostome vpon this place writeth, that circumcision preached righ­teousnes. Wherefore God would that we should both haue his wordes in the ho­ly scriptures, which should be set forth vnto vs, whilest the misteryes were in doing, and also that vnto them should outwardly be added visible notes: that we might the more firmely resist, if at any tyme the minde should beginne to doubt. By these thinges it is manifest, how they are deceaued, which thinke that by the power of the action, or (as they vse to speake) by the worke wrought, The worke wrought is excluded. the sacramentes bring saluation. Vndoubtedly, euen as the wordes of the scrip­ture nothing profit without fayth, so also nothing profit the sacramentes, vn­les fayth be present. Nether is that opinion to be allowed (whereof Augustine in his booke De ciuitate dei, maketh mēcion) namely, that they can not be dam­ned, They are deceaued which thinke that no man af­ter he hath once recea­ued the sa­craments can be damned. In this place abone all other is is expressed the nature of Sacra­mentes. Sacra­ments are not onely markes & notes. which haue once receaued the sacramēts of Christ. I thinke there is scarse any place in the holy scriptures, wherein is so briefely and so expressedly set forth the nature of the sacramentes, as in these wordes of Paule, wherein cir­cumcision is called, a seale. And to the ende we should vnderstand, that it is not the seale of euery thinge, there is added, of righteousnes, that is, of the forgeue­nes of sinnes, which pertayneth vnto the will of God. Lastly he addeth, of fayth to geue vs to vnderstand, what maner of thinge that is, whereby we may take hold of that righteousnes. And that is fayth. Wherefore euery man may see how much they are deceaued, whiche thinke the sacramentes to be but onlye markes and notes of religion, whereby men may knowe one an other. For so should they attribute no more vnto sacramentes, then vnto garments, or cou­lors, whereby familyes and sectes are descerned one from an other. Nether is this sufficiente whiche others say, which thinke, that in sacramentes are shew­ed forth the signes only and professions of those thinges and actions which are required of vs, which are initiated into Christ: so that circumcision they make to signifye the mortifying of wicked affection: and baptisme to signifie that we [Page 78] must stoutely and with a valiant courage suffer losses, iniuries & aduersities: What is the chiefest and princi­pallest thing in the Sacra­mentes. Graeca Scolia. Three sig­nifications of circumci­sion. because in it is signified, that we are crucified and buried together with Christ. And that the supper of the Lord is only a signe of Christian beneuolēce, & of du­ties of mutuall charity. We deny not but that all these thinges are in the sacra­mentes. But the hed and summe of theyr signification we say consisteth here­in, that they seale vnto vs the giftes and promises of God, which he offreth vn­to vs to be taken holde of by fayth. The Greeke Scholies haue in this place most expressedly put, that Circumcision was for three causes geuen: that it should be a signe of fayth and of righteousnes: that it should seperate the kyn­dred of Abraham from other nations: and that it should be a note and manifest token of a pure and vndefiled conuersacion. This place most manifestly decla­reth y ^• which Augustine writeth to Bonifacius: namely, that Sacramēts haue the names of those thinges which they signifie. And that thing he proueth by many stmilitudes: amongest which he maketh mencion also of the Eucharist, bicause Circumci­sion because it was the signe of the couenant, therefore it had the name of the thinge. It is Paul which tea­cheth that sacraments do signify & seale things promised. That we call sacra­mentes are signes, we say it out of the holy scriptures. Sacra­mentes not after iustification vnprofita­bly recea­ued. Sacra­mentes stirre not vp faith, but the ho­ly ghost stirreth it vp. A simili­tude. Our righ­teousnes hath much vn­cleanes mingled with it. The resur­rection shalbe a perfect regene­ration. we call it the body of Christ, when as it is only the sacrament thereof. And wee also teache, that the bread in the holy misteryes is therfore the body of Christ, bycause it is the signe thereof. These things some cānot abide. But they ought to remember, that in the boke of Genesis, Circumcision is called the couenaunt of the Lord: which is nothing ells, then the promise of righteousnes, and of the forgeuenes of sinnes throughe Christ. And this couenaunt the Lord commaunded that the Iewes shoulde carye aboute with them in theyr fleshe. That thing Paule now expoundeth, namely, that it was the signe of that righteousnes and couenaunt. Wherefore it manifestly appeareth, that this kind of interpretatiōs which we vse, was brought in by the Apostle, and that to follow those interpre­tations is nothing els then to follow the steps of the Apostles. If thou demaūd, that for as much as we haue remissiō of sinnes, & haue by fayth obteined righ­teousnes, what commodity then bringe the sacramentes vnto vs, we answere, very much: for that they offer themselues before our eyes, and so doo admonish vs. For our fayth is stirred vp, not indéede by them, but by the power of the holy ghost, who vseth this instrument of the sacraments euen as he doth the instru­ment of the woord which is preached. And faith being stirred vp, more and more embraseth righteousnes and remission of sinnes For these things are not in ato­mo, or in an indiuisible point, but they haue in them some breadth. For if sinne were in this life perfectly remoued from vs, we should neuer sinne any more. But many euilles oftentimes offer them selues vnto vs, which haue nede of for­geuenes and remission. So, although we be regenerated and renewed, yet there neuer wanteth in vs somwhat, which must be regenerated and renued. And to make this the playner, I will bringe this similitude. That which is most perfect white, hath mixed with it no blacknes or darknes at all. But our righteousnes hath mixed w ^t it much vnpurenes & vnclenes, which must nedes be made clene. wherefore in the resurrection we shall haue a perfect and absolute regeneratiō. And therefore Christ called the resurrection by that name, when he sayd vnto his Apostles, that they should sit in the Regeneration vpon xij. seates, and iudge the twelue tribes of Israell. For that selfe same cause Paul, when he was alredy iuste­fied, was commaunded to be baptised. And Abrahā, of whom we now speake, after that righteousnes was imputed vnto him, was commaunded to be circum­cised, and that not in vayne, but for that cause which we haue alredy declared. Now the matter moueth or rather requireth vs, somewhat to speake of circum­cision. But because we can certaynely affirme nothing touching it vnles we thoroughlye knowe the nature of sacramentes, therefore I thoughte it beste, first to declare what in my iudgement is to be thought of them in generall.

The word which signifieth a sacrament is in Hebrue Sod, & Razi. The fyrst of A place to [...] ching sacramentes. Of the He­brue and Greeke woorde. these wordes is common vnto all secretes and hid thinges, and is more in vse. And the other Esay vsed in the 24. chapter: whē he sayd, Razi li, Razi li, that is, Asecret vnto me, a secret vnto me. Daniell also in his 2. chapter, when he entrea­teth [Page] of the knowledge of the mistery, vseth the selfe same worde. Such is the na­ture and condition of sacramentes, that they contayne thinges hidde, vnto some indede knowen, but not vnto all. And from this Etimology, the Greeke worde [...], differeth not much, which is deriued of [...]. That is, we ought diligently to kepe thinges close inwardly. Of that ma­ner were the misteries of Ceres of Eleusis in the countrey of Athenes, which were The miste­ries of Ce­res of Ele­usis. opened vnto none, but vnto those, that were initiated. And they are called [...], which haue these thinges sealed and shut vp in them. Chrisostome, when he enterpreteth the xi. chapter of this epistle where Paule sayth, that he writeth a mistery of the Israelites partly blynded and partly to be restored, sayth: that a mistery signifieth a thing vnknowen, and vnspeakeable, and which hath in it much admiration, and which is aboue our opinion. The same father, when he enterpre­teth the second chapiter of the first epistle to the Corrinthyans, where we reade, we speake wisedome in a mistery, thus writeth: It should be no diuine or perfect myste­ry, if thou shouldest adde any thing of thy selfe. By which words it is manifest, how Nothing ought to be added vnto the miste­ries of god. much they are to be blamed, which at their owne pleasure and iudgement make sacramentes, and from those which Christ himselfe hath ordained plucke away what pleaseth them. These wordes of Chrisostome do manifestly reproue them. Neyther let them thinke, that this any thing helpeth theyr case, to say that he speaketh of that mistery which is found in the holy scriptures, vnto which he sayth nothinge is to be added, neyther any thinge to be taken awaye from it. Forasmuch as the sacramentes, whereof we entreate, are of no lesse wayght, The sacra­ments are equall with the holy scriptures. then the holy scripture it selfe. For they (as Augustine very aptly sayth) are the visible wordes of God. Farther, Chrisostome, expounding the place before allead­ged, sayth, that we in the sacramentes see one thing, beleue an other thing, behold with our sence one thinge, vnderstand in our mynde an other thinge. Whereof it follow­eth, that all are not after one and the selfe same maner affected towardes these misteries. For an infidell when he heareth, that Iesus Christ was crucified, thinketh it to be a thing The fayth­full and the vnfaythfull are diuer­sly affected towardes the sacra­mentes. foolishe, and of no valew. But the faythfull man acknowledgeth in that mistery the exce­ding great power and wisedome of God. If an Ethnike heare, that Christ was raysed vp from the dead, he will thinke it to be a fable. But a Christian will not only beleue, that so, but also will not doubt, but that he himselfe, as a member of Christ, shall one day be raysed vp from the dead. Chrisostome commeth afterward to the visible sacrament, and sayth: If an infidell see baptisme, he will iudge that there is but water onely. But the the faythfull beboldeth the washing of the soule by the bloud of Christ. And in the Eu­charist, by the senses is knowen only the bread and the wine. But the beleuers referre their myndes vnto the body of Christ. Hereunto he applieth a similitude of a booke: For A simili­tude. if an vnlearned & rude man that can not reade a word should light vpō a booke, he can only behold & wōder at the prikes, figures, & colours: but the sense and vnderstanding of them he can not find out: but be which is learned, learneth out of it, ether histories, or other thinges worthy to be knowen and pleasant. Now that we haue declared the interpretecion of the Greke and Hebrue name, there resteth, that we speake somewhat of the lattin word. Among the elders sacramentum, that is, a sacra­ment What the Latines signifie by this worde Sacramen­tum. signified a bond which passed by an oth. Wherefore we are accustomed to say, Sacramento cum aliquo contendere, that is, by an othe to contend wyth a man, and Sacramentum militare, that is, an othe which a man taketh, when he goeth to warfare. And paraduenture these our misteryes are therefore cal­led sacramentes, because in them God byndeth himselfe with couenantes and promises being after a sort sealed, and we on the other side binde our selues vn­to him. Wherefore we entreate not of a mistery or sacrament generally, wher­by Now is not entrea­ted vniuer­sally of sa­cramentes. is signified (as Chrisostome sayth) any thing that is vnknowen, and vnspeak­able, which hath in it much admiration, and is aboue our opinion. For after that maner, there are an infinite number of sacramentes. For so may we call sacramentes, the natiuity of Christ, his resurrection, the Gospell, the blinding of the Iewes, the calling of the Gentles, and many other things. But we speake so of sacramentes, as Paule now speaketh of circumcision. Now because we [Page 79] haue sufficiently spokē of the word, we will adde the definition of a sacrament, Definition of a sacra­ment. What a signe is. and this definition is most receaued. A sacrament is a visible forme, or a visible signe of an inuisible grace. And that is called a signe, which besides the forme which it offreth vnto the senses, bringeth some other thing into our knowledge. And a signe (as Augustine writeth, and the master of the sentences affirmeth) is deuided into a naturall signe, and a signe geuen. Smoke is a naturall signe of fyre, and cloudes, a naturall signe Distinction of a signe. Thinges signified haue theyr distinction by diuersi­ties of times. of fyre, and cloudes, a naturall signe of rayne. But a signe geuen, and appoyn­ted of the will, is diuers, as letters, wordes, gestures, beckes, and many such like. And these signes may pertayne to diuers and sondry senses. But the things that are signified, are eyther thinges past, thinges present, or thinges to come. The tables of the lawe, the Manna, & the rodde of Aaron, which were kept, signified thinges past. For God would haue these thinges to remayne as cer­tayne monumentes of thinges past. Other signes betoke thinges to come, as the raynebow in the cloudes, which was geuen in the tyme of Nohe, the flese of Gedeon, and the shadow of the Sunne, which in the tyme of Ezechias the king went backward. Sometimes are signified thinges present, as in the garments of the priestes, in the apparell of the Leuites, in the ornamētes of magistrates, and in the miracles of Christ. For all these signified the present power of God. Our sacramentes are visible signes, not indede of theyr owne nature, but ge­uen vnto vs by the will of God: and they pertayne to many senses. For the wordes which are set forth in the sacramentes, are receaued with the eares: but the notes and outward simboles are perceaued eyther by sight, or féeling, or smelling, or tasting, and they demonstrate both thinges present, thinges past, and thynges to come: for the death of Christ is represented in them, which is now past: and the promise and gift of God, which in the mynde and by fayth is presently embraced: and the purenes of lyfe and mortification, and duties of charity, which are afterward to be performed of vs. By those thinges it is manifest, what maner of signes we put to be sacramentes. But it may séeme to be sufficiēt to take that definition which Paule here vseth, namely, to say, that Definition of a Sa­cramentout of this place of Poule. What is the chiefest [...] promise which is sealed in a sacrament. sacramentes are [...], that is, sealinges of the righteousnes of fayth. For they seale the promises, by which, so that fayth be adioyned vnto them, we are iustifyed. If a man demaund, what it is that God promiseth vnto vs, to aun­swere briefely, it is, that he will be our God: which thing where it taketh place, saueth vs, & maketh vs blessed & happy. This is the promise, which is by diuers outward simbols sealed in the sacramentes. Which thing we haue in the boke of Genesis the 17. chapter, where circumcision is geuen, whereby was confir­med the couenant made betwene God and Abraham. The summe of that pro­mise was (as we haue sayd) that God would be his God, and the God of hys séede. Which selfe same thing Ieremy also testefieth of the new couenant of the Gospell: where he sayth, that the lawes shoulde not only be written in the bowelles and hartes of the beleuers: but also that God would be vnto them theyr God, and they agayne on the other side, shoulde be vnto hym, his people. That also we well allowe, Sacra­mentes consist of two thinges. We must haue a con­sideration vnto the a­nalogy of the signe vnto the thing signi­fied. We must also kepe a diuersity betwene the signe and the thinge signified, which is commonly sayd, that the sacramentes consist of two thinges: namely, of outward signes, which the scholemen count for the matter, and of the thing signified. Which is chiefely expressed by the words adioyned vnto the simbols: out of which we may gather the forme. Which is not so to be vnderstand as though those thinges which are signified, are bound to the outward signes, or lye hidden vnder them: otherwise as many as should receaue the outward cle­mentes, should together therewithall receaue the thinges signified. And it is necessary, that betwene the signe and the thing signified there be kept some a­nalogy, that is proportion and conueniency. For if signes had no similitude with those thinges that are signified, then shoulde they not be signes of them. And yet notwythstandyng wyth thys conformity is styll to be kept a diuersity betweene that which is signified, and those thinges whiche signifye. Whiche thinge Augustine moste manifestly teacheth agaynste Maximinus the Arrian [Page] in hys 3 boke, where he sayth, that Sacramēts are one thing, & signify an other thing. Wherby oftentymes it commeth to passe, that these things which are attributed vnto the Oftētimes are thinges spoken of signes, which are not agrea­ble with theyr nature. A place out of the epi­stle of Iohn. signes, agree in no case with the nature of them, but onelye are to bee referred vnto the thinges by them signified. And he citeth a place out of the epistle of Iohn, where thys thing is manifestly shewed. For he saith y ^• there are thrée things which bear wit­nes, bloud, water, and the spirite: and these thrée (saith he) are one. This can by no meanes be true, if we haue a consideration to the nature of bloud, water, and the spirite. For these things are not one (as they vse to speake) in essence, or in kinde. But this verily agréeth with the father, the sonne, and the holy ghost which are the thing signified. And that thing which Augustine here writeth, may we easely per­ceaue in the sacramēts which we now entreate of, in which, the properties of the signes, and of the thing of the sacrament are put one for an other. Now that I haue sufficiently spoken of the name and definition, and also of the matter and forme of the sacraments, there resteth to speake of the finall and efficient cause of them. The end of the sacra­mentes. The ende for which the sacraments were instituted, is, that our mynde being ad­monished by the senses might be stirred vp, and by faith take holde of the promises of God, and so be inflamed with a desire to attaine vnto them. For we sée, y ^• signes tend to no other ende, but to transferre and to imprint those things which we our selues haue in our mindes, into the minde of an other man: that therby he may be made the more certaine of our meaning and will. And this is not cōmonly done, but in matters of great weight. For if they be but light matters, we are not accu­stomed to confirme them with signes. But in things of great importance, they are To things of greate wayght are added signes. commonly vsed: As when princes are consecrated, whē matrimonies are contrac­ted, when bargainings & gifts, or other such like couenaunts of great waight are made. For we desire to haue them to the vttermost witnessed, and to be knowne not only by reason, but also by the sences. But there can be no other efficient cause of the sacramentes geuen, but either God, or our Lord Iesus Christ, who also is verily God: and of them ought we to haue an euident testimony out of the holy scrip­tures. Which thing is most plainly declared by the definition, which we haue now set forth. For thus we defined them, namelye, that sacramentes are signes, not indede naturall, but appointed, & that by the will of God. And this his will can not be made known vnto vs, but onely out of y ^e holy scriptures. And therfore it is no hard matter to know how many they are in number in the new Testament. We sée, y ^• How many the sacra­mentes of the new testament are. New found out sacra­mentes ex­cluded. Christ instituted Baptisme, and the Eucharist: but the other sacramentes, which the schole deuines set forth, can not by the worde of GOD be proued to be sacra­ments. We speake not this, as though we deny that matrimony is to be had in re­uerence, or that the ordinations of ministers is to be retained still, or that penance is to be doue: although we reiect auriculer confession, and other the abuses thereof, & deny it to be a sacrament, otherwise euen we also do highly esteme these things, but not as sacraments. Neither dislike we with that confirmation, whereby chil­dren when they come to age should be compelled to confesse their faith in y ^• church, and by outwarde profession to approue that whiche was done in Baptisme when they vnderstoode nothing: but yet in such sort, that of such an action we frame not a sacramēt. But as touching extreme vnctiō, it is manifest, y ^• it nothing pertayneth vnto vs: especially seing it had no lōger any force, then whilest the gifts of healings were extant in the Church. And forasmuch as those giftes are now long since ta­ken away, it were absurde to kepe still the vayne signe thereof. Neither also dyd Why be­sides bap­tisme and the Eucha­rist, the rest are not pro­perly sacra­mentes. Basilius putteth vn­ction a­mongst tra­ditions nei­ther saith he that it is had out of the scrip­tures. Christ commaund that this vnction should perpetually be vsed in the church. But those other things which we before spake of, although they may still be wyth pro­fite retained, yet are they not properly sacramentes, eyther bicause they haue not outward signes: or els bicause they wantmanifest words of promises, which should by a visible signe be sealed: or els bicause there is no commaundemēt of God extant wherby we are bound to obserue these thinges. Basilius in his booke de spiritu sancto, where he reckneth vp the traditions of the church, maketh mencion of y ^e signe of the crosse, wherwith we ought to defend our selues: and that adorations vppon [Page 80] the Sonday, and from the resurrection vnto the feast of Penticost ought to be done standing vpright. Amongst others also he reckeneth holy vnction. Hereby we sée, y ^• this father held not, that this vnction is had out of the holy scriptures, which thyng our aduersaries rashly do. Farther by his wordes we gather, of how great waighte it is, when as it is put amongst the number of those thinges, which haue now long since growen out of vre. Now let vs sée what be the effectes of the sacraments. The Effectes of the sacra­mentes. maister of the sentences, in the 4. booke in the first dist. putteth thre effectes of the sacramentes. For he would that as men for pleasure sake haue made themselues subiect vnto thinges sensible and inferiour vnto themselues, so now they should for piety sake do the same, that of a certaine modesty, or (as they speake) humilitie, they should suffer themselues to be made subiect vnto these visible signes of the sacra­ments. By the sa­craments we are not made sub­iect vnto creatures In the sa­cramentes we are in­structed touching thinges di­uine. But herein he far erreth. For by the sacraments we are not made subiect vnto creatures, neither ought we to worship them. Onely the mind is there erec­ted vnto God, that man may be restored vnto his olde dignitie. For he is set to be aboue all things which are sene, and not to be subiect vnto them. The second effect he putteth, to be erudition, that by the outwarde signes we should be instructed of things heauenly. Which thing we also vndoubtedly affirme. Lastly he sayth, that therfore thei were iustituted, that we should not be idle, but be profitably exercised in true ceremonies, rasting away supersticions. But this, vnles it be declared, is not very plaine. For we are sufficiently occupied in beleuing, praying, readyng of the word of God, and doing good to our neighbours. But outward ceremonies al­though they be instituted of God, yet without faith they nothing profit. Wherfore the exercising of them doth not of it selfe please God. Howbeit if faith be presēt, su­persticions can take no place, for that it hath alwayes a regard vnto the worde of God. Wherfore after this maner they may be called exercises of faith and of pietie, and be counted acceptable vnto GOD. But we will after a better sorte set forth these effectes of the sacraments. First, we say that they instruct vs, which thing is alredye said: Secondly, that they kindle in vs fayth, & a desire of y ^e promises of God: Thirdly, that they knit vs together in a streighter bond of charity, for that we are By the sa­cramentes the holy ghost kind­leth in vs fayth. Other effectes. What thinges are repugnante vnto the sa­cramentes. Vnto the sacraments are some­times attri­buted those thinges which long vnto the thinge sig­nified. Who be sa­cramenta­ries. They are not bare signes. A sacramēt is not of his owne nature a sacrifice. all initiated with one and the selfe same mysteries. And to these may two other ef­fects also be added. For by the sacraments, we are both seperated from other sects, & also are admonished to lead an holy life. But touching grace, whither it be confer­red by the sacraments or no, we shall afterward sée. These things being thus orde­red, there are two thinges which are contrary and repugnaunt vnto the nature of the sacraments. The first is, if we attribute to much vnto them. For by y ^• meanes is easely brought in idolatry: when as that which belongeth vnto God onely, is as­cribed vnto a creature. And if at any time the sacraments are sayd, either to saue or to remit sinnes, or any such like thing, the same ought to be vnderstand of the thing signified and not of the signes. For these thinges onely procéede of the pro­mise and liberality of God, whiche is sealed vnto vs by visible signes. And often­times it happeneth, that both the scriptures and y ^e fathers seme to attribute vnto y ^e signes, those things which only belong vnto the promises. But now they which after this maner attribute more thē is mete vnto y ^e sacramēts, may be called sacra­mentaries, bicause they put to much affiāce in thē. The other thing which we said is repugaant vnto the nature of the sacraments, is, when we count them to be nothing but bare & naked signes. For by that meanes they shuld nothing differ from Tragicall and Comicall significations, and from colours and garments. Nether are they only signes of our actions, but also of the promise and of the will of God, and are sealinges therof. And the holy ghost doth no les vse these signes to stirre vp our hartes, then he vseth the woords of God which are in the holy scriptures. And hereby also we may se, that they likewise are agaynst the sacraments, which will haue them to be sacrifices. For the nature of a sacrifice is, to be offred of vs vnto God: but the nature of a sacrament is, to be offred of God vnto vs. I confesse indeed, that in the celebracion of the supper of the Lord are contayned thankesgeuing, almes, prayers, and other such like things: which [Page] may haue the consideration of a sacrifice. But we deny, that the very sacrament The sacri­ficing priestes of­fer not Christ vn­to God the father. The instrument wher­by the thing of the sacramente is receaued is fayth. of the Eucharist may properly be called a sacrifice. And much les is that to bee borne with all, which the sacrificing priests make theyr boast of, that they offer vp vnto God, the body of Christ. Our lord hath offered vp himselfe, nether hath he nede of any other to offer him vp. Now that we haue well considered all these thinges, we nede not manye woordes to expresse the instrument, whereby the thing of the sacrament is receaued. For, Paul hath most manifestly declared it, when he sayd, that Circumcisiō is the seale of the righteousnes of fayth. For it is faith wherby y ^• righteousnes, which is signified in y ^• sacrament, is receaued of vs: for nether can our sense or reason therunto attayne. And Augustine, expoūding these woordes of Iohn, Now ye are cleane bycause of my word. sayth: that in that the sacraments doo make vs cleane, they haue it of the word of God. For if thou take away (sayth he) from the element the word, there will nothing remayne but water only. The woord commeth vnto the element, and it is made a sacrament. For how commeth it (sayth he) that the water toucheth the body, & washeth the hart? He answereth: that the same commeth to passe thorough the force and power of the word, not bycause it is spoken, but bycause it is beleued. By these thinges it is manifest that fayth is it, whereby we receaue clensing and sanctification. which thing also is written in the Actes of By the po­wer of the word we a [...]e w [...]hed not because it is spoken but because it is beleued the Apostles: By fayth purifiing theyr harts. And Paul to the Ephesians sayth, that Christ loued the Church, and clensed it with the lauacre of water. But there is added, In the woord, that is, by the word: which (as Augustine sayth) is vnderstand to be done, bycause it is beleued, and not bycause it is spoken. For by the pronuncia­tion of the woords, are neither changed the natures of the signes, nor the bene­fites of God geuen: for so it mought seme an enchantment. Fayth (I say) is the instrument, wherby we receaue the woordes of God, and let them downe into The bene­fites of God are not geu [...]n by the pro­nounciatiō of the woordes. The sacra­mēts must be admini­stred as Christ hath instituted them. our mindes. But now touching the maner of administring the sacramēts, there ought none other maner to be brought in, then that which Christ himselfe the author of the sacramentes hath commended vnto vs. For if the Iewes durst not deale otherwise in the ceremonies of the old law, thē was prescribed thē of God: much more ought we to obserue those ceremonies, which christ hath prescribed vnto vs, after the selfe same maner that he hath prescribed them. Farther for­asmuch as those signes came from the wil of God, and of theyr own nature signifie nothing, what is more reasonable then to referre all thinges vnto his wil, which hath geuen them. But his will can by no other wayes be knowen, but by y ^e holy scriptures, And vndoubtedly no mā will presume to alter the letters pa­tents of kings graunts: much more ought y ^e same thing to be takē hede of in y ^e sacramentes of God. And the minister by whome these thinges ought to be ex­ercised and distributed (althoughe it be conuenient, that he be godly and of an honest lyfe, for such a one is to be maintayned and when he behaueth himselfe The wic­kednes of the minister corrupteth not the sa­cramentes. A similitude otherwise, and is knowen so to be, he ought no longer to be suffred) yet though he be wicked, so long as he kepeth still that funciō, he can not vitiate the sacra­ments, so that he doo those thinges which Christ hath commaunded to be done. Augustine hath a very trime similitude, of a pipe of stone, through which water is brought into a garden. For although the pipe be made nothing the more fer­tile by meanes of the running through of the water, yet is the garden by it wa­tred, and made fruitfull. The dignity of the sacramentes dependeth not of the minister, but of the institution of God: which thing the donatistes not vnder­standing, raysed vp much tumults agaynst the Church. That is true which is commonly sayd of liuing creatures, that by a dried vp member the spirite of life can haue no passage into the other member. For if the arme be dead and withe­red Solucion of the argu­ment ob­iected. vp, the life and spirite can not come vnto the hand. But in the Church, there is no suche greate coniunction betwene menne. For the power of the sacra­ments is to vs as the light of the Sonne: which light although it bee dispersed through vile and filthy places, yet is it not therfore contaminated or infected. But the times of the sacramentes may be deuided into two partes. For some [Page 81] were before the comming of Christ, and some after. And these differ the one frō the other, by outward notes and signes. Nether was that done rashly or with­out Of sacra­ments some were before the com­ming of Christe and some after. The sacra­ments of the elders & our sacra­mentes are aptly distinguished vp signes. Two er­rors to be eschewed in the sacra­mentes. A simili­tude. An other simil [...]ude How the signes of the elders are taken a­way and how they abide. What are the thinges of the sacra­ment. By the se­cond com­ming of Christ shall our signes be taken a way. Our sacramēts more excellenter then the sacramentes of the elders The nature of the thinges signified is one and the same, We and the Iewes in the old time haue one & the same stocke and one and the same roote. The diuer­sity of tyme distingui­sheth them. greate consideration. For we also (as sayth Augustine) do after one sort sig­nifye thinges to be done, and after an other sorte affirme thinges already done. which thing these two woordes now pronounced sufficiently declare. But here are two errors to be taken hede of vs, as the same father agaynst Faustus very well admonisheth vs. Fyrst, that we thinke not, that though the signes be chaū ­ged, therefore the thinges also are diuerse: or that forasmuch as the thing is one and the selfe same, therfore the signes ought not, nor can not be changed. For if an housholder may commaunde streighter thinges vnto those seruauntes, for whome he knoweth it expedient to be more streightly kept vnder: and may laye easier burdens vpon theyr neckes, whome he will count as his children: why then may not God doo the same towardes men. Phisitions also vse according to the diuersity of the disseases of the sicke persons, to minister dyuers and sondry medicines: of all which medicines yet the force is one & the same, namely, to restore health. But whether the signes of the old Testament haue now vtterly ceased or no, Augustine answereth in his boke de vera religione, that they remayne by interpretacion and faith, but are in very dede taken away. But as touching the things thēselues, the things which were set forth vnto the elders in their sa­craments, & which are set forth vnto vs in our sacramēts, were one & the same. And if thou demaund, what were those thinges which were common vnto the fathers and vnto vs, it may in fewe words be answered, God, Christ, reconci­liation, Grace, Remission of sinnes, and such other like thinges. These things were in tymes past signified, and set forth to be beleued in the sacramentes of the elders: and the selfe same, are in our tyme signified in the new Testament, and set forth in our sacramentes. But the signes and simbols, which the fa­thers vsed, were changed by the comming of Christ: at whose second comming also, those likewise which we now haue, shall be taken away. For when we haue once the fruition of that chiefe felicity which we wayte for, we shall then nede no sacramentes. Farther besides the alteration of the signes, are also out of Augustine gathered some other conditions, whereby is declared, that our sa­cramentes are more excellenter then were the sacrrmentes of the elders. For ours (sayth he) are in power greater, in profit better, in acte, easier: in number fewer, in vnderstanding most full of maiesty, in obseruation most pure, and in signification most excellent. Those thinges indeede are greate, but yet they alter not the nature of the thinges signifyed. Neyther cause they, but that our sacramentes and the sacraments of the elders, are as touching the substance one and the same. Paul in his epistle vnto y ^• Romanes, sayth, that the Iewes as vnprofitable branches were cut of frō the holy tree, and we grafted into theyr place. And the roote (sayth he) carieth thee, and not thou the roote. wherby it is manifest, y ^• both we & the fathers, as touching the substaunce of saluation, are in one and the same stocke, and in one and the same roote. Wherefore the better and worthyer part of the sacramēts, is one and the selfe same. And whatsoeuer differēce there is betwene vs & them, the same consisteth wholy in the comming of Christ, past, and to come. Where­fore Augustine agaynst Faustus sayth, that our sacramentes are signes of thinges now fulfilled, but the sacramentes of the elders were signes of thinges which were to be fulfil­led. And vpon the 6. chapter of Iohn he sayth, that in signes, they were diuers from ours, but in signification of thinges, like. I know in deede, and I remember that the fathers are wont sometymes aboue measure to extenuate the sacramentes of the elders. Chrisostome in hys 27. homely vpon Genesis denyeth, that circumci­sion The fa­thers exte­nuate the sacraments of the elders any thing profited vnto saluation: but that the Israelites caried it about with them, as a token of gratitude and as a signe and a seale, to the ende they should not be contaminated by mingling themselues with other nations. And in his 39. homely he sayth: that it was a bridle and a payer of fetters vnto the Iewes that they shoulde not mingle themselues wyth other nations. And [Page] he affirmeth that God commaunded it vnto Abraham, and vnto his posterity, that by an outward sygne he myght declare, that he was the possessor of hym. And for that cause he changed his name. For so do we also, when we take into our possession a beast or a bondman. For we geue vnto them a name, and we marke them with our signe or marke. And vpon the same booke in the 40. ho­mely, he sayth, that the Iewes by circumcision were knowen. And hereunto may be added Ambrose, expounding this selfe same place which we are now in hand with. For he declareth, that circumcision did only put a difference be­tweene The fa­thers speke not after one manner touching this thing. the posterity of Abraham and other nacions. Howbeit they do not eue­ry where speake after one maner. For the same Ambrose when he expoundeth that place in the 10. chapter of the first to the Corrinthyans. That the elders wer baptised in the sea, sayth that theyr sinnes were not imputed, and that they were without doubt purified. These thinges are of much more excellency then to be seperated, or to differ from other nations. And Augustine agaynst Faustus Augustine graunteth the true baptisme vnto the elders. The schole deuines. Circumci­sion was not a bare signe. in hys 12 booke and 29 chapter, expressedly sayth, that the sea and the cloude was baptisme consecrated in the bloud of Christe, and by them the sinnes of the Iewes were forgeuen: all which thinges are common with our sacramentes. Farther all the schole deuines hold, that circumcision was a remedy against original sinne wherby we may perceiue, that they hold not, that circumcision was a bare and vayne signe. There may also for profe hereof be brought places of the scripture, which teach the selfe same thing. For in the 10. chapter of the fyrst epistle vnto the Cor. the elders are sayde to haue bene baptised, and to haue eaten the selfe same spirituall meate, and to haue dronke the selfe same drinke, which we at this day eate and drinke. And agayn in the 2. chapter to the Collossians he sayth, that we are circumcised with circumcision not made with handes: And he addeth, By the washing away of the sinnes of the fleshe: where he declareth, that in the signe of circumcision, was through Christ geuen the washing away of sinnes. And in the booke of Genesis the 17. chapter is most manifestly declared, that circum­cision Whither the sacra­mentes of the elders and ours be one and the selfe same. was the signe of the couenant, wherein God promised, that he woulde be the God both of Abraham and of hys seede. But agaynst those thinges, whiche haue bene spoken, is obiected vnto vs out of the 10. chapter of the first to the Cor­rinthyans, that Paul there affirmeth not, that the sacramentes of the elders were one and the same with ours: but only writeth thys, that the elders had one and the selfe same sacramentes amongst themselues, and yet many of them shame­fully perished and were destroyed in the desert, although they had in the sacra­mentes communicated with other godly men. Wherefore they say, that Paul of the lesser or of the like would conclude, that we also if we lyue wickedly shall perishe, although we be initiated in Christ, and vse the selfe same sacramentes that the elect of God do. But agaynst this exposition the wordes of the Apostle hymselfe are most playnly repugnant. For he sayth, that the elders had in their sacramentes the selfe same meate that we haue, that is, Christ. For thus he The elders did eate and drinke Christ, er­go they had the fru [...]cion of the selfe same meate that we haue. writeth, And they dranke of the spirituall rocke following them: and the rocke was Christ, Now, if they had Christ, doubtles they wanted not the meate of our sa­cramentes: which can not be sayd to be any other thing, then Christ. Farther we see, that the Apostle hath by expresse wordes put the names of our sacra­mentes. For he nameth baptisme and spirituall meate and drinke. Farther if we follow the expositions of our aduersaries, we shal make Paules argument of small force. For he ment to reproue the security of the Corrinthyans, which se­med to promise vnto themselues saluatiō for this cause only because they were Christians, and partakers of the holy misteryes, although in the meane tyme they liued losely, and dissolutely. Wherefore he declareth that God would se­uerely punishe them, except they repented, as we reade he punished the fathers of the old testament, when he sondry wayes afflicted them in the desert. And if their sacramentes and ours were not one and the selfe same, Paul concludeth nothing. For the Corrinthyans mought haue sayd: yea but our Testament is [Page 82] a farre other thyng, then was the testamēt of the olde fathers: & our sacramēts are farre excellenter then were their sacramentes. Wherefore God wil not af­flicte vs, neyther oughtest thou to compare vs with them. By this meanes is Paules argument made of no force, if we take away the similitude and propor­tion of the things of our sacramēts with y ^e things of y ^• sacramēts of the elders Augustine sayth that the sacra­mentes of the elders and ours at one and the selfe same. Farther also Augustine in his. 26. treatise vpon Iohn most plainlye teacheth, that the Elders as touching the spirituall thing, had in their sacraments the self same thing that we haue. In outward forme (he sayth) one thing was geuen vnto thē, and an other vnto vs: but as touching the thing signified, he acknowledgeth no difference at all. Wherfore the place of the Apostle, which our aduersaries haue by their expositions, gone aboute to wreste from vs, is by these reasons to be defended. They obiect moreouer, that the Fathers in many places say, that the sacramentes of the Elders were shadowes and images of that truth, which is ex­hibited in our sacraments. Vnto them we aunswer, that images may two ma­ner of wayes be taken. For some are outwardly vayne and voyde, and contayne nothing: other images haue in dede the thing it selfe, but yet intricatelye and obscurely, if they be compared with other images that are more open. And thys Images taken two manner of wayes. second way we will easely graunt, that the sacraments of the Elders were ima­ges and shadows of ours, not that the elders had not in their sacramēts y ^• self same things y ^• we receue in ours, but because their sacramēts more intricately and ob­scurely shadowed those thinges. To the better explication hereof, Chrisostome se­meth to bring a verye apt similitude, in his homelye which he made vpon these wordes of Paul, Our fathers were baptised into Moyses, and in his. 17. Homely vp­on the Epistle vnto the Hebrews. Paynters (sayth he) when they entend to paynt a King, firste draw out the proportion vpon a table wyth shadowes and darke colours: but yet in such sort, that a man may by that delineation, althoughe it be somewhat ob­scure, easely perceyue, that the image of a Kyng is there paynted, and horsemen and cha­riots, and such other like thinges, which thinges yet are not straight way knowen of all men. But afterward, when the Paynter hath layd enfresh colours, and hath finished the worke, those thinges which before by those first lines appeared scarce begonne and rude, ar now manyfestly and expressedly perceaued. Such (sayth he) were the Sacramēts of the Elders, if they be compared with ours. By these wordes it is manifest, that Chrisostome was of the opinion, that one and the selfe same thing is represented The names of the sacra­mentes of the elders and of ours are put one for an other in our Sacraments, and in the Sacramentes of the Elders, although in theyrs more obscurely, and in ours, more manifestly. But how great a nearenes there is betwene both these kindes of Sacraments, Paul séemeth hereby to teach, in that he putteth the names of the one, for the names of the other, and maketh them common to both. For in the. 10. chapter of the firste epistle to the Corrinth. he af­firmeth, that the Elders were baptised, and had one and the same spirituall meate, and one and the same spirituall drinke, which we now haue. And on the other side, to the Colossians, he calleth our Baptisme, Circumcision. For he saith: that we are circum­cised in Christ, but yet with a circumcision not made with handes, by putting of the bo­dy of the sinnes of the flesh. In which place he ascribeth vnto circumcision, y ^e puttyng of sinnes. But they thinke that this maketh against vs, which is red in the viij. chapter to the Hebrewes, where it is written: In that that he sayth now, he hath abo­lished Whether the old te­stament be vtterly a­bolished. that which was before. But that which is abolished and waxen olde, is euen at hād to vanish away. Of these wordes they conclude, that the olde testament is vtterly a­bolished. Which thing (say they) could not be possible, if the substaunce therof were one, and the same with the substance of the new. But these men ought to haue cō ­sidered, that the substance of the olde Testament is not abolished. In dede ceremo­nies are abolished as touching the outward signes: howbeit the signification of thē abideth the selfe same that it was. Iudiciall preceptes also, although in our dayes they be not all had in vse, yet the summe and principall scope of them, is stil retai­ned, namely, y ^• sinnes should be punished, and iustice preserued in cōmon wealths. But the sence and obseruation of morall preceptes, remaineth stil perfect & whole: although they no more either accuse, or condemne the conscience, to the destructiō [Page] of the elect. But they say, that Augustine, also is against our sentence. For in hys preface vpon the 73. psalme, thus he writeth: That the sacramentes of the elders pro­mised a saulour, but ours geue saluation. But by these wordes Augustine mente one­ly to put a distinction betwene the maner wherby the sacraments of the elders sig­nified Christ in one sort, and ours in an other sort. For they so represented Christ, as which should one day come: ours do so represent him, as now already come. For how could Augustine thinke, that the sacramentes of the elders did by no meanes geue a sauior, when as he most manifestly testifieth that the fathers in the Manna had the selfe same Christ, which we now haue in the Eucharist. And in his booke de nuptijs & concupiscentia ad Valerium, and other places he oftentimes con­fesseth that the Elders were by circumcision deliuered from originall sinne. Bede also vpon Luke affirmeth the selfe same thing, and saith, that circumcision differed nothing from baptisme, as touching remission of sinnes, but onely that it opened not the gates of the kingdome of heauen. For to the performance of that, the death of Christ was looked for. Touching this thing surely, I will not much contend, so that this be graunted, y ^• those fathers being dead in what place so euer they were, were in the presence & sight of God in happy state. For they had without al doubt the fruicion of God, neither is it to be thought, that they could bée forsaken of hym in whom they beleued. But that they were caried vp into heauen, before Christ as­cended vp, I know the fathers do deny, neither do I therein any thing contende a­gainst them. But let vs returne vnto that that these fathers of their owne accords graunt, namely, that Circumcision toke away originall sinne. How then can they An error of the master of the sen­tences. say, that Christ by circumcision was not geuen at all? For what remission of sins could there be without Christ? The maister of the sentences very absurdly thin­keth, that circumcision had y ^e power of remitting of sinnes, but not of conferring of grace: as though forsooth remission of sinnes can be had without grace. He fayneth also, that the sacraments of the Gospell had their force of the death of Christ: and The death of Christ was of effi­cacy euen before it was payde. forasmuch as this death is now accomplished, therefore are they of more efficacy & more mightier then the sacraments of the elders: as in whose time the price of the death of Christ was not yet paid. But this their sentence wherby they appoint the force and merite of the passion of Christ, to be but for a time, cannot be but absurd. For of what more force to saue is the death of Christe now that is already past, then it was in the old time, when it was looked for to come? Vndoubtedly, on eche side is required faith, whereby assuredly we do no lesse comprehende thinges to come, then we do things past. But if we will say, that GOD hathe a respect vnto the sacrifice of hys sonne offered vppon the crosse, vndoubtedly, this was from all eternitie, and before the foundations of the worlde were layd, ratified and most fully accepted of him. Of Christ also it is written in the Apocalips. That the lambe was slayne from the beginnyng of the worlde. And where as they say, that circumcisiō had the power to take away originall sin, frō whence I pray you had it such so greate power, but from the death of Christ? Doubtles our baptisme so agre­eth with circumcision, that Augustine agaynst the letters of Petilianus in hys 2. booke and 72. chapter and in other places, proueth, that the sacramēt of bap­tisme ought not to repeted, because circumcision in the olde tyme was not re­peted, if a man had receaued it of the Samaritanes, and were afterward con­uerted How the sacraments of the el­ders were weake, and beggarly elements of the worlde. Why there were more sacraments in the law then in the Gospell. vnto the sincere religion of the Ierosolomites. But amongst other thinges, this semeth not a litle to haue moued our aduersaryes, for that it is written vnto the Galathyans of the ceremonies of the elders, that they were weake and beggerly elementes of the world. But these wordes of Paule are to be vnderstand of those olde sacramentes whiche are now abrogated by Christ. Or if this aunswere like not, then vnderstand Paule so to speake of the sacra­mentes of the elders, as he saw the Iewes at that tyme vsed them, namely, without Christ or hys promise. But the first answere is both truer and play­ner for that place. And if a mā demaund, how it commeth to passe, that the sa­cramentes of the elders were more in number then ours, this question may ea­sely [Page 83] be answered. Namely, that the church was then beginning, neyther did they know so many thinges of Christ, as are made open vnto vs, after that he How they erre which speake soft­ly to them­selues the woordes of consecrati­on. is now come into the world and hath finished the sacrifice so long looked for. Wherefore it was requisite that God shoulde at that tyme by many ceremo­nyes and images shadow one and the selfe same thynge: but there is no neede now of such paynfull instruction. For (as we haue before sayd) the signes of the sacramentes were therefore geuen, to confirme the promises of God: not as though those promises are not of themselues firm inough, but that our minds, being otherwise hard to beleue, and wauering, should by sēsible signes be stren­thened. Chrisostome in hys 60. homely vnto the people of Antioch, If (sayth he) our nature had bene vtterly spirituall and without body, spirituall thinges shoulde haue bene deliuered vs, without corporall signes. Hereby it is manifest, how absurdely they order the matter which set forth the visible signes of the sacramentes to be sene of all men: but the promise which should be confirmed by those signes, and ought to cleaue vnto our mynds, they both pronounce in a strange tonge, and secretly mumble vp, that it should not be heard of others. But that the sacra­mentes Explicatiō of certaine of the sacramentes of the elders. of the lawe, which were so many in number, were seales of the promi­ses of God, may by induction be easely known. The tabernacle and Arke of the Lord sealed the promise, that God would dwell in that people, & that he would be in the middest of them. The conseccation of the priest, and the ornamentes of the garmentes, shadowed Christ the only priest, and the same perpetuall and eternall, as the author of the epistle to the Hebrues proueth. And of this selfe same promise, Dauid most playnly maketh mencion, when vnder the person of Christ he sayth, Thou art a priest for euer according to the order of Melchisedech. The sacrifices also signified the oblation of Christ vpon the crosse. But here some man will paraduenture say, Ergo, the sacrifices were sacramentes. How then do we say, that there is great difference betwene the nature of a sacrament, and the nature of a sacrifice? So indeede we sayd before, and now agayne constāt­ly Two thinges are to be consi­dered in sacrifices. affirme: but thereof it followeth not, but that the consideration of ether, may sometymes light vpon one & the same thing. The nature of a sacrifice and of a sacrament may concure in one & the same thing. For there were two things to be considered in sacrifices: fyrst, that there was something offred vnto God: and therein consisted the whole strength of sacrifices: secondly, that the oblati­on which was killed, and burnt, represented Christ, which was to be slayne for vs, by whome we shoulde haue God pacefied and mercifull. And after thys maner we doubt not but that in them was a sacrament. And how all these thinges were seales of most certayne promises, may easely be declared by euery one of them perticularly: as by the obseruation of the Sabboth, by cir­cumcision, by choyce of meates, by washing and sprinklinges of holy water, by the vow of the Nazarites, by the ceremony of the ielious, by the purification of the childwife after her deliuery, and by all such like kynde of misteries. But Whether the people in the old time vnderstood the promises which were sealed in th­ceremonyes because we would be briefe, we thought it sufficient to expresse those fewe now mēcioned. But there yet remaineth one doubt, whether the people of the Iewes hauing those sensible signes of ceremonies, vnderstoode also the promises of God, whiche were by thē sealed Augustine at large intreateth of this matter in his 4. boke agaynst Faustus, & in his 3. booke de Doctrina Christiana: & sayth, that the patriarches and prophetes, and the excellenter sort of men in the olde testament being illustrate with a mighty spirite, knew very well the significations of the ceremonies and of the sacramentes: so that they tooke not the signes, for the thinges, which (sayth he) is a miserable seruitude: but he thinketh that the people and common sort of men vsed these signes as the thinges themselues, for that they vnderstoode only this, that there is one only God, which ought to be honored with thys kynde of wor­shippinge and seruice. For if there were any, whiche when they knew those to be signes of other thinges, woulde yet notwithstanding enterprete them after their owne lust, y ^e had bene an error of a wandring mynde. By this doctrine of [Page] Augustine may be put three kindes of men, as touching the vse of signes. For Three kindes of men which vse signes. some there are, which in very deede vnderstand, what is signified, & therefore sticke not in the signes, but turne their eyes to the thinges signified. Others vse the signes, but to what they are to be referred, they know not: And this Au­gustine thinketh, pertayneth to seruitude. Lastly are those, whiche are not igno­rant, that those thinges which they vse are signes, but yet notwithstanding they peruersly, and as they lust themselues, interprete them. This is an error, & that very hurtfull. As touching the first, and third, I am of the same mynde that Au­gustine is. But in the second as touching the common and vulgare people of the Iewes, I do not so fully assent vnto him, to graunt, that the common people of the Hebrues know nothing els of the sacramentes, & ceremonies of the law, but that by them they shoulde worshippe the onlye and true God. For they were taught continually of the Scribes and of the priestes, and heard dayly the ora­cles of the prophetes. Whereby they mought easely gather, at the least a gene­rall signification of theyr sacramentes, as well touching Christ, as also tou­ching all other thinges pertayning to purenes of lyfe and holynes of maners. The doc­trine of the looking for the Messi­as was common. The doctrine of the looking for the Messias was so common amongst them, that, as I suppose, it was hidden from none o [...] them all. Phillippe, as it is written in the Gospell of Iohn, thus spake vnto Nathaniell: we haue founde the Messias, of whome Moses and the prophetes haue written. And the common people of the Iewes, being ama [...]ed at the miracles of Christ, sayd, we knowe that Messias shall come, and teach vs all these thinges. Hereunto also serueth that the prophetes euer tought, that ceremonies being done onely outwardly and with­out fayth, are most displeasant vnto God. And that fayth, which was required to outward rites, vnles it had had a respect vnto Christ, although not fully, yet some way, and that at the least generally, of what force could it haue bene? And The pro­phetes most diligentlye taughte the significati­of the cere­monies. forasmuch as the prophets were so diligent in obtruding, and euery where in­culcating the significations of the ceremonies, doo we thinke, that they taught nothing of Christ? dauid most playnly speaketh of sacrifices, that God delighteth not in them But a sacrifice vnto God (sayth he) is a troubled spirite, and a contrite and humble hart Touching washinges and clensinges, Esay instructeth them saying Be ye washed, and be ye clene. Ieremy also, washe (sayth he) thy harte from iniquitye. And Ezechiell sheweth that by those waters is signified the power of the holy ghost, when he bringeth in God promising, that he would poure cleane water vpon them. Touching Circumsion also they are verye often admonished in the holy scripture to circumcise they neckes and theyr hartes. And that they should not thinke, that they were able to doo this of them selues and by theyr owne strengthes, Moses in the 30 chapter of Deut. sayth, God shall circumcise thyne harte▪ that thou mayst loue him. Touching purifications and washinges of garmentes, and such other like thinges, they were thus admonished in Leuiticus the 11. chapter, I am the [...]ord thy God, which brought the out of the land of Egipt ye shalbe holy vn­to me, bycause I am holy. Touching the Saboth they were oftentimes told, that in it was signified the rest of God, and theyr santification. And if so be all these The people of the He­brues vn­derstoode that Messi­as was sig­nified in the sacraments of theyr times. thinges were so manifestly and playnly declared, which no man can doubt, but that vnto them they were good and profitable, and that it was not possible for them to be ignorant, that the attaynment of euerye good thinge came through Christ or the Messias, I can not be perswaded, but that they saw, that in theyr sacramentes was signified Christ. Moreouerr this also is an other reason Esay most manifestly testifieth, that God did lay vpon Christ all our sinnes, and that we were healed only by his stripes and death: wherfore seing in the sacraments mention is made, that God by sacrifices is made mercifull vnto vs, they could The people knew generally and not perti­culerly the considerati­of all the misteries. not but cal to remembraunce, the only mediator Christ, by whome only is God made mercifull vnto vs. Howbeit we can not affirme, that the common sort of the Israelites knew all the misteries perticularly. Onely this we say y ^• they had a certayne generall knowledge of Christ in the sacramentes of the law, when [Page 83] as otherwise we our selues can not perticularly render a reason of these ceremonies. The Apostles haue only generally made them playn vnto vs. And though there haue benne some amongst vs, as Origen, and a greate many other like, which haue attēpted to frame for euery perticular ceremony a proper alegory, yet haue they in a manner but lost theyr labour. For theyr inuentions could We must not geue our selues to much to Allegories. Error of the schole­men. bring no profite at all vnto vs. For they most plainely want the woord of God. Nether is it to be meruayled at, that they so muche delighted in such inuentiōs, For euen as euery where our owne deuises woonderfully please vs, so in this matter, the curiosity of man excedingly delighted it selfe. Now those things which we haue spoken most playnly declare, how farre the schole men haue missed of the marke, which haue betwen the old sacrementes, and the new, put this difference, that the old sacramentes only signified grace and Christ, but ours largly and aboundantly exhibite both. For the elders (say they) were holpen by the woorke of the worker. For when any man came with fayth and a godly Of the worke working [...] and the worke, wrought. motion of the hart and of the minde vnto those holy seruices, he had therby me­rite. But the woorke wrought (as they call it) nothing profited them as tou­ching saluation. But in our sacraments they say it is farre otherwise: that not only fayth and the spirituall motion of the minde, which they call the woorke of the worker, helpeth vs, but also euen the outward sacramente it selfe, and the institution of God, which they call the worke wrought, conferreth vnto vs both remission of sinnes and also saluation. But I will demaund of these men, what that is which the outward worke and the visible sacrament exhibiteth vnto vs, that we do not attayne vnto by fayth: if they aunswere that it is Christ as for hym we comprehende by fayth: If remission of sinnes, that also, we obtayne by fayth: if reconciliation, wherby we returne into fauor which God, this also we can not obtayne without fayth: if last of all the encrease of grace and of the spirite, neither vndoubtedly doo we by anye other meanes obtayne this, but by fayth, what is there then remaning, that this worke wrought bringeth? This word is altogether strange, nether is it once mēcioned of in the holy scriptures. Worke wrought a woorde neuer heard of. Nether would I at this time haue vsed it, but that I haue to contēd agaynst the aduersaries. But paraduenture they will say, Forasmuch as besides fayth is also added the outward woorke, is there nothinge to be attributed vnto it? yes vndoubtedly, I attribute much vnto it when it procedeth of fayth. For I know that such a worke pleaseth God, and that he vseth to recompence many thinges vnto such workes. But what maketh that to this present purpose. Did not the elders vnto theyr fayth adioyne also those workes, wherby they exercised and re­ceaued the sacraments of theyr law? Wherfore as touching this part, wee see that they had in theyrs as many things which pleased God, as we haue in ours: vnles paraduenture they wil contend, that the exercising and receauing of our sacramentes, is ether a better, or nobler woorke then was the exercising and receauing of the sacramentes of the elders: which thing I will not graunte vnto The recea­uing of our sacraments is not more excellent or better then the recea­uinge of the sacraments of the elders Whither the sacra­mentes conferre grace and remitt [...] sinnes. thē: especially seing y ^• the perfectin of the worke is to be cōsidered by faith and charity from whēce it procedeth: wherfore if Abraham and Dauid had more faith when they receaued theyr sacramentes, then any weake Christian, when he is baptised, or communicateth, who will not iudge but that theyr worke is more notable and more excelēt then the other mans worke? And moreouer as for that kinde of speach which these men so often vse, namely, that sacraments remitte sinnes, ar conferre grace we do not easly admite: vnles paraduenture in that sēse wherin Paule affirmeth, that the Gospell is the power of God to saluatiō: & as vnto Timothe the reading of the holy scriptures is sayd to make saffe: which vn­doubtedly is nothing ells, but that the might and power of God wherby he re­mitteth sinnes, geueth grace, and at the end saueth, vseth these instruments and meanes to our saluation. And euen as to bring vs to saluatiō, he vseth the word of the Gospell, and the preaching of the holy scriptures, so also adioyneth he ther vnto the sacraments. For by ether of them is preached vnto vs the liberall pro­misse of God: which if we take hold of by fayth, we shall obtayne both saluatiō [Page] and also remission of sinnes. This is the true sense, vnto which also are the fa­thers to be applied, when they say that grace is the power of the sacramentes. Which is all one as if they had sayd, vnderstanding and sense is the power of speach and of wordes. And how vnaptly the Scholemen speake of theyr stay or Of the stay or let of the scholemen. let, herby it is manifest, for that they say, that he putteth not a staye or let, which although he haue not the acte ether of louing, or of beleuing, yet obiecteth no­thing that is contrary or opposite vnto grace: namely, the acte of infidelity or of hatred. Thē in such case (say they) the sacraments of the Gospel conferre grace. But this is nothing ells, then to attribute vnto creatures the cause of our sal­uation, and to binde our selues to much to signes and elements of this world. Thys ought to bee certayne and most assured, that no more is to be attributed vnto the sacramentes as touching saluation, then vnto the worde of God. Wher­fore We oughte to attribute no more vnto the sacraments then vnto the woord of God. How our sacraments are better then the sa­cramentes of the el­ders. Some­times is receaued the sacraments onely, sometimes the thinge one­lye. Grace is not bounde vnto the sa­cramentes as we put corne into sackes. if sometimes we heare, as Augustine also saith, our sacramentes are better then the sacramentes of the elders, this ought so to be vnderstanded that it be refer red vnto perspicuitie. For we graunt that our sacraments both speake and preach more plainly of Christ, then did the sacraments of the elders. Wherfore seing we are more clearely and plainly instructed, faith is the more fuller, and bringeth vn­to vs more grace and spirite. And we gladly admit that which the same Augustine saith: That sometymes it commeth to passe, that the sacrament is receyued wythout the thing. For so the wicked and infidels vsinge the sacramentes, receiue onelye the outwarde signes, and are vtterly voyde of saluation and of grace. Sometimes also it contrariwise happeneth, that the godly being excluded by any necessitie frō the vse of the sacramentes, yet are in no wise defrauded of the thing it selfe, and of the thing signified. Neither let any man here lay to our charge, that we affirme that sacraments depend of our faith: For neither teach we any such thing: yea ra­ther we affirme, that the sacraments are sacramentes, although thy faith be either weake, or els none at all. And Augustines iudgement is very good concerning him which onely carnally receiueth the sacrament, when he sayth: It doth not therefore cease to be spirituall: but vnto them it is not spirituall. And now at length to make an ende, we must neuer come to this point, to thinke that grace and our saluation is conteined in the sacramentes, as in certaine sackes or bagges, which may be pou­red out vpon the communicantes and receiuers. For the sacramentes are as cer­taine tidyng bringers of our saluation: whom he that beleueth, shall obtaine sal­uation. And thus much hitherto haue I sufficiently spoken of sacraments general­ly. Now resteth for vs somwhat to speake of circumcision: for the better vnderstanding wherof we haue spoken these things the more largely and with more words. But here we shall not nede so long a treatise. For if we remēber all those things, which haue bene generally spoken of sacraments, it shall be no hard matter to vn­stand all that which may be spoken of circumcision.

And circumcision (not to go from the wordes of the Apostle) was the seale of y ^• What cir­cumcision is. How cir­cumcisyon is sayd to haue brought re­mission of synnes. Whether remission be had of sinnes to come. righteousnes of faith, bicause it preached and confirmed the promise concernyng righteousnes, which the elders receiued by faith. And hereof it followeth, that the elders by it had remission of sinnes. For, forasmuch as righteousnes (as we haue be fore more at large debated) consisteth chiefly in the remission of sinnes, whosoeuer beleued the promise set forth and by circumcision sealed, it followeth of necessitie, that he was pertaker of the remission of sinnes. Some demaund, whether circumcision and baptisme which succeded it, bring remissiō onely of those sins which are alredy past, or also of those, which are afterward cōmitted. Let these mē cōsider, y ^• the vse of Circumcision and of Baptisme is not for a tyme, but perpetuall. For, as the faithfull oftentimes fal, so when they forthwith come againe vnto themselues, they thinke vpon the promise of the Gospell, which is of the remission of sinnes. Wherin also euen for this cause they are confirmed, for that they remember them In erroure of those which would not be baptised. but in the last houre. selues to be either baptised or circumcised: and so by putting to of faith, they are de­liuered from sinnes, and are reconciled vnto God. Hereby it is manifest, how they wer in the old time deceiued, which would not be baptised, but euē now whē death [Page 85] approched, & that they were in a maner geuing vp y ^• ghoste. Neither let any man thinke, y ^• this is repugnant vnto the kayes of y ^e Church, by which are receiued the penitent. For, that they may the better vnderstande the matter, this they must nedes graunt, that those kayes of the church are nothing els, but the preachyng of the Gospell, wherby the ministers do perswade the beleuers that their sinnes are forgeuen them. But they which are to be perswaded, are by the benefite of the ho­ly ghost persuaded, & their faith concerninge the promise is also hereby confirmed, for that they call to memory the signe of Baptisme or of Circumcision, whiche in times past they receiued. And Paule when he said, For the remission of the sinnes going before, ment, y ^• iustification when it is applied vnto vs, alwayes putteth away those sinnes which we haue before committed. But that nothing letteth, but that the promise of the remission of sinnes, and the sealing therof, may oftentimes with profite be called to our memory. But so oftentimes as sinne is so forgeuen, it fol­loweth of necessitie that the same sinne went before: but that which we speake of tendeth to this, to declare, that the vtilitie of the sacraments is not for a tyme, but pertaineth to the whole course of our life. Circumcision differed from other sacra­mentes, for that it was the beginning and first steppe and visible entrance to the couenaunt of God. But what maner ones the vncircumcised were counted, the A­postle declareth in the epistle to the Ephesians. Remember (saith he) that ye wer som­tymes Gentiles in the flesh, which were called vncircumcision of circumcision in the flesh made wyth hāds, ye were sometimes without Christ, aliants frō the cōmon wealth of the Israelites, straungers from the couenantes of the promises, without hope in the world, and without God. And in the epistle vnto the Phil. he teacheth, which is the true & spi­rituall What i [...] the spiritu­all circum­cision. circumcision. For we (saith he) are circumcision, which serue the Lord in spirite, and glory in Christ, and haue no confidence in the flesh. And vnto the Coloss. he writeth In whom (saith he) ye are circumcised with circumcision not made with handes, by the puttyng of the sinfull body of the flesh. By whiche place we sée (as we haue before also noted) that forgeuenes of sinnes is to be put, as well in Circumcision, as in Bap­tisme. Wherfore Augustine in his booke against Iulianus the Pelagian, in that part wherin he heapeth vp a great many authorities of the fathers, reproueth the Pela­gians by these wordes of the Apostle, for that notwithstanding they denied original sinne, yet they baptised their infāts: for, forasmuch as they affirmed y ^• in them is no sinne, how could that Baptisme (as Paule saith) be circumcision not made with handes, by the putting of of the sinful flesh? These places of the Apostle serue very much to the explication of the proprietie and nature of circumcision. And in Deut. the x. chap. the Lord saith: Thou shalt circumcise the vncircumcision of thyne hart, nei­ther shalt thou harden thy necke. In stede of vncircumcision the Chaldey interpreter hath, Tephaschoth that is, foolishnes: therby signifieng, y ^• the first ground of sinne herein consisteth, that we are blinde to all thinges pertaining to God, and that we The first ground of sinne. The pro­myse which circumcisiō sealed. are wonderfully infected with the ignoraunce of God. The 70. interpreters haue [...], that is, hardnes of hart. The promises which are offred vnto them y ^• are circumcised, are these: that God is made our God, and the God of our séede: in which onely thing we haue the horne of plenty: that is, the sūme of all good things. Hereof also springeth our felicitie, & consolatiō in all afflictiō: They were therbye also put in mind of y ^• mortifiēg of y ^• flesh: y ^• is, of y ^• cutting away of superfluous ple­sures, & moreouer by it they professed pure religiō. And in sum therby was signified y ^• couenāt made w ^t god. These wer y ^• things signified, & y ^e matter of this sacramēt and pertayne truly vnto the nature and substance therof. In baptisme also all those selfe same thinges are contayned. Only the signes are changed. Wherfore If circum­cision was geuen vnto infantes, baptisme cā not be deni­ed them. hereby we may conclude, that euen as in times past Circumcision was geuen vnto infants, so also Baptisme can not now he denied vnto them. For if they haue the thing, what reason is it, why they should not haue also the signe? And that we should not doubt, whether Circumcision and Baptisme are a like, and haue one and the self same nature, Paul most manifestly declareth it vnto the Co­lossians, in which place he calleth Baptisme, the circumcisiō of Christ. And they which affirme, that the infantes of the Hebrues oughte to haue bene circumcised [Page] but ours should not be baptised, do make God more fauorable vnto the Iewes, then vnto Christians. Some demaund, that seing we are ignorant whether in­fantes God is not more fauo­rable vnto the Iewes then vnto Christians. Seing we are vncer­tayne of the thing, why is the sea­ling added. haue the thing of the sacrament or no, why we geue them the signe, and seale y ^• which is vncertaine vnto vs? Vnto whom we answere, that this questiō is not moued agaynst vs, but agaynst the word of God. For he expressedly com­maunded and willed, that children shoulde be circumcised. Father let them aunswere vs, why they admitte them that be of full age vnto Baptisme and vnto the Communion, when as they are not sure howe theyr harte is affec­ted. For they whiche are baptised or doo communicate maye dissemble, and deceaue the Churche. They aunswere, that it is inoughe that they make theyr profession. If they lye, what is that to vs? say they, let them looke to that. So say we of infantes, that it sufficeth vs, that they are offred vnto the Church, e­ther of the parents, or of them in whose power they are. And if with the action of the sacrament be ioyned election and predestination, that which we doo is ratefied: but if not, then is it voyde. For our saluation dependeth of the election and mercy of God. But as touching election, for as much as it is hidden from What to­kens of the election of God we follow in geuing of the sacra­ments. When in­fantes are baptised the Church is enstructed vs, we iudge nothing. We follow only those signes and tokens of it, which wee may attayne vnto: as are these, that the children being infantes are offred vnto the Church to be baptised, and that when they come to age, they by words con­fesse, that they beleue in Christ: which tokens although they be not so certayne, that they can not fayle, yet vnto vs they are sufficient for the ministration of the sacraments. Nether as I thinke is this to be omitted, that when infants are baptised, although they haue not the vnderstāding of the signification to moue thē, yet notwithstanding doth it moue and instruct the Church which is present: but the infantes obtayne the benefits at Gods hand, who secretly worketh in them by the holy ghost. But the signification of the sacrament, they shall, whē by age they may, afterward perceaue and vnderstand, Nether let vs much be moued with the difference of the signes, of Circumcision (I say) and of Baptisme: for in the sacraments this part is of least wayght: for they may be changed, as experience hath now thought. And without them God can geue the more excellēt part. For nether is his power and mercy bound vnto the sacraments. Wher­fore The mercy and grace of God is not bound vnto the sa­cramentes. The thinge is more to be conside­red then the signes. when we vse the sacraments, we ought to applye our minde rather vnto the more excellenter and better part. Wherfore the Lord in Ieremy the 4. chap­ter after this maner reproueth the Iewes: Circumcise the foreskinnes of your hart, lest my fury be kindled, and there be no man to quenche it. But they which contem­ning fayth, and the thing signified, cleaue wholy vnto the signes, seme to deale euen altogether as they doo, which in kings letters patents with great diligēce kepe the seales, but the letters themselues and the giftes, they ether rent, or care not for.

Now are there two thinges remayning to be discussed. The one is, why cir­cumcision Why cir­cumcision was mar­ked in the member of generation. was commaunded to be marked in the member of generation: the second why it was commaunded to be done the eight day. Out of Augustine in diuers places we gather, that therefore God woulde haue it so, to put vs in mynde, that originall sinne, is by generation traduced from the parentes into vs: and that euen as the foreskin being cut of in the parent, doth notwithstan­ding returne agayne in the childe which is begotten, so originall sinne being re­mitted vnto y ^• parēts, buddeth vp agayn in y ^• children which are brought forth. We are thereby also admonished (whiche thing we haue before oftentymes mencioned) that the league of God pertayneth not only vnto vs, but also vnto our children whom we beget. Fynally by that signe was chiefely signified, that Christ shoulde spring of the seede of Abraham. Nether ought we here to follow our owne sence or humane reason, to thinke that to be a thing ridiculous or of small force, which God himselfe hath instituted. For otherwise the crosse of Christ and the Gospel are an offence vnto the Iewes, & foolishnes vnto the Gen­tiles. Neyther ought we to iudge of thinges deuine according to that which is [Page 86] shewed outwardly. Otherwise Iulianus and Celsus made a laughing matter, that the apple was forbidde our first parentes. And Naaman the Sirian thought Things deuine are not to be iudged by the out­ward appe­rance. it a thing ridiculous, that he should be seuen tymes washed in the riuer of Ior­dane. Nether doubt I, but that there were some which derided Moses, when he did cast the wood into the bitter waters, to heale their bitternes. In our dayes also very many meruayle, how it commeth to passe, that the stealth of one hal­peny bringeth eternall destruction. But these men ought to remember, that these thinges are not to be considered by their owne force: but vnto them must be added also the wayght of the word of God: which vndoubtedly is of so great wayght, that it waygheth heauier then the whole world. Neyther is there any thing so vile and abiect, but that when the word of God is added thereunto, it is made notable and excellent. Indeede kinges and princes of this world haue a The word of God is of most great waight. The seales of God consist not of thinges of goodly shew. care to haue goodly and honorable seales. But as touching the promises and gifts, which are by them sealed, they oftentymes deceaue men. But God when he vseth euen the most abiect signes, neuer deceaueth any man. Now will I speake a word or two of the consideratiō of y ^• eight day. The Hebrues affirme, that such is the dignity of the seuenth day, that of it all thinges obtaine I know not what force and strength. Wherefore they thinke, that after the seuenth day there commeth vnto the infant newly borne so much strength, that he is able easely to abyde the payne of circumcision. But let vs leaue vnto them these The eyght day betoke­neth the re­surrection of Christ. fayned toyes: and let vs rather thus thinke, that in the eight day was betoke­ned the resurrection of Christ, and therewith all ours, which thing, may ease­ly be perceaued by Paule: for he sayth, that in circumcision was signified the cutting of, of the sinnes of the flesh. But the sinnes of the flesh can neuer be perfectly cut of from vs, vntill we are come to the holy resurrection. All the whole tyme of this world, and the tyme of this whole life representeth a weeke of dayes. But the eight day signifieth the resurrection. There is moreouer an other reason The tyme of thys life is a weeke. not worthy to be contemned, namely, that a childe being so newely borne is able to do nothing of hymselfe as touching the attaynement of righteousnes. Wherfore hereby we be admonished, y ^• iustification cōmeth not of our workes. And although it were so in the rite of Circumcisiō, yet are not we in Baptisme bound to any certayn nomber of dayes. For Christ hath made vs fre from this In bap­tisme we are not compelled to an [...] certayne nomber of dayes. Circumci­siō mought in the pri­mitiue church be retayned for a time. kinde of obseruation. Howbeit there haue bene some, which haue gone aboute in Baptisme also to compell Christians vnto the eyght day. But those the Counsell held by Cypriam hath condemned. In the primitiue Church, Circumcision was for a tyme obserued. Augustine also vpon the epistle vnto the Galathians saith, that not euery circumcision after Christ was condemned, but only that circumcision, wherin was put hope of saluation: but that circumcisiō which was receaued for this cause only, to retaine peace in the Church, and the more to aduaunce the preaching of the Gospel, mought well be borne with all. For this cause Paul suffred Timothe to be circumcised. But if it be required to be done as necessary vnto saluation: it is by no meanes to be permitted. And therfore Paule ernestly resisted and would not suffer Titus to be circumcised, as it is written in the epistle to the Galathians. They say that euē now very many Chur­ches Many churches of the chri­stians re­taine still circumcisiō in the East or in the South retayn still to this day Circumcision together with Baptisme. How rightly they do it, let them see vnto that. Doubtles it is most likely, that, forasmuch as they haue retayned it so long, and that so stifly, they put some hope of theyr saluation in it. Wherefore they should do much better if they would vtterly omitte it. But it shalbe good, in the meane time to de­clare Why cir­cumcision bound men to obserue the law. how Paul to y ^• Galathians sayth: that he which is circumcised is debter to obserue the whole law. For when Abraham receaued Circumcision, the law was not yet geuen. Wherefore it semeth, that Circumcision had not that of his owne force and nature, to binde men to obserue the law. But we ought to remember, that that whiche the Apostle sayth, proceedeth out of an other principle: namelye, that Circumcision represented Christ as which should come, and geue himselfe vpon the crosse: and the law should so long be of force, vntil Christ came. Wher­fore [Page] seing by Circumcision they testified, that he was not as yet come, it must nedes follow, that they were kept still vnder the law, when as the law could only by the comming of Christ be abrogated. And with how greate an obseruation God would haue that sacrament to be kept, hereby it is manifest, for that in the booke of Genesis the 17. chapter he testefieth, That the soule which is not circumcised the 8. day, should be cut of from his people. Ambrose in his booke of Abraham the Pa­triarch, semeth to wonder at this so greate seuerity, For God (sayth he) appoynted How it is sayd that the soule of the vncir­cumcised should be cut of. cities of refuge, that if any had by chance, or vnwares killed a mā, he mought haue a place whether to go, that the frendes and kinsfolke of the party slayne should not kill hym: so that he had not of set purpose and willingly, but by chaunce and vnawares committed the murther. Wherfore seing infants did not by their owne will refuse circumcision, what reason was there they should bee cut of? He answereth, that therefore peraduenture God would haue the children depriued of theyr corporall life, that in them the parentes might be punished for theyr impiety. But he sayth that there were other which were of the opi­nion, that this sentence pertayned not vnto the infants: but vnto those in whose power they were, as if it had bene sayd, that they should be cut of. But the very words of the scripture are agaynst this sentence: wherefore he turneth himselfe to an allegoricall exposition: as though that threatning should pertayn to those, which circū cise not the mind, which is the strongest & most excellentest portion of the soule. But suche allegories satisfie not this question. Wherfore I thinke that two thinges are necessary to the absoluinge of this doubte. The firste is, that that threatning pertayned vnto him, when he came to full age, if he should then al­low the negligence of his parents, & not receaue Circumcision, vnto which he was by the law bound. The second is, that God is not to be accused of iniustice, if somtimes he killed the infant being so brought vp vncircumcised. For such se­uerity mought be of force to admonish mē, in how il part God taketh it, to haue his sacramentes contemned. And if paraduenture thou demaund, what is to be What is to be iudged of children that peri­shed with­out circum­cision. iudged of the soule of a child so killed, hauing not as yet receaued the sacramēt? I answer, that we, ether as touching his saluation or condemnatiō, can affirm nothing on neither side. For if he pertayned to the number of the elect, so that he was predestinate to eternall life, there is no cause, but that he may be saued: for­asmuch as grace is not bound vnto the sacraments. But if he were a vessell to that end made of God, to shew forth in him his wrath, and so to be condemned, what can we complayne of the seuerity of God, especially seing we are all borne the children of wrath, and of condemnatiō? Howbeit in my iudgmēt we ought to hope well of him: for that, forasmuch as the promise was geuen vnto the sede of Abraham, and he being an infant hath not by any actuall sinne of his owne withdrawen himselfe from the promise, it is most likely, that he is admitted vn­to the kingdome of God. Neither oughte we to thincke, that he was slayne of God to eternall condemnation, but rather to saluation, that he shoulde not by mallice change his hart: and that by hys death he mought testifye vnto hys pa­rents, vnto his elders, & vnto others, how greuously they sinned, in neglectyng hys circumcision: and might profite the whole Churche, being a manifest token of the wrath of God against the contemners of the sacramentes. Farther it is Before cir­cumcision were some signes of the sacra­mentes. Whether the sword wherewith they circumcised were made of stone. Circumci­on spread a­broade to outward nations. not hard to beleue, that godly men, which liued before Circumcision was insti­tuted, had other certayne notes, wherby theyr righteousnes, which was had by fayth was sealed. For we read, that they both offred fyrst fruites, and also sacri­ficed. But by what signe they signifyed theyr fyrst regeneration, the holy scrip­tures menciō not. And the Hebrues, in Circumcising their children, vsed a knife made of stone, which thing yet God commaunded not. But they were moued so to do by the example of Zippora the wife of Moses, whiche vsed suche a knife in circumcising of her sonne, when he was in danger to haue bene slayne of the angell. And although this sacrament was diligētly obserued and kept amongst the Iewes, yet it spred abrode also to forren nations. For if we may geue cre­dite to Ambrose in his. 2. booke of Abraham the patriarch, the Egiptians, Arabi­ans [Page 87] and Phenicians were circumcised. And he thinketh, that they for this cause did it, for that they thoughte, that by suche firste fruytes of their bloude are dri­uen The deuill as much as lieth in him vitiateth the sacra­ments of God. A foolish manner of the Iewes in circumc [...] sing of their children. The Egip­tians cir­cumcise their chil­dren in the 14. yeare. awaye diuels, to the ende that they shoulde not hurte hym which is circum­cised. So the deuill hath alwayes gone aboute to vitiate the sacramentes of God. For it was supersticion, to ascribe the power of saluation or of the deliuery from Sathan, vnto the nature of bloud shed forth. And at this day the Iewes seme not to be farre from this kinde of foolishenes. For whilest they circumcise the in­fante, there standeth one by with a little vessell full eyther of earth or of duste, where into they thruste the foreskinne beyng cut of, as though the Deuil seemed by that meanes to haue his meat. For the Lord said vnto the serpent euen straight way at the beginnyng: Vppon thy breast shalt thou creepe, and earth shalte thou eate. They séeme to thinke that the deuill, hauing thus gotten his meate, departeth from the child, and wyll not afterward trouble him any more. Amongst the Eth­nickes also (as the same Ambrose affirmeth) was circumcision corruptly obser­ued after an other maner: for the Egiptians circumcised not in the eight daye, as God had commaunded, but in the. 14. yeare, for that Ismael at that age receiued circumcision. Which maner also it is most likely the Arabians followed: For at this day the Turkes also are circumcised at that age. Although the Egiptians (as the same Ambrose affirmeth) were wont also to circumcise theyr women The Egip­tians circū ­cise women kynde, and that in the. 14. yeare, as they did their males. And of this thinge they gaue this reasō, that they would by this signe signifie, that lust is to be restrained, which in eyther kinde at that age beginneth chiefly to be kyndled. But God com­maunded, that onely the male kindes should be circumcised: and yet were not the women of the Hebrewes therefore counted either straungers frō the Church The womē of the He­brewes though they were not circum­cised peri­shed not. An obiecti­on against circumcisi▪ or from the couenāt. For they are alwaies numbred together with the men: they that were vnmaried with their Father, and the maryed with their husbandes. There haue bene some which haue by deceitfull arguments spoken yll of circum­cision, and after a sorte reproued the God of the olde Testament. For first they sayd, that the foreskinne that was cut of, is eyther according to the nature of the of the body, or els it is against the nature thereof. If it be according to nature, why would God haue it cut of? If it be agaynst nature, why doth God suffer it to be brought forth. Ambrose in his. 77. epistle to Constantius answereth, That that foreskinne is according to the nature of our body: but it is not absurd, that those thinges which are agreable with our body or our flesh be cut of, if the spirite may thereby be hol­pen. Which thing we see done in fastings and other mortifications of the fleshe, and in bearing the crosse, which God hath layd vpon all the faithfull. In whych we are compelled to suffer many thinges which are against the fleshe. Farther, they said, that God feared away the other nations from the law of Moses, when An other obiection. he layd vpon them this yoke of Circumcision. Which if it had bene away, many straungers and outward nations would haue come vnto the religion of the He­brewes. But after the selfe same maner also they mought cauell against Christ him selfe, for that he seemed to feare away the world from his religion, partly by reason of the seuerity of his doctrine, and partly by reason of the persecutions and martirdome, which in the first time the most part of the faithfull were lyke to suffer. But they which truely pertaine vnto the number of the elect, doo in no wyse leape backe because of the difficultie of the calling. But they which go back­warde, were not of vs, and therefore they are fallen away. They maruayle also why God would in so tender age haue such a ceremonie excercised, which mought oftentimes bring weake litle bodies into danger. As touching age (saith Ambrose) Euery age meete for the sacra­ment. Few chil­dren died by occasion of circumci­sion. as euery age is subiect vnto sinne, so also is it mete for the sacrament. And that Infants are subiect vnto sinne, theyr diseases, weepings, paines, and deathes aboundantly declare. And if peraduenture they were brought in daunger of their lyfe, yet was there no cause why they should complaine, for as much as they ought the same all whole vnto God. And yet (as they write) very few haue by that occasion died. And that payne and daunger brought some vtilitie. For euen as valiant soldiours, when they remēber that they haue before suffered many thinges, for that they would not flee away, are the more animated [Page] to stand by it, least they should dishonor those skarres and woundes, which they before suffered, rather then they would forsake theyr place and standing; So would God, that Why God would haue the children afflicted with such a wound and with paine. the hebrues being now of full age and at mans state should defend the profession of theyr law euen agaynst all dangers, when they called to remembraunce, that for religions sake they had bene wounded euer from theyr infamy. But now (he sayth) Circumcisiō is wor­thely refused of Christians, for that forasmuch as Christ hath shed his bloud the price of our redemption, there is now no neede that euery particular man should priuatelye shed his own bloud. And as touching the sacrament of Circumcision, these thinges we thinke sufficent for this present purpose. Now let vs returne againe vnto Paul.

For the promise, that he should be the heyre of the worlde, was not geuen vnto Abraham, or to his seede by the law, but by y ^• righ­teousnes of fayth. For if they which are of the law be heyres: fayth is made voyde, and the promise is made of none effect. For the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.

For the promise that he should be the heyre of the world, was not geuen vnto Abraham or to his seede by the law.] He hath before proued, that Abra­ham had not his righteousnes by Circumcision: for that he had obteined it before he was circūcised. Now he proueth the same á maiori, that is, of a greater thing. By the law (saith he) was not the promise made: wherefore neither thorough Cir­cumcision. The reason is hereby manifest, for that the law extendeth farther then The law extendeth farther thē circumcisi­on. Why the promise came not by the law. circumcision: for the law doth not onely conteine it, but also other innumerable most excellent preceptes: And that the promise was not geuen thorough the law, as it were vppon a condition, may two manner of wayes be proued: First, as it is writtē vnto y ^e Galathians: The law was geuen after the promise foure hundreth yeres: wherfore forasmuch as it was not as yet extant, it could not be a condition of the promes then already made. No man (saith Paul) maketh voyde the testament of a man, or ad­deth any thyng therunto. But this reson taken of the time Paul here omitteth: partly bicause he had a little before vsed it, when he said, that circumcision was geuen, after that Abraham was now alredy iustified: partly also because he woulde vse an other reason more euident. The law (saith he) if it were added vnto the promise, If the lawe were added vnto the promise, it should make it voyde. shoulde make it voyde and abolish fayth: for when the law entreth into our wic­ked mindes, it setteth forth nothing before vs, but the wrath of God. And it is not possible, that it should bring vnto vs the promise or the inheritance of felicity. And that by the law commeth the wrath of God, he hereby proueth, for that wher no law is, there is no transgression. Ambrose sayth, that the lawe was therefore geuen, to make the offenders guiltie. But they which are gilty, are either condem­ned, or els made vnmete to receiue the promises. For the sonne which by reason of hys transgressions is disinherited, receaueth not the inheritance: So wee also by the law are adiudged to hell fire, and to the curse, rather then that by it we are made able to receaue the inheritance, and to obtayne the promise. Thus muche of the order of the argumentes. Now let vs examine euery thing particularly.

By the lawe (sayth he) commeth not the promise.] For whē the inheritance of y ^• world was promised vnto Abrahā, there was no such cōditiō added that he should obserue y ^• law. This reason leadeth to an absurdity. For by this meanes both y ^e promise, & fayth also should be made voyd. The Greke Scholies affirme, The Greke Scholies affirm that we are iu­stified by faith onely. that we are iustified by fayth only. And vnder y ^e name of Seuerianus, is added a sentēce that he which sticketh in the law, as though be could obtaine saluation, neglecteth that saluation which is by fayth. And Chrisost. sayth, that it mought be that some would say: Although we haue fayth, yet will we keepe the lawe also. But this he showeth is not possible. For whosoeuer (sayth he) obserueth the lawe as a thing geuing saluation disa­bleth the power of fayth. Wherefore seing the lawe is not annexed vnto the pro­mise Priuele­ges are not to be narro­ly drawen but to be enlarged. of God, as a condition of necessity, it followeth that he is presumtious and rashe which taketh vpon him to anexe it. For lawyers say that priueleges and grantes of Princes are not to be contracted or narrowly skanned, but rather [Page 88] with reasonable fauour to be enlarged.

To be the heyre of the world.] There is no where by expresse woordes had any such promise made to Abraham: howbeit it is contayned in those promises which we haue in the scripture. For God sayde vnto hym, that his seede should be multiplied lyke the sand of the sea, and the starres of heauen. Wherefore herein con­sisted How Abra­ham is the heyre of the world. the promise, that his seede should fill the whole wolrde. For they are not counted his seede, which haue proceded from him only as touching the flesh: but which imitate hys fayth. And forasmuch as such are dispersed throughout the whole worlde, by them hath Abraham the inheritance of the whole world, which selfe thinge is very expressedly spoken, when God made this promise vnto him: And in thy seede shall all nations be blessed. And although all these thinges are true, Christ the heyre of the whole world. yet I thinke rather that this inheritance is to be referred vnto Christ. For he sayth, that all thinges are deliuered vnto hym of the father. And Dauid writeth, that he hath for hys inheritance all the Gentiles, and the endes of the earth. And fayth in Christ, who is in this sort the heire of the whole worlde, is it, which iustifieth: & all the promises of God (as we haue els where tought) are to be referred to thys promise only. The prophetes haue oftentymes expressed this promise of the The pro­phets haue expressed the king­dome of Christ by the conditi­ons of a worldly kingdome. kingdome of Christ by the propertyes and conditions of a worldly kingdome, & of carnall felicity. For spirituall things can not by any other meanes be vn­derstanded of gros wittes. Sometymes they say, that it shall one day come to passe, that the children of Israell being dispersed and exiles shalbe of the Gen­tiles brought home agayne in shippes to their owne place. They tell forth also, that kinges and princes should be the fosterers and nurces of the Iewes: And they threaten destruction to those kingdomes and nations, which will not obey the Israelites. But all these things are chiefely to be attributed vnto our great king Iesus Christ: of whome we reade in the Gospell, this is the heyre, come let vs kill hym. Dauid in the voyce of God the father writeth of Christ: Aske of me, and I will geue thee the Gentiles for thyne inheritance: and the borders of the earth for thy possession. And in Daniell it is written of the stone hewed out without hands, that it shoulde ouerthrow the principalities of this world, and whē it is growen to a great huge mountayne, it should possesse all things. And we, forasmuch as we are the mem­bers We are pertakers of the king­dome of Christ. of Christ, can not be excluded from this inheritance. For in this selfe same epistle Paule writeth, that we shall be the heires of God, and the fellow heires of Christ, for that he is the first begotten amongst many brethern. Christ himselfe also sayth: Euen as the liuing father sent me, so send I you: and dispose vnto you the kingdome, as the father hath disposed it vnto me. Where I am, I will that there also be my minister. Agayne in an other place, to the ende he woulde declare, that we are not exclu­ded frō this inheritance, he sayth, blessed are the meke, for they shall possesse the earth. And Paule sayth, All thinges are youres, and you long to Christ, and Christ to God. Yea also the Angels serue the elect. He hath geuen charge (fayth he) to his Angels concer­ning thee, to keepe thee in all thy wayes. Farther by Christ is restored whatsoeuer was lost in Adam. Man, when he was created, was made vnto the image of God: which sentence the scripture strayght way interpreteth, to be ruler ouer all thinges created. And if Christ haue restored this Image, then also hath he rendred agayne the principality that was lost: and so hath rendred it, that the same is sayd by right to be restored vnto vs, by right (I say) of inheritance. Ne­ther ought we to despaire of this promise, although the outward shew of things appeare now farre otherwise. They which pertayne vnto Christ are very weake. And the deuil stirreth vp against them the Princes of this world, and ty­rantes. Wherefore we seeme to be most nedy of all thinges, and to be most ab­iect: The abiect outward appearaunce nothing de­priueth vs of our do­minion. when yet in very dede we are Lordes of all thinges. These thinges are hidden from the eyes of the fleshe: but then shall they appeare, when Christ himselfe, in whome our life is hidden, shall appeare. Which is not spoken, as though Christ doth not now raygne. Vnto many paraduenture he semeth to be idle: but the godly feele, that he raigneth most mightely in the congregation of [Page] the elect, which is the churche. And he raigneth by the spirite & the word: that is, by faith, which cōmeth from the spirite, and depēdeth of the word of God. Which The godly feele Christ euen now also to r [...]igne. Christ raigneth by the word and the spirite, that is by fayth. faith, when the elect haue obtained, they haue obtained the victorye against the world. For Iohn saith, This is the victory, which ouer commeth the world, your faith. And forasmuch as the faithfull vnderstand that all thinges are theirs, they are content with meate and drinke, and apparell: as for other thinges they vse of them so much as is expedient vnto their vocation. Finallye, there is nothing in the world, which turneth not to their profite. The Chiliassis, whom in Latin we may cal Millenarij, thought that this inheritaunce of the whole world shal be de­clared before the end of this world, when Christ, as they thought, shall raygne a thousand yeares in this world with his saintes, hauing destroyed and ouercome all the wicked. And these men, it should seme, followed the oracle, which is sayde to come from Elias, That the worlde should endure. 6000. yeares. And these An oracle of Elias. yeares they thus describe, saying that. 2000. yeares passed away before the law, 2000. vnder the law, and as many shall be vnder the Gospell. Afterward they adde a thousand yeares, in which they say shall be the chiefe rest: so that the thou­sand last yeares they call the Sabaoth. And so they appoint a weke, in which eue­ry particular day is taken for a thousand yeares: according to that which is said, a thousand yeares are wyth the Lord as one day, & againe one day, as a thousand yeres. Augustine maketh mencion of this opinion in his. 20. booke, and. 7. chapter de ci­uitate Dei, and saith, that it was after a sorte tollerable, & that he himselfe was once of the same minde. But that which they added concerning pleasures, delightes, and worldly honors, which they sayd, all the faythfull should for the space of those thousand yeares enioy together with Christ, he earnestly reproueth. They vsur­ped certaine testimonies of the scriptures, wherby they thought to establish their fond inuention. For in the Apocalips the. 27. chapter it is written, that Christ shall raigne a thousand yeares with the saintes, hauing in the meane time ouercome, and vanquished Sathan. They leane also vnto a saying of Christ in Luke the. 22. chapter, That ye may eate and drinke vpon my table. I wyll so dispose the kingdome vnto you, as my father hath disposed it vnto me. Finallye, the oracles of the Prophetes, which by temporall descriptions shadowed the kingdome of Christ, they so take, as though they were no otherwise to bee vnderstande, then they seeme for at the first sight. And they in suche sorte speake of this matter, as though in the last time shall be restored the golden worlde, which is described, Great men were Mti­lenarii. of the Poetes. There were of this opinion men not of the meanest sort, as Papias which liued in the Apostles tyme, Ireneus, Apollinarius, Tertullian, Victorinus, La­ctantius, and Methodius the Martir. Wherfore Hierom in his 4. booke vpon Ieremy writeth, that he durst not condemn that sentence, because many ecclesiasticall men and Martyrs had died beyng of that opinion. Howbeit in an other place he manifestly de­rideth these Millenarij, and very pleasauntly mocketh them. Eusebius Cesariensis. The opini­on of the Chiliasts sprang from Cherin­thus. in the third booke of his history, saith: that this opinion had his beginning of Cherinthus the heretike: of whom Dionisius bishop of Alexandria, expounding the Apoe. of Iohn thus writeth: that he was altogether geuen to lustes and vnto the bellye, and therfore attributed these carnall delightes vnto the kingdom of Christ, which should continue a thousand yeares. Neither contendeth he onely that there should be matrimonies and procreations of children all that whole time, but also that there should be circumcision, sacrifices and other ceremonies of the law. But sithen we sée that Ire­neus is agaynst Cherinthus, we cannot easely thinke, that he was wholy of the selfe same opinion touching this fable. And doubtles it is possible, that amongest these Millenarij, some were touching one, and the same thing of an opinion, and other some of an other opiniō. For it is very likely, that by reason of that place of the A­pocalips, some holy men were brought into this opinion, to thinke y ^• Christ should In the kingdome of Christ the law shall not be renued. in this world raigne with his a thousand yeares: but touching the restoring of the law, the réedifieng of Ierusalem with precious stones, the bringing in agayne of delightes and pleasures of this world, they were vtterly against it. For how is it [Page 89] possible, that the law which hath brought no man to perfection, shall be thē of grea­test force, when the state of the godly shall be most perfect? Doubtles men that are of full age haue no neede of a scholemaister: and they which haue profited muche, nede not to be brought backe againe to learne their first rudimentes. But Lactan­cius, as touching pleasures & delightes, writeth nothing els, but that the earth shall at that time shew forth her fertilenes, & shall of her owne accord bring forth fruites most plentifully. For hony shall run down the rockes, vine trées shall spread along the riuers, and the flouds shall flow ouer with milke? But all these thinges are the inuentions of men, and the same, such fayned deuises, that they are manifestly re­pugnant vnto the word of God. Christ whē he entreateth with the Saduces con­cernyng the resurrection, affirmeth, that the sayntes shall be like the aungels of God, as which shall neyther marry wyues, nor be married. And Paul, when vnto the Thessalonians he setteth forth the history of our resurrection, maketh no mencion of such tri­fles. This onely he saith, That we shall not preuent those which haue slept in the Lord, but shall be taken vp together wyth them to mete Christ in the ayre, and so shall alwaies be with the Lord. Farther our sauiour hath testified, that hys kingdome is not of this world. And Paule to the Corinthians sayth: That we after the resurrection shall be spiri­tuall, and also that the belly and meates shall bee destroyed. And to the Rom. he sayth: that the kingdome of God is not meate and drinke. In the booke of the Apoc. a thousād yeres are taken for a long tyme, as he sayth: That he would haue hys myracles testi­fied A place of the Apoca­lipse. vnto a thousand generatiōs, y ^e is, for euer. So y ^• number of an hundreth signifieth an absolute reward. For so Christ saith, that he would rēder an hundreth fold to those which forsake all that they haue for hys sake. And oftētimes in y ^• holy scriptures, a nū ber certain is put for a nūber vncertain & infinit. And wher as it is written in the Apoc. y ^• the deuil shal be bound for a M. yeres, Augustine referreth y ^• to the state of this presēt tyme, wherin by the benefite of Christ, that strong man is so vnarmed and ouercome and spoyled, that he cannot seduce the elect vnto destruction. And y ^e table of Christ at which the sayntes shall eate and drinke, Ambrose vpon Luke interpreteth to be the communication of eternall lyfe, and of the chiefe felicitie. The prophets also oftentimes vsed similitudes taken of kingdomes of this world, to de­scribe the kingdome of Christ: that the ruder sorte mought the easelier vnderstand the things that were spoken. And as touchyng this matter let this suffice.

Forasmuch as Paul sayth: that the promise consisteth not of the law, but of faith: and bringeth this reason, for y ^• otherwise both the promise should be voyde & faith made of none effect, a man mought doubt, if there be so small agréement betwene the promise and the law, how it came to passe, that God vnto his law and pre­cepts annexed so many promises. For he hath promised to doo good vnto a thou­sand Why God annexed promises vnto the law. A distinctiō of promises some per­tayne vnto the law and some to the Gospell. generations of them that obserue his law: and to geue long life to them that honor theyr parents. And Christ himself sayth, If thou wilt enter into life kepe the commaundementes. Geue, and it shallbe geuen vnto you, forgeue and it shallbe forge­uen you. Here we muste make a distinction of promises. For some of thē per­taine to the Gospel, & concerne iustification, & eternall saluation. These thinges de pende not of the condition of the lawe, as Paul testifieth. For then shoulde they be voyde, for as much as none of vs is able to accomplish the law: and that partly by reason of our infirmity, and partly by reason of the wonderfull excel­lency of the law it self. Our infirmity Paul declareth in this epistle, when he saith That which was impossible vnto the law, in as much as it was weakned through the flesh &c. Wherby it is manifest y ^• the flesh is the let, y ^• we cā not perform those things which are cōmaūded in y ^• law. And in y ^e 7. chapt. he sayth, that in our flesh dwelleth no good, so that we doo those thinges which we would not. And the excellēcy of the law is vnderstanded by the 5. 6 & 7. chapters of Mathew: and especially by that pre­cept, Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God withall thyne hart, and with all thy soule &c. And one the other side, Thou shalt not lust. And Paul ioyned these two causes together, when in the 7. chapter of this epistle he sayd: The law indede is spirituall: but I [...] carnall, sold vnder sinne. This is the reason why the promise of the Gospell consisteth [Page] not of the law: which thing also Paul expressed in that that he sayth, that the law worketh anger. But there are other promises annexed vnto the law, and to certayne perticular commaundemēts, and those we say are not put in vaine For after that a man is once iustified, there beginneth in him a certayne obedi­ence of the commaundements of God: and the same pleaseth God: which obedi­ence although it be not absolute and perfect, yet is it so imputed vnto the bele­uers, as if it were perfect, & by that meanes we obteyne the promises annexed The bele­uers obtain the promi­ses annexed vnto the [...]w. vnto the commaundementes: whiche yet should in vaine be hoped for without iustification, and the promise of the Gospel. And this is a notable place, and worthy neuer to slip out of our memory: That the promise consisteth not of the law. And if any man will by the law vnderstand ceremonies, straightway ought to be layde agaynst hym those thinges which follow, the lawe worketh anger: and this, that the promise shoulde be firme. In which places is most manifestly decla­red, that the law is not to be vnderstād only of ceremonies, but also of the mo­rall part. For by neglecting or not obseruing it, we fall into the wrath of God. Although there are some which go about rifltingly to auoyde the strength of this reason. For they say, if the inheritance shoulde consist of ceremonies, the A cauillati­on againste the reason of Paule. promise should be vncertayne. For those ceremonies were not common vnto the Gentiles, vnto whome yet was promised saluation. Wherefore at the least as touching the Gentiles, fayth shoulde be vncertayne, and also the promyse. But if it were so, the argument of the Apostle should be absurde: for the aduer­saryes, and the false Apostles would haue sayde: therefore to the ende the pro­mise shoulde not be vncertayne, let the Gentiles also receaue the ceremonyes. And so Paule should haue vsed that fallace, which is called peticio principii, and shoulde haue taken that as a ground, which he shoulde first haue proued, name­ly, that the Gentiles ought not to be compelled vnto ceremonyes. But they are most manifestly confuted by that that is added, that the lawe worketh anger. Which thinge vndoubtedly agreeth rather with morall preceptes, then with ceremoniall. The Apostle moughte haue proued his argument by that, which we haue a litle before made mencion of, that none of vs is able to kepe the law. But he omitteth that at this present. And to conclude the more euidently, he addeth, that the lawe worketh anger. As if he shoulde haue sayde: So farre is it of, that the lawe bringeth the inheritance, that it rather maketh vs guilty, and subiect vnto the wrath of God. And if thou demaund, why the law doth in such sort bring vnto vs anger, we may answere, because we are not able to kepe it. For by anger Paule vnderstandeth nothing els, but the vengeance of God, and that by the figure Metonymia. For men when they are angry, are accustomed to auenge: whiche thinge God also doth although he be not moued with hu­mane affections. This selfe same thinge hath Paule to the Galathyans, in other words expressed, saying, Cursed be he that abideth not in all the thinges that are written in the boke of the law. And a curse in the holy scriptures signifieth nothing els, but calamity, affliction and misery. I meruayle that Origen vnderstandeth this saying of Paule, of the lawe of the members: for that vndoubtedly is to farre wide from the purpose. For the Iewes gloried not of the concupiscence which was in them by nature, which is called of Paul the lawe of the members: but they boasted of the lawe of God, which was geuen them of God by Moses. Wherefore that the Apostle mought with some fruite deale agaynst them, it behoued him to write of that lawe, whereof they boasted. Howbeit by Origenes wordes our aduersaryes may see, what he thought of naturall concupisence. Vndoubtedly seing he sayth, it worketh anger, it followeth that he iudged, that the first motions, which are deriued out of it, are of necessity sinnes and trans­gressions. I know there haue bene some, which haue taken anger in this place, not for the anger of God, but for our owne anger. For forasmuch as we are by nature prone vnto vices, and the lawe when it commeth forbiddeth them, we beginne to hate God the author of the lawe: and so it worketh in vs anger. But [Page 90] the first exposition is bothe plainer, and also better agréeth with the sentence fol­lowyng.

For where no law is, there is no transgression.] By these wordes it is ma­nifest that the Apostlement to signifis this, that the wrath of GOD is kindled a­gainst transgressions. But how transgression is brought in by the law, the nature How the law and transgressi­on follow one the o­ther. of relatiues teacheth: which is such, that the one of them beyng taken away, the o­ther also is taken away. On the one side is put the law: on the other side is set ey­ther the obseruation or transgression therof. And forasmuch as the obseruation of the law can not be perfect, there remayneth onely transgressiō, which Paul in this place inferreth. But those thinges which are here spoken, are to be vnderstande of the law written, and whiche was geuen by Moses. For otherwise there is none, which wanteth a law, at the least vndoubtedly the law of nature. Wherfore there can none be found without sinne: no not an infant of a day olde, when as vnto him the image of God is in stede of a law: vnto which image for that he answereth not The law of children is the image of God. (as Augustine declareth in his booke of confessions) vndoubtedly he can not be with out sinne. As touching the letter, the Greke worde worde is [...] with aspiration, & so it is turned in Latine cuius, that is, of whome. But the vulger interpreter sée­meth to haue red [...], and therfore turned it vbi, that is, where. But as touching the sence, there is no difference, whether it be this, or that. Howbeit let vs not thinke, that these thinges are to be ascribed vnto the lawe, as it is taken by it selfe alone: The law of his owne nature worketh not these things A simili­tude. but as it lighteth vppon our mynde being corrupt and vitiate. We haue of thys thing an example (although grosse) in gonne pouder, wherwith is mingled either salt nitre or salt peter, which is by nature very cold. And thereof it commeth, that when the fire is receiued in the brimstone, against which striueth the coldnes of y ^e salt nitre, or of the salt peter, it conceiueth so great a violence, that the pellet be­yng driuen out with an incredible force, shaketh and ouerthroweth whatsoeuer is in the way. So the heate of our lust, when it findeth the law repugnaunt agaynst it, is with a greater violēce strēgthned, so that it enforceth men to most haynous wycked actes. For as the common saying is: We endeuour our selues to that whiche is forbidden vs, and we haue alwayes a desire to thinges denied vs. Howbeit to the godly and to the elect, this force of the law is not vnprofitable. For it leadeth them euen as a scholemaister vnto Christ. And for that cause Christ is iustly and worthely called the ende of the law: not for that the law is by him abrogated, but bicause it directeth men vnto him. Finally Christ hath performed and accomplished y ^• law Christ the end of the law. not onely in himselfe, but also in them that beleue in hym: for he hath geuen them strengthes to obey it. Neyther is it any maruell, that the law bryngeth men vnto Christ, especially seyng he himself was the author therof. For by the Sonne it was Christ the author of the law. reuealed vnto Moses. And for this ende he gaue it, by it to drawe men vnto hym. Here are we admonished of the peruersenes of our nature, whiche is so greate, that although we be taughte the wyll of GOD by the lawe, yet we neuer cease to striue agaynste it. Some goe aboute by this place to inferre, that they do ill whiche set for the lawes, especiallye seyng they serue verye muche to increase Whether it be lawfull to make lawes, transgressions. But if their argument were of any strengthe, then shoulde they inferre that GOD also oughte not to haue made any lawe. Wherefore we say, that those lawes whiche are made, are either iust or vniust. If they be vniust, then are they not to be counted for lawes. For who will call the violent affectes of tyrantes lawes? But if they be iust, then are they interpretations of the lawes of God. And by them we vnderstande the will of God, that by that meanes, we Good lawes are interpreta­cions of the lawes of God. Names at­tributed vnto the law. may be broughte to Christe, that by him we may obteine strengthes to do them? This selfe same sentence also is had in the epistle to the Galathians, That the lawe was put because of transgressions, namely, to shew forth thē, to accuse them, & to con­demne them. So in the latter epistle to the Corinthians, the law is called the mini­stery of deathe: and in the first to the Cor. it is called the power & efficacy of sinne. And before in this epistle, by the law is said to come the knowledge of sinne. Wherfore a man may not without iust cause meruaile, what moued Paul to write so [Page] like things so oftentymes of the lawe. But we oughte to consider that it is moste What was Paules en­tente when he wrote of the law. lykely, that in the primitiue church, when Christ beganne euery where to be rece­ued, the deuill craftely inuented an other new deuise, to extol the law by all man­ner of meanes, that it mought be had in estimation, not onely of the Iewes, but al­so of the Gentles, that in the mean time Christian religion mought be weakened, and cleane taken away. And he blinded the eyes of men, that none should haue an eye vpon Christ, which was the end of the law. And lest any man should by often reading of the law, attaine to any commoditie, he found the meanes, that mē gaue themselues to brawling about wordes, and old wiues questions. Wherefore Paul was brought to this point, that either he must reiect the lawe of God, or els haue wincked at the lettes of the Gospell. Wherfore by great aduise he teacheth thrée thinges. For first, considering the law of God by it self, and in his owns nature, he with worthy praises extolleth it, and therewithall sheweth, what euils by it come vnto vs thorough our owne default: Secondly, he teacheth that Christ is the ende of the law: last of al, he cutteth of brawlings, contencions, disputations, and vnpro­fitable questions, and which make nothyng to the purpose. These self same things in a maner, happen also in our tymes. Our aduersaries cry out, Good workes, good workes: as though we were agaynst them. Farther they wyll not that the people As the false Apo­stles pretended the de­fence of the law so do our aduer­saries now pretend the defence of good works What we must teache concerning good woorkes. What they are that are the instru­mentes of the deuell. should vnderstād the mercy & grace of God, & benefite of Christ. Lastly, they conti­nually braule & contend to hinder y ^e iust reformation of the church, & so continual­ly prolong the tyme, to the ende nothyng shoulde be put in execution. But let vs learne of Paul how we may warely and wisely resist them. Let vs leaue vnto good workes, their dignitie: but yet not in such sorte to attribute more vnto them, then either the truth and holy scriptures will suffer, or els is agreable with our weake nature. Farther let vs as plainly as we can out of the holy scriptures declare the grace of God and benefite of Christ: Lastly let vs abstayne from superfluous and contentious questions. By these wayes and meanes may we well withstand the deuill. Neither doth the diuell these things by himselfe: but alwayes findeth instrumentes apte for his wicked purpose: whome Paule calleth deceitfull workers, which transforme themselues into aungels of light; and euery where sowe discordes and offences, bewitching mē that are in the ryght course, and leadyng men from Christ to estimation of themselues. He calleth them moreouer, thynges cut of, dogges, enemies of the crosse of Christ, whose God is the belly, and end destruction: which wyll be teachers of the law, and yet in the meane tyme know not what they affirme and speake: whiche by a fayned modesty and affliction of the flesh, and worshippyng of angels, and religion of themselues deuised, take away from men the reward of saluation: which after they haue fallen away from the loue which procedeth from a pure hart, a good conscience, and an vnfeined faith, turne themselues to vayne speaches, and range and creepe abrode like a canker: which al­though in wordes they say they know God, yet in dedes they deny hym. With these cou­lours doth the Apostle paint forth false ministers, against whome he had muche to do: Vnto whome they are not vnlike, which in our dayes withstand the restoryng of religion. Hitherto he hath vsed reasons ab absurdo, that is, driuing to an absurditie. If the inheritaunce should consist of the law, then should faith be vayne, and the promise of none effect: and to affirme either of them, were very absurd. His ar­gument he hereby proued: for that the law worketh anger, and is alwayes ioyned with some transgression. Now he proueth by a direct reason, that the inheritaunce consisteth of faith: namely, that it might be of grace, to the ende the promise should be firme. As if he should haue sayd, it behoueth that the nature of Gods promises be kept. For such is the nature thereof, that it be certayne, and come fréely. But it can not be certayne and come fréely, vnlesse we be made heyres by fayth, and not by the lawe.

Therfore is the inheritaunce geuen by fayth, that it might come by grace, and that the promise might be firme to all the sede, not to that onely which is of the law, but also to that which is of y ^e fayth [Page 91] of Abraham, who is the father of vs all, as it is written, I haue made thee a father of many nations, accordyng to the example of God, whome he beleued, who restoreth to lyfe the dead, and calleth those thinges which are not, as though they were. Whiche aboue hope beleued vnder hope that he should be the father of many nati­ons, accordyng to that which was spoken vnto hym: So shall thy seede be. And he not weake in fayth, considered not his owne body which was now dead, beyng almost an hundreth yeare olde, ney­ther the deadnes of Saraes wombe. Neither did he doubt of the promise of God through vnbeliefe, but was strengthned in faythe, & gaue glory to God, beyng full assured that he which had promi­sed was also able to do it. And therefore it was imputed vnto hym for righteousnes.

Therfore is the inheritaunce geuen by faith.] By this place we sée, that to To haue a thing by fayth is to haue it freely. attaine to any thing by faith, is with Paul nothing els, but to haue it fréely. Wherfore it ought not to seme meruailous, that we haue oftētimes inculcated, that to be iustified by fayth, is to be vnderstande of the obiect of fayth, that is, of the mercy and promise, that we may be iustified fréely. Chrisostome sayth, if the promise should come of the law; we should not nede that saluation, which we obteyne by fayth and grace. But In Abrahā a double posterity, now where as the Apostle saith, that the promise oughte to be firme vnto all the sede of Abraham, that ought to be vnderstanded both of the Iewes, and also of the Gentles: as though in Abraham were a double posteritie. And this is chiefly to be noted, which here is alleaged of the certaintie of the promise. For, that may not ei­ther be wauerynge or doubtfull. For, that whyche we apprehende by fayth Besides the holy scriptures there is no­thing that can wyth a true fayth be beleued. He decla­reth that whatsoeuer is not of fayth is sinne. oughte to be certayne. Whiche is onely the worde of GOD, whereunto onelye faith ought to leane. Wherefore besides the holy Scriptures there is nothing that shoulde be beleued. For it can not be constant and firme. And whatsoeuer is not of fayth is sinne. For if the conscience doo not by fayth beleue, that that which we doo, pleaseth God, or also if it suspect, that it is not acceptable before him, and yet in the meane time we do the selfe same thing, vndoubtedly that which we do is sinne. And so doth Basilius in his Moralls the 80. sum in a maner towards the end of the boke interpretate that place which we haue alleadged. Wherfore we ought not ether to add any thing vnto the word of God, or to take any thynge from it, as in which only are contained the promises: Otherwise both our faith and our cōscience should haue no certainty whervnto to lean. And this certain­ty Two prin­cipal points whereupon dependeth the certain­ty of the promises. wherof we speake, dependeth of two principal pointes. Of which the fyrst is, that it be plaine by the word of God: then which, can nothing be more firme or constant. But some man will say God by the prophet Ionas sayd it should come to passe, that the city of Niniue shoulde be destroyed, and that after 40. dayes. And by Esay the Prophet he shewed vnto Ezechias the king, that he should dye: which thinges yet came not to passe as they were fortold. Yea also the lord him selfe in Ieremy the 18. chapter thus speaketh, If I shall speake of any kingdome, or na­tion, to roote it out and to destroye it and they in the meane time repent them, I also will repent me. And on the other seede, if I shall speake to plante, and to build any kingdome or nation, and they in the meane tyme behaue themselues wickedly, I will not performe these thinges which I haue spokē. But we answeare, that the promise whereof Paul here Paule spea­keth not of such a pro­mise as is annexed with a con­dition. That which consisteth free­ly is not conditio­nally. speaketh dependeth not of any condition, as doo a greate many promises of the law, vnto which pertayne these threatnings which are now alledged yea the A­postle himselfe sufficiently expresseth, of what kind of promises he speaketh whē he sayth, By fayth, that it should be of grace. For if it consist frealy, thē hangeth it not of any condition, or supposition, and by this means the promise can in no case be made frustrate. This may the easier be vnderstand by a similitude: If a phisition should by taking of any medicine promise health, but yet vpon this condition, [Page] that he would haue for his paynes infinite summes of money, & that the A simili­tude. sicke persō should obserue a very hard diet, a poore man mought easely answere that that promise of health is vayne, both for that he hath not the money to pay, and also for that being weake he is not able to obserue the diet which is prescri­bed him. But contrariwyse, if a man promise a medicine which he will geue freely, nether requireth any worke of the sicke person, but only that he woulde drinke, or some other way receaue his medicine, this promise is easely made firme. So vndoubtedly standeth the case here: the promise is offred vnto vs, and that freely. For only is of vs required, that by fayth we receaue it. And this is the first principall poynte, whereupon dependeth the certaynty of the promise: namely, for that the promise consisteth of the word of God, and is of­fred freely. The other principall poynt is, the nature of fayth. For fayth is an Fayth is not an vn­certayne or doubtfull assent. Of the cer­tainety of saluation. We must not doubt of perseue­rance. The testi­mony of the spirite is firme. assent not vncertayne or doubtfull, but fixed and constant, as the Apostle wyll afterward more at large declare, when he discourseth the example of Abraham, By these two principall poyntes it is manifest how wickedly they deale, which teach mē continually to doubt of the promise of saluation. For if as the holy scriptures teach vs we ought to hope, and such is the nature of hope, not to con­found, we may manifestly inferre, that we ought not to doubt of our saluati­on. There are, which pretend, that their doubt hereof springeth, for that they are vncertayne, whether they shall perseuer vnto the ende or no. But these men should consider, that we ought alwayes to pray for perseuerance. For, as saith Ciprian, whome also Augustine followeth, In all the thinges which we aske in the Lordes prayer, is included perseuerance. And as Iames teacheth, we must aske with­out doubting. Wherefore it is manifest, that we must by no meanes doubt of preseuerance, and especially seing we haue in our harts the holy ghost alwayes They which be­leue that their sinnes are a let vnto the pro­mes, are easely dri­uen into desperation They which are not sure of theyr salua­tion, can nether haue peace nor tranquility of consciēce What thinges are to be taken heede of as touching certainty of saluation. Sinne that wasteth the conscience. We are ne­uer so assu­red but that there ari­seth some doubt. These thinges are not repug­nant in a man, to be certaine & yet some­what to doubt. bearing an excellent testemony vnto vs thereof. For as Paul sayth in this epi­stle, It is the spirite, which beareth witnes vnto our spirite, that we are the sonnes of God. And he which hath not the spirite of Christe, is not hys. And Paul writeth of himselfe, that he is sure, that nether life, nor death, nor principalities, nor powers can plucke hym from the loue of God, namely, from that loue wherewith God loued him. But that is friuoulous, which some alleadge, namely, that Paul speaketh these thinges of himselfe only, and that by a certayne peculiar and assured re­uelation. For when we come to that place, we will declare, that those thinges pertayne to all men vniuersally. Other say, that sinnes feare vs away from the assured confidence of our saluation. But so long as we are in this life, we can not be without sinnes. For Iohn sayth, If we say, we haue no sinne, we deceaue our selues, and the truth is not in vs. Wherefore so to teach is nothing els but to driue men to desperation. Finally forasmuch as Paul saith, that we being iustified free­ly haue peace towardes God, it manifestly declareth, that the faythfull are certayn of theyr saluation: otherwise there can be no tranquillity, & peace in the con­science. Howbeit there are certayne thinges to be taken hede of, that we be not dangerously deceaued in this certaynty. For first we ought to know [...], that it springeth not of any righteousnes which is in our mindes: and farther, that they which are most assured, do not for all that want trembling and feare, but are sore afrayd of falles and of offending of God. Neither can that certaynty, which we speake of, haue ioyned with it that kinde of sinne, which, as Augustine speaketh, wasteth away the conscience. And we must chiefely beware, that this cer­taynly be not applied to licentiousnes and liberty of the fleshe. But in such sort ought we to frame our selues, that we should alwayes dispayre as touching our selues: but contrariwise put all our confidence in God only. Lastly this is to be knowen that it is not possible, that so long as we lyue here, we shoulde be so assured in fayth, that there should neuer aryse any doubt. Neyther are these thinges repugnant one to the other, but that we may both beleue, and al­so be assured, and yet in the meane time be moued with some doubtfulnes. For these thinges procede of diuers principles. As for example, reason iudgeth, that [Page 92] the orbe of the Sunne is bigger then the whole earth: but yet in the meane tyme the sence both doubteth touching that matter, and also testifieth other­wise. Certainety and doub­ting come of diuers grounds. Iohn also sayth, he which is borne of God sinneth not: Howbeit contrariwise he sayth, If we say we haue no sinne, we lye, for we do not alwayes worke by that grounde whereby we are regenerate: and therefore we oftentymes fall & sinne. So also must we think of certainty & doubting, that they procede not out of one & the self same principles or grounds. For doubting procedeth frō our flesh, frō humane weaknes & humane wisdome. But certainty, cōmeth of y ^e faith which we haue towards god. But because we do not alwayes worke by faith, therof it commeth that we oftentimes doubt. But at the last the strength of fayth get­teth the vpper hand, and driueth away the cloude of doubting. Now let vs sée, Certainety getteth the vpper hand how Paule declareth vnto vs the certaynty of the promise by the second princi­pall poynt, namely by the propriety and nature of fayth. This thing he doth in discoursing the example of Abraham, of whome he thus writeth.

Which is the father of vs all. As it is written, I haue made thee a father of many nations.] Abraham is a father of many nations, that is, of all those, which beleue, in what place of the world so euer they be. And he is called the fa­ther of the beleuers, both bycause he was an example of faith vnto the beleuers, and also taught and preached the same. This is that communion of Saintes, The com­munion of sayntes. which we professe in the Simbole or Creede.

According to the example of God.] In Greeke it is [...], which Chrisostome interpreteth by this aduerbe of similitude, [...], as though Abraham Abraham like vnto God. were like vnto God. And this likenes the same Chrisostome declareth two maner of waies. First, for that as God is not the father of one nation, and not also of an other: So also Abraham is not in such sorte the father of some beleuers, that he is not also the father of other beleuers. Secondly, for that as God is not our fa­ther by kinred of y ^e flesh, but by a spirituall maner. So Abraham is not in such sort the father of all the beleuers, that he hath begotten them according to the fleshe: but as we haue sayd, by a spirituall kinred. That Greke word may signifie, Be­fore: so that he was the father of all the beleuers before God: namely, because it can not be vnderstand by humane sense and reason, that Abraham is the father of all the beleuers, but this is vnderstand onely before God: that is, by the power of the spirite. This word also [...], may signifie Before in such sort, as in the booke of Genesis the woman is sayd to be made a helper vnto the man, y ^e she should be Benegdo, that is, before him, as if a man should say, a thing apte, and hauing proportion and iust analogy vnto the man: and which shoulde euer be at hande, which maner of helpe coulde not be found for Adam amongest the other liuing creatures. And if a man demaund, seing that we differ from God by an infinite distance of perfection: What analogy or proportion can we haue towards him, How w [...] may by fayth be cō ­pared wyth God. I aunswere, that that commeth to passe by the helpe of faith. For by it we receiue the giftes and promises, which God hath decreed to fulfill in vs, when yet our strength and power can by no meanes be made equall with God. Suche a lyke thing haue the Philosophers of God, the first cause of all thinges: vnto whom A simili­tude. they say by a certaine proportion and analogy answereth that which they cal the first matter: for that in power it is apt to receaue all maner of formes, whych God would bring forth. So we by faith are made apt to receaue the promises of God, and so we are set before him, or ouer against him. Howe be it euerye man must diligently take heede, that he haue so muche faith as is sufficient, least hee The wrest­ling of Ia­cob with God. should be ouercome of the promises of God. This is that wrestling of Iacob with God. For he would not be ouercome of him, but wrastled against him, and recea­ued the blessing.

Whom he beleued.] Ambrose readeth, Thou hast beleued, as though it were an Apostrophe which is a turning of his speche to the Ethnike. But the reading which is vulgarly receaued, is the playner.

And calleth those thinges which are not, as though they were.] This a­peared [Page] in the creation of the world. For when God did onely commaund, that a­ny Why God is sayd to call crea­tures. thing should be, straight way it was. By which kinde of speeche is shewed the easines of creation of thinges: for in it there is no more griefe to God, then it is to vs when we call anye manne. Here is declared also, that by the sonne, whiche is the word of the father, were and are all thinges made. We also when we are regenerate, are sayd to be called.

Which aboue hope beleued vnder hope.] This kinde of speach seemeth at the first sight absurde. For how is it possible, that a man shoulde aboue hope, haue notwithstanding hope? Chrisostome very well expoundeth this. Aboue the hope (saith he) of man, and vnder the hope of God. And it is all one, as if a man shoulde haue sayd, he hoped euen in thinges desperate, or elles when there was no hope at all, yet hoped he. But in that word is vsed the figure Metonymia. For, by hope, in this place we vnderstande, those thinges whiche are hoped for. The meanyng is; Contrary to those thinges whiche moughte by man haue bene hoped for, he way­ted for those thynges whyche were set foorth by God to be hoped for. In this ex­ample of Abraham, which the Apostle hath taken in hande to entreat of, is verye The na­ture and property of fayth. aptly described the nature and property of faith. For faith is the gift of God, wher­by we firmely assent vnto his promises, striuyng agaynst the flesh and humayne wisedome. That it is the gift of God, Paul to the Ephesians by expresse wordes testifieth, when he sayth, that by fayth we are saued, and that not of our selues: for (saith he) it is the gift of God. And euen as the Philosophers supposed, that the strengths and faculties of men are not sufficient to do all things absolutely and perfectly, & ther­fore A simili­tude. held y ^• we haue nede of habites or qualities, y ^• in sodaine cases we mought be redy to do well, so that we should nede no long deliberation, and that that whiche we do, we mought do it both easely and pleasantly: so also ought we, for the recei­uyng of those thinges which are of GOD, to haue our minde and vnderstandyng strengthened by some power, from without vs, and geuen vnto vs: seyng that tho­rough the default of our first parent, we are most vnapt to vnderstande the hidden thinges of God. And forasmuch as those things, wherunto our faith hath a respect, are altogether deuine, it followeth of necessity, that to vnderstand them, we be hol­pen also by deuine inspiratiō. But we must now declare what is the chiefest thing wherunto our faith is directed: and that (to speake briefly) is the promise of God, wherunto by beleuing we assēt. An [...] this promise is chiefly y ^• wherin he promiseth, that he wil thorough Christ be fauourable and mercifull vnto vs: And although in the holy scriptures are red and offred vnto vs very many promises of GOD, yet What is the first ob­iect of faith. this one is the chiefest, for whose sake the rest are performed vnto vs, vnto whiche also are all other promises to be referred. This promise, as we haue before sayde, is that, wherein God promiseth, that he wil be mercifull vnto vs for Christs sake. And although there be very many things which we ought to beleue, as threatnings, histories, exhortations, prayses of God, and such other like, yet ought The com­mon obiect of fayth. all these thinges to be referred, to perswade vs of this promise onely. Hereby is manifest, what is the chiefest obiect of fayth: for the common obiect of fayth, or (as they call it) the equall obiect, is the word of God set forth in the holy scrip­tures. Beyond this obiect, fayth extendeth not it selfe. For as Paul sayth, fayth commeth of hearing, and hearing by the word of God. This thing our aduersaries cā The pa­pistes obiect vnwritten verities which they say are to be beleued. The perpe­tuall virgi­nity of Marye. by no meanes abide: for they contend, that there are certayne things, I know not what, to be beleued, which are not conteyned in the holy scriptures. But we say, y ^e fayth is an assent, whiche is geuen vnto the holy scripture, & vnto those things, which are necessarily and euidētly cōcluded of it. Amongst other things they are wont to obiect vnto vs y ^e perpetuall virginity of the mother of Christ; whiche they say, is to be beleued, although it be not had in the holy scriptures. They obiect moreouer that y ^e authority of y ^e holy scripture depēdeth of y ^• church, and can not be proued by the scriptures themselues. As touchinge the firste, it is sufficient for vs, that we are taught by the holy scriptures, that Christ was conceaued and borne of a virgin. And aboue that to affirme, that the blessed virgin was ioyned with man as touching fellowship of the flesh, it were rash & presumptuous. [Page 93] For seing that is nether had in the holy scriptures nor yet is verye likely, why (in Gods name) ought we ether to beleue it or to affirme it? And con­trariwise, that she abode perpetually a virgin, forasmuch as the holy scriptures doo not by expresse wordes auouch the same, it is not to be receaued amongst those things, which are of necessity to be beleued: as are those things which are expressedly contained in the holy scriptures. Ierom of this matter wrote against Heluidius. For he was woorthely to be condemned, for that he rashly affirmed, that she was not perpetually a virgine. And Augustine very well admonisheth Augustines counsell touching this mat­ter. The scrip­ture hath not hys au­thority of the church. vs, that when we come to such places where the sence of the scripture can not certainly be gathered, we shoulde not hedlong runne vnto ether parte. As touching the other obiection, we haue oftentimes declared, that it is not true, which they take as graunted, that the scripture hath his authority of the Church. For the stedfastnes therof depēdeth of God, and not of men, and the word was both firme and certayne before the Church beganne. For the Church was called by the word. And the spirite of God wrought in the hartes of them that beleued the word, and of them that red it, to acknowledge it to be no humane words, but altogether deuine. wherfore frō the holy ghost came the authority vnto the word of God, and not from the Church: But they say, y ^• Augustine writeth agaynst the epistle called epistola Fundamēti. I would not beleue the Gosple except the authority I would not beleue the Gospell except the authority of the church mo­ued me therunto. of the Church had moued me therunto. But Augustine by those words would signi­fy nothing els, but that we must attribute much vnto y ^e ministery of the church which setteth forth, preacheth and inculcateth the Gosple to all the faythfull, for which of vs hath come vnto Christ, or beleued the Gosple, but that he hath bene stirred vp by the preaching of the Gospel, which is done in the Church, and yet therby can not be gathered that the authority of the Gosple dependeth of the Church in the mindes of the hearers. For if it lay in it, to cause the scripture to be receaued, then vndoubtedly had it long a go perswaded the Epicures and Turkes to beleue the same. But the matter is farre otherwise. For whatsoeuer authority the Church hath, or the ministers therof, the same dependeth wholy of the word of God. For if a man should demaund of them, how they proue the authority of the Church, or how they are certayne that erreth not in vnderstā ­ding of the holy striptures, and discerning them from other writinges they wil answere, bicause it is gouerned by the holy ghost. But I besech you how know ye that? Bycause Christ (they will say) hath promised that he will be with it euer vnto the end of the world. And bicause he hath also sayd, weresoeuer shall be two or thre gathered together in my name there am I in the middest of them. And agayne, I will send the holy ghost the comforter which shall lede you into all truth. These are the thinges (say they) which perswade vs of the authority of the Church. But I Contrari­wise the church hath his autho­rity from the scrip­ture. Fayth, is firme. would fayne know from whence ye receaued these thinges, if not out of the holy scriptures? Wherfore we may contrariwise conclude, that the Church hath his authority of the scripture. Farther by this place of Paule is declared an other difference of fayth: namely, that it is a firme assent. For he setteth forth of A­braham, that he nothing doubted. And he vseth this verbe [...], which sig­nifieth, to reason with himselfe and to put doubtes. In which signification the Actes of the Apostles vse the selfe same word. For it is so sayde vnto Peter, that he should go vnto Cornelius the Centurion, [...], that is, nothing doubting. Abraham had a respect vnto the will and power of God which made the promise: and not to his owne infirmity, or to the infirmity of his wife. Set God aside, and he had nothing whereby he coulde promise himselfe any such thing. Wherefore, as sayth the Apostle, he was strengthned in fayth, nether doubted he through vnbeliefe which is all one, as if he had sayd. On euery side els were offred vnto him in credulity and doubting. Nether ought this sentence to be reproued, for that that we fele no such experience in our selues. For there is none, in whose minde sometymes ariseth not some doubt touching those thinges which we beleue. For this commeth not of fayth, but of our infirmity. [Page] Which thing we may easely be instructed of hy y ^• which we sée to happē in y ^• h [...] ­bite or quality of any science, especially of the mathematical science. For there­in is certaynty, and that vndoubtedly very great. For the conclusions there ne­cessarily and most euidently follow of the premisses. But if a man haue not per­fectlie learned, or absolutely attained vnto the science, he shal sometimes doubt: And this commeth to passe not by meanes of the science, but by reason of the default of him which vseth the science. So we, because so long as we liue here, Why some­tymes arise in vs doub­tes euen a­gainst our willes. we are weake, nether can haue a full and perfect fayth, therefore oftentymes do aryse in vs doubtes, yea euen agaynst our willes, but it is farre otherwise of the nature of an opinion which is such, that there can be no blame layde vn­to vs, if we somewhat enclyne vnto the other part from that which we thinks to be true. And the infirmity which happeneth vnto vs, concerning fayth, may come two wayes. For sometymes we firmely cleaue vnto those thinges which we beleue: but yet are there other things behind, which are to be beleued, which yet we perceaue not. And after this maner, they which still together the Gospell obserued choyce of meates, and other ceremonies, are in this epistle called of Paule, weake in fayth: for they yet knew not, that the ceremonies of the Iewes were by Christ abrogated. Sometymes it commeth to passe, that we sée in deede the thinges which are to be beleued: but yet we are not so perfect in fayth, that we can firmely and constantly cleue vnto them. So Christ called the We must pray vnto God to en­crease our fayth. Apostles, men of little fayth, and especially Peter, when through doubting he was almost drowned with the waues of the sea: wherefore as touching eche part, we must alwayes pray vnto God to encrease our fayth. By this place also is to marked, that the power of beleuing commeth from the holy ghost: when as we geue not place to so many and so great waues of doubtes, beating agaynst our mindes, but at the last get the vpper hand of them: which thing coulde not be done without a certayne celestiall and supernaturall strength. But in this as­sent What thinges are diligently to be examined in the assent of faith. of fayth, we must diligently examine, both who it is whiche speaketh, and also what that is which is spoken, and set forth vnto vs to be beleued. For the deuill laboreth for nothing more, then to make vs to beleue, that God said that, which he sayd not. Oftentymes also those thinges which are spoken of God himselfe, are by false deceauers wrested to a wrong sense, and corrupted, and are so obtruded to be beleued. Wherefore seing as touching eche part we haue nede of reuelatiō, we must pray vnto God, not to suffer vs to be deceaued. One of them that writeth vpon the sentences is of this opinion, that if it were most We must pray vnto God not to suffer vs to be deceaued assuredly knowen, that God spake any thing, therein faith could haue no place. For strayght way (sayth he) by the light of nature we should know, that that ought to be true, which God hath spoken: vnles we will thinke him to be a ly­ar. But this man is wonderfull far out of the way. For we doubt not, but that the prophetes assuredly knew, that God spake in them, and yet they gaue faith, or beleued those thinges which they foretolde. We also assuredly know, that Whether it followeth that they beleue which know assu­redly that God hath spoken any thing. God spake those thinges which are read in the holy scriptures. And yet we be­leue them. The Apostles know, that they had receaued the holy ghost. And yet for all that they wanted not fayth. But that which this man sayth, should then be true, if by reason or sense we might euidently know, that God spake these thinges: which vndoubtedly can neuer come to passe. For these thinges are not made knowen vnto vs, but by reuelation. But this man in stede of euidence, did put certaynty. The last part which is in the definition, wherein it is sayde that this assent wrastleth with the sense and wisedome of the fleshe, may mani­festly be declared, not only by this example of Abraham, but also by a great ma­ny other examples. God promised deliuery vnto the Israelites: and yet in the Examples. meane tyme increased their affliction: they had a greater number of brickes layd vppon them: they had no straw geuen them for theyr worke: they were sharpely and cruelly beaten. And whē they were now departing out of Egipt, the sea came agaynst them, on the other side were great huge rockes: and at [Page 95] their backes was Pharao at hand with a mighty host: against whiche lettes it behoued y ^• flesh to striue. And many things in like sort semed to be agaynst the promise made to Dauid, to moue him not to beleue the anoynting of Samuell: a­gaynst which it was nedeful, that he should by fayth be strengthned. The Apo­stles Fayth per­petually wrestleth with some doubting The ende of fayth. Wherein the glory of God consi­steth. also found in Christ many tokens of infirmity, which they could not haue ouercome, but by fayth. Wherefore we may conclude, that such is the nature of our fayth, that it alwayes striueth with some doubting.

Geuing the glory to God.] Here is set forth the ende whereunto fayth ten­deth, namely, to aduance, and encrease the glory of God: which herein consisteth, that we conceaue a worthy estimation touching God. Abraham is sayde to haue bene in a maner an hundreth yeare olde. For as it is written in the history of Genesis the 17. chapter, he was now 99. yeares of age when this promise was made vnto him. He had no like example before his tyme, by consideration wher­of he mought haue bene confirmed. For he is the first vnto whome we reade in the scriptures was restored strength to beget children. Nether is it any meruaile that By fayth we re­nounce the best part of our selues. by y ^• worke of faith, is aduāced y ^• glory of God: forasmuch as in it for Gods sake we deny the best part of our selues: which is our mynde and reason, wherby we ether assent or not assent, vnto thinges set forth vnto vs. Wherefore it is manifest, that there can nothing more excellent be offred of vs vnto God. For this is a wonderfull testification of the power and goodnes of God: for his sake to seme to quench in our selues the sense of nature. But I wonder at those, which so diligently commend workes, and so highly extoll chastity, sole life, and other workes, and yet are so colde in setting forth the commendation of fayth: when as by it commeth the vic­tory, whereby we ouercome both our selues, and also the whole world. For so Iohn sayth, this is the victory, which ouercommeth the world, euen our fayth. Which thing We are not iustified by fayth as it is a worke. Faith meriteth not vnto vs iusti­fication. Fayth as it is a worke excelleth all other workes. Proues that fayth cannot be without good wor­kes. The ver­tues of the vnderstan­ding are not repug­nant to vices. I speake not, as though I ment, that we are iustified by fayth, as it is a worke. For, it is defiled by sundry blottes of our infirmity. And Augustine sayth, that this sentence is by no meanes to be admitted, that fayth meriteth vnto vs iustification. For fayth is not (sayth he) of our selues: but as Paul to the Ephesians expressedly testefi­eth, it is the gift of God. Howbeit as it is a worke, it many wayes excelleth all other workes. Nether can it be expressed, how far wide the scholemen erre, when they imagine, that fayth can consist without good workes. For by their sentence, fayth should not attayne vnto the dignity of prudence: which both as the Philosophers write, and also they themselues confesse, can not be had without the rest of the vertues. What maner of thing then shall Theologicall fayth be, if it attayne not vnto the perfection of prudence? Farther, forasmuch as vertue suffreth not vice to be ioyned together with it, and they themselues contende that fayth is a vertue, how wil they haue true fayth to be in sinners, and such as are strangers frō God? But they will say, that they put fayth to be a vertue of the vnderstanding: vnto which kind of vertues vices are not repugnant. For that we sée sometimes, that the most wickedst men that are, haue in them excellent sciences. But nether will this any thing helpe them, their owne fayned imagination is a let thereunto. For they imagine, that those thinges which are set forth vnto our vnderstanding, are obscure and nothing euident, and that we geue not assent vnto them, but because the wil cōmaundeth the vnderstanding to geue his assent, & in that thinge to geue place to the truth of God. Wherefore I will demaunde of these men, whether the worke of y ^• wil, wherby it cōmaundeth y ^• vnderstāding to geue place & to assēt vnto the words of God, be good or euell. Vndoubtedly whether they wil or no, they must The vnderstandinge cannot be commaun­ded to be­leue with­out charity. Fayth depē deth not of the com­maundemē [...] of the wyl [...]. be cōpelled to say it is good. But without charity it is not possible that the will should bring the vnderstāding to embrace y ^• things that are to be beleued. Where­fore these fonde deuises of theirs are repugnaunt the one to the other. But we teach no such thing, that fayth should depend of the commaundement of the wil For how should it be moued to commaund things that are to be beleued, to be receaued as good and worthy of credit, except it had first receued it by vnderstanding? In dede we confesse, that those things which we beleue, are obscure [Page] and not very euident vnto humane reason. But they are made plaine vnto the vnderstanding by the light of the diuine reuelation, and illumination of the holy The deuine reuelation maketh those thin­ges playne which o­therwise were ob­scure. ghost. Wherfore they are by the iudgment of reason apprehended and admitted with a singular certainty, which thinges being so knowen and receaued, as it must nedes follow, the wil delighteth it selfe in them, & so earnestly embraseth them, that it commaundeth vnto the other faculties of the mind, workes agrea­ble vnto that truth, whiche the mind hath beleued. And by this meanes of faith springeth charity: and after it, followeth hope. For the things which we beleue and ernestly loue, with a valiant and patient minde we wayt for: which thing pertayneth chiefely vnto hope. Nether let any man thinke, that this is ether against reason, or extinguisheth the nature of mā, for that in beleuing we sem [...] to renounce humane sence: as though this were in vs a madnes, as Agrippa the king sayd vnto Paul, when he preached the fayth of Christ: Much lerning hath driuen thee to madnes. The matter is not so: but rather by faith is brought to passe, Fayth neyther ex­tinguisheth the nature of man nor reason. The foun­dacions of our resur­rection. that our reasō maketh it selfe subiect vnto the doctrine of God and vnto y ^e reue­lation thereof, rather then to inferior reasonings and perswasions, which being inferiors vnto the holy scriptures, man is by them rather exalted, then deiected. And if a man should say that men in beleuing are madde, we will adde farther it is aboue all things done with reason. The Apostle maketh mencion that God rayseth to life the dead, and that the body of Abraham was dead, and also the wombe of Sara. By which wordes Chrisostome sayth, are layde the foundacions of our resurrectiō, which we beleue shal come. For if god could do these things, then can not he wante ether meanes or power, whereby to restore againe to life the deade. And vndoubtedlye I am perswaded, that this fayth was no small helpe vnto Abraham to moue him to sacrifice his sonne, as God had requi­red at his handes. For although hee had receaued the promise, that he should haue posterity by Isaake yet he saw that although he were slaine, yet there was What faith confirmed Abraham to obey God. still remayning place for that promise. For he beleued, y ^• God was able to rayse him vp although he were slayne, and make him to liue agayne. And how com­mendable the fayth of the patriarch was: Paul declareth when he sayth, that he had not a regard to his dead body or to the dead wombe of Sara, but gaue the glory to God: being most assuredly perswaded this, that God was able to performe and bring to passe whatsoeuer he had promised. Ambrose by an Antithesis or contrary position decla­reth the excellency of this fayth, for he compareth it with the incredulity of Za­chary: vnto whome when the angel shewed the birth of Iohn Baptist, yet he remained still in vnbeliefe, and therfore he was reproued of the lord, and his tonge so tyed, that he could not declare it, which punishment was verye conueniente for that offence. For they which beleue not, doo nether speake nor confesse. Abraham considered with himselfe, although I am now by nature past children gettinge: and am become barren, yet the and might of God is not subiect vnto the impe­diments of creatures. For God can beyond the accustomed maner and course of nature bring to passe whatsoeuer he wil, wherfore although I cā not by mine owne strengths beget a child, yet God can adorne his promise with a miracle, wherby he may ouercome the order of nature. The Rabines of the Hebrues say, that Abram begetteth not, but Abraham begetteth. Bycause saye they in that name is put y ^e aspiratiō. He, which is a letter pertaining to y ^e name Tetragrāma tō. As if it should haue ben said, y ^e power of God being aded, he which could not beget, now begetteth children. Augustine in his questions vpon Genesis thinketh that this place of the Apostle is not simply to be vnderstanded. For we rede, that after the death of Sara, Abraham had many children by his wife Chetura which he afterward maried. And he addeth, that the opinion of naturall philosophers is, that men of greate age can not beget children of old women: but yet they may of young maydens. Wherfore he thinketh, that we must in this place vnderstād that the body of Abraham was dead as touching Sara his wife, which was now fower score and ten yeares old. But this exposition hath not such firme cause to [Page 96] compel vs to thinke it to be true. For in that Abraham begat children of Chetura, Sara being now dead, that mought come by this meanes, that God had now be­sides the order of nature restored vnto him strength to beget childrē. Nether maketh that any thing to the purpose, which Origen affirmeth, who vpon this place writeth, that the body of Abraham is vnderstand to be dead, bycause he now liued chast­ly with his wife, nether had any more fellowship with her. But he cōmēdeth him, for that when he had receaued the commaundement of God, that he should haue issue by his wife, he agayne went in vnto her, These thinges, as it appereth he deuised of his owne hed, for they can not be gathered out of the history. Now the Apostle is in hand with this, to commend the fayth of Abraham, for that he constantly gaue assent vnto the promise of God, although both his owne nature and his wiues nature were vtterly agaynst it. But whither Abraham any thing doubted, when God promised vnto him a child, the scripture semeth to leaue in suspēce. For in the 12. Whether Abraham doubted, whē he had a child pro­mised him. chapter of Genesis it is written that he laughed, and sayd, shall a child be borne to one of an hundreth yeares of age? And shall Sara bring forth a child being 90. yeares of age. I would to God Ismaell mought liue in thy sight. These words haue a shew both of ioy and of admiration, being ioyned notwithstanding w ^t some doubting. And this scripture therfore maketh mencion of these things, that the fayth of Abra­ham, which is so highly commended, should in no wise be thought to haue bene without doubtings, which are accustomed to spring of the flesh and humane fence: but bycause the fayth of the Patriarch ouercame these doubtings, there­fore is it praysed. Nether doo we read there, that Abraham was accused of God Both of thē laughed Abraham & Sara. of incredulity, as Sara was, which also laughed. And if a mā waigh the outward laughter, they were both a like. But God, which is the sercher of the hartes vn­derstood right well the fayth of ether of them. Holy men although they beleued the promises of God, yet sometimes through humane weakenes they somewhat doubted and therof it oftentimes came to passe, that they required signes and miracles to confirme theyr weaknes: which thing we reade of Gedeon, and Eze­chias The saints to confirme theyr fayth sometimes required miracles. A remedy against weake fayth. Whither the blessed virgin doubted. the king. But in this place is shewed a remedy agaynst such temptacions, namely to call backe our thoughtes from humane lettes, and to fixe our eyes only vpon the power of God. Of this thinge the Angell admonished the blessed Virgine, saying, No word is impossible with God. Although it appeare not by the wordes of the virgine, that she doubted, but only asked, how that shoulde come to passe. For she doubted not, but that as the Angell had tolde her, she shoulde conceaue, and that straightway: but because she saw, that she was not as yet coupled in matrimony, although she were betrouthed, she demaūded how that should come to passe: whether she shoulde wayte till she were ioyned in matri­mony, or whether it should by any other meanes come to passe. Wherefore the Angell in his answere comprehendeth two principall pointes. The one is, wherby he remoueth away doubting, if paraduenture there stacke any in the minde of the Virgine: for he sayth, No word is impossible with God. The second is, of the maner of conceauing. The holy ghost (sayth he) shall come vpon thee, and the po­wer of the most highest shall shadow thee. But whereas some fayne, that she asked this, because she had vowed her virginitye vnto God, it nedeth no long confu­tation, The blessed virgine made no vow. especially seing we are by the history it selfe tought, that she was betro­thed to a mā, nether was there at that tyme any such custome to vow virginity vnto God. But to return to our purpose, our part is to resist the doubts which striue agaynste fayth, by the consideration of the power of God: for there can no doubt arise as touching the will of God. For of his owne accord he promi­seth, whatsoeuer he setteth forth to be beleued: nether doubtles woulde he do it, if he would not geue it. Wherefore it followeth that they whith are tempted The pray­ers of the church be­gin at the omnipoten­cy of God. with such doubting, are in doubt of hys power. Hereof I thinke it commeth to passe, that the prayers of the Church do so oftentymes beginne with the omni­potency of God, to the ende the hartes of them that pray shoulde be confirmed, and that they should not with doubting require any thinge in their publique [Page] prayers. Of those thinges it is manifest, how gréeuous a sinne it is, to doubt of the promises of God. For that is nothing els, but to make God eyther a lyar or els A greuous sinne to doubt of the promises of God. The deuell hath not fayth. weake. And they which are of that mynde, can nether call vpon God, nor aske, or looke for any thing at his hands. But now forasmuch as this is the nature of faith, which the Apostle now describeth, it manifestly appeareth, that the deuill hath not fayth. For he can haue no confidence, that he is accepted of God, and besides that he knoweth right well by the naturall sharpenes of his vnderstanding, that God is omnipotent. But whereas Iames sayth, that the deuill beleueth and trem­bleth, to beleue, is there put to know. But the fayth which is here described par­tayneth vnto men only, and to none but to those that are godly. The Apostle re­peteth The fayth which is here entreated of per­taineth vn­to godly men onely. that this fayth was imputed vnto Abraham vnto righteousnes. He did in­dede before beleue, and was iustified: but the scripture sheweth now, how it was expressed, when his fayth shined forth more excellently, and more notably. For as touching this promise, both the disposition of his body, and the age of his wife were wonderfully agaynst it: which thing is not so manifestly declared in the promi­ses, that were before geuen.

Now it is not written for him only, that it was imputed to him for righteousnes, but also for vs, to whome it shalbe imputed for righteousnes, which beleue in him that raysed vp Iesus our Lord from the deade. Who was deliuered for our sinnes, and is ri­sen agayne for our iustification.

Now it is not written for him only.] Here Paul applieth the example of A­braham vnto vs. For sayth he, euen as fayth profited him vnto iustification, so al­so shall it be imputed vnto vs vnto righteousnes. This maner ought we to obserue when we come to the reading of the holy scriptures, that when we haue diligent­ly peysed any place, we turne the eyes of our mynde to our selues, and diligently examine how those thinges which we reade pertayne vnto vs. This thing also is to be obserued that the Apostle, when he discusseth this place of controuersy tou­ching The proues of Paule takē out of the scriptures. iustification, for the iudgement of the whole disputation, sendeth the bele­uers no where els but vnto the scriptures: for he sendeth them not to the fathers, to sée what their iudgement is. For that we haue the scriptures, in which are all thinges playnly contayned which are necessary to saluation: for Paul sayth to Timothe, All scripture inspired by God is profitable to teach, to reproue, to enstruct, and to correct, that the man of God may be perfect and absolute, and be enstructed to all good A place of Paule to Timothy declared. workes. Here are reckened fower principall pointes, which comprehend the whole summe of Christian relgion. For it entreateth ether of doctrines or of maners. And as touching doctrines, we must take hede that we confirme thinges that are good and true, and confute thinges corrupt and false. And of these thinges the A­postle sayth, that the scriptures are profitable to teach and to reproue. And as tou­ching maners such as are good are to be perswaded by admonitiōs, or such as are e­uell are to be reprehended. And hereunto pertayneth y ^• which the Apostle sayth, To correct and to enstruct, And these things are so contayned in the holy scriptures that by them a man may be made perfect. Which could in no case be counted true, if there were any thing wanting in them. Wherefore our negligence is much to be accused, which doth in such sort contemne to search the holy scriptures. The laytie and simpler sort complayne of their pastors: for seing they lye snorting a Remedy a­gain [...]th: negligence of Pastors. slepe, it is not to be meruayled at, if others slepe. There can be no better remedy agaynst this so great negligence of the pastors, then that the lay men continually occupye themselues in the scriptures, and when they are in doubt of any thing to bring it to their pastors, and to aske of them their iudgement, and to vrge them. By that meanes it shall come to passe, that will they or nill they, they shalbe com­pelled to be diligent in study. For they should vndoubtedly at the length be asha­med, when they should sée themselues not able to make answere. But the lay men [Page 96] say, they haue no leasure to study the holy scriptures: when yet to the greate losse of tyme they haue leasure inough for pastimes and vnprofitable trifles. Chriso­stome continually in his holy sermons pricked forward all his hearers to the rea­ding of the holy scriptures, both by many other reasons, and finally by this excel­lent A simili­tude. similitude. They which haue found out (sayth he) mynes of gold or siluer, spare no paynes, digge the grounde, go vnder the earth, and sustayne the pestilent exalati­ones of the earth, that they maye come to small crommes of golde or of siluer. And we hauing the scriptures, a treasure most aboundant and most easy to attayne vnto, neglect to excercise our selues or to take any paynes therin. We must not in these daies wayte for the pastors to inuite vs to read the scriptures. They had a great deale rather that they were vtterly forbidden the people, & that they might be kept of such men as were called Triumuiri, as the bookes of the Sibils were, that the people mought come and aske counsell of them, and they to geue them answers as it were out of an oracle. By which meanes their idlenes and ease should be very well pro­uided The subtelty of the Popish prie [...]es. for. But now when they sée, that that cannot be, they say that the sence of y ^e scriptures is to be sought for out of the fathers: forasmuch as it is an infinit worke to read them ouer all, they may in the meane time at their pleasure confirme their abuses. For they shall alwayes fynd some amongst them, which may seme to fauor their fonde deuises and dreames. Neither are these men ashamed to make the ora­cles of God subiect to the opinions of men. But they say, that they doo this onely there, where the places are in controuersie, neither can be expounded by the scrip­ture it selfe. Touching which matter it shall not be amisse to heare what Ierome saith. He vpon the xxiij. chapter of Mathew entreating of this sentence of y ^e Lord, The scrip­ture ought not to be made sub­iect vnto the iudge­ment of mē Of Zacha­ry slain [...] betwen [...] [...]e temple and the alter. That Zachary the sonne of Barachias was slayn betwene the temple and the altar, saith, that some thought that this Zachary was the father of Iohn Baptist, which was slayne in that place, because he was a priest, and that for no other cause, but for that he had preached Christ. I sought oftentimes to know which of the fathers exposition thys was. And at the length I found that it was Basilius exposition. For he vseth it in his sermon of the Natiuity of our Lord, and saith: That it was a tradition by long succession euen vnto his tyme confirmed, that Zachary beyng priest, dyd register the mo­ther of Christ, after she had brought forth a chylde, amongest the virgins, and when he was accused of the Iewes for the fame, and rendred a reason of his so doyng, and preached besides also many thynges of Christ, the Iewes not beyng able any longer to beare wyth him, killed him. Touching this history Jerom in this maner pronounceth: That for as much as it hath not autority out of the holy scripturei, it is by the self same easines cōtēned wherby it is proued. We sée therfore by the testimony of Ierome, that the interpreta­tions of doubtfull places are not admitted, vnles they be brought out of the scrip­tures and by them confirmed. And if we will ouercome the difficulty of the Scrip­tures, we must be familiarly conuersant, in them day and night. And let vs remember this which the Apostle now here mencioneth, that they were not written for their sakes onely of whom is there entreated, but also for our sakes.

But in that this worde, Onely, is added, declareth, that they were written for their sakes also. For Gods pleasure is, that we should thinke wel of his elect, which self thing, also turneth to our cōmoditie, for whē we thinke well of thē, we are stir­red vp to imitate them. This is moreouer here hence gathered, that so often as we shall establish any doctrine or declare any commaundement of God, it shal then be An argu­ment taken of examples is very apt. We are made equal with Abra­ham as too­ching iusti­fication. aptly done when we bring proues of them by examples. For in harde and doubt­full places, proues taken of examples bring great perspicuitie. For in them both the minde and the sences are ioyned together. Farther there is no small comforte conteined in this place, when we sée that we are made equall with the Patriarche Abraham as touching iustification. For although he were adorned with a greate many giftes which we want, yet that we should by faith be adopted to be the chil­dren of God, it is no lesse geuen vnto vs, then vnto him. And although our fayth be the instrument, whereby we receiue righteousnes and the promise offred vnto vs of God. For vnto them that are of full age, by that instrument onely is righteous­nes [Page] geuen, yet Christ hath so much estemed it, that he hathe spoken of it no other­wise, Christ speaketh of faith as the cause of iu­stification. A firme ar­gument for the certainety of salua­tion. then if it were properly the cause of iustification. For he sayth: Thy faith hath made thee safe. And seynge it is saide, that faith shall be imputed vnto vs vnto righteousnes, as it was in tymes past imputed vnto Abraham, we haue a moste firme argument of the certeintie of saluation. For as Abraham behaued himselfe towardes the promise of God, as touching that he should haue issue: so must we be­haue our selues towardes the promise of the remission of sinnes. But he was cer­taine, neither doubted he: wherfore, we also ought to be certaine of the saluation promised vnto vs, and by no meanes to doubt therof. This reason let vs hold fast, and not suffer it to slip from vs. But seyng Abraham had many singuler things, neither ought we to imitate him in all thinges, how doth Paul with any strength gather, that this pointe of fayth should haue place? that as it came vnto him, so also shal it come vnto vs? For if we should take armour, and beyng priuate men make warre, shall it happen vnto vs as it did to Abraham? And to lye with our hand­maidens, shall it be excused in vs, as the fellowship which Abraham had with Agar is excused in hym? And shall it be lawfull for euery man to sacrifice his own sonne because he was redy to offer vp his? This doubt may thus be answered: that there Argumētes taken of ex­amples how they be of force. Two ma­ner of cal­linges generall and sin­guler. How cal­linges are to be discer­ned. A fruiteful considerati­on of singu­lar callings In singu­ler callings also of the Saintes at many thinges to be imitated is one callyng which is vniuersall, and an other singuler: and when we reade the actes of the saints, we must take hede that we rashly confound them not. For those things which pertaine vnto the general calling, we must imitate: but those things which pertain to the singuler calling, are rather to be reuerēced thē imitated. And if thou aske, by what meanes these things are to be discerned, the difference is not hard. For whatsoeuer thinges thou séest that they did accordyng to the prescript of the commaundementes of God, those thinges haue relation vnto the general state of the faithful. But where any thing is committed, that thou séest agréeth not with the law of God, the same wholy is in them priuate and singuler. Which yet is not red w ^tout fruite. For there we sée, how God sometimes by a wonderful maner go­uerneth his: as one not addicted to one maner of sauing those whom he hath elected. Farther always in this kinde of actions, if thou come to the roofe and ground, thou shalt finde many things which thou mayst imitate. Abraham was willyng to sa­crifice his sonne. Although the same be not lawfull for thée to do, yet do thou that which is lawfull for thee. Abraham preferred the commaundement of God before the lyfe of his onely sonne: so also oughtest thou to preferre the will of God before all naturall consanguinitie. Farther he hid al this whole matter from his wife, for that he saw she should haue bene a let, wherby he should not haue bene able to exe­cute the commaundementes of God: so muste we also do that we remoue awaye all lettes from good purposes. Finally, although he knew. that he had in Isaac receiued the promise of an infinite posteritie, and saw that his vntimely death was re­pugnant vnto the promises of God, yet ceased he not of from that which he had be­gonne, but permitted the successe of the promise vnto the prouidence of God: so also let not vs by humaine reasonings resist the commaundements of God. All these thinges beyng thus well weighed, shall easely call vs from our infirmitie, to shew our selues obedient vnto God.

VVhich beleue in him that raised vp Iesus our Lord from the dead, vvho was deli­uered for our sinnes, and is risen againe for our iustification.] Here is set forth a The sum of the Gos­pell. briefe and redy summe of the Gospell: for in the death of Christe are vnderstād al the misteries of Christ, which went before it: as his Natiuity, preaching, la­bors inteaching, accusatiōs, cōdēnatiō, crosse & burial. And his resurrectiō frō the dead setteth forth vnto vs al these things which followed it: as his restituti­on to life, & that eternal last glory, & chief felicity: & finally al those things which pertain therunto. The Apostle very aptly in this place maketh mencion of our lord Iesus Christ, for that he is the mediator and arbiter betwen God and mē. And seing he hath hitherto spoken of fayth which is the instrumēt wherby we are iustified, it serueth very well to the purpose that he should also make men­cion of Christe: for he is the obiect of our fayth, as by whome God would com­municate [Page 97] vnto vs his righteousnes. Nether could we haue bene otherwise cer­tified of the will of God, except Christ himself had enstructed vs therof. For Iohn sayth, No man hath sene God at any time. The sonne which is in the bosome of the fa­ther, he hath declared him. For neither the prophets in the old time, nether we ourselues could by any other meanes then by Christ haue knowen, that this is the will of God, that by him he is made mercifull and fauorable vnto vs. Farther there is no mā ignorāt, but that there was nede of a sacrifice and price, to purge vs from our sinnes. Wherfore seing both the death of Christ, and the sheding of his bloud hath performed these thinges, vndoubtedly they ought not to be kept in silence. But here ariseth a doubt, by what meanes the Apostle may seme to seioine and to put a sonder these things one from the other: namely, the forgeue­nes of sinnes, and iustificatiō: and one the other side, the faith of the death, from the fayth of the resurrection, when as it semeth that by the fayth of ech part, of his death (I say) and of his Resurrection is geuen not only remission of sins but also iustification. Augustine against Faustus in his. 16. boke semeth to geue his interpretacion. That our fayth is chiefly directed vnto the resurrection of Christ. That Fayth is directed chiefly vn­to the resurrection of the Lord. he died, euen the Ethnikes also confesse: but that he rose againe, they vtterly deny. And therfore forasmuch as fayth is sayd to be that, whereby we are iustified, Paul would make menciō of that thing wheron it chiefly cōsisteth. And to cōfirme his sentēce he citeth a place out of the 10. chapter to the Romanes: If with the mouth thou confesse the lord Iesus Christ, and with thy hart beleuest, that he was raysed from the dead, thou shalt be saued. By which wordes it appeareth, that saluation and iustificatiō are attributed vnto the fayth of the resurrection of Christ. But these things are not so to be taken as Our fayth is directed also vnto the death of the Lord. though our fayth should not also be directed vnto y ^• death of y ^• Lord. It is true in dede that the Ethnikes confesse, that Christ was slayn: but they do not beleue that this was done for the sinnes of men: but for some offence he had committed or ells wrongfully: but we beleue that he was crucified for the saluatiō and re­demptiō of mankind: wherfore our fayth is exercised as wel in y ^• death of Christ In the fayth of the resurrectiō is compre­hended the faith of the death. Besides the payinge of the price▪ it was nedefull that the redempcion should be applied vn­to vs. as in his Resurrection. And that which he bringeth out of the 10. Chapter vnto the Romanies, maketh nothing agaynst our sentence. For who vnderstandeth not, that in the fayth of the Resurrection of Christ, is also included that fayth which we haue of his death and crosse? wherfore there are yet behynd two other very likely interpretations of which the first is, that in very dede by the death of Christ, was payd the price of our redemption. But, that it might be applied vnto vs, there nedeth the holy ghost, to moue vs to beleue, and Christ to geue vnto vs this holy ghost, rose againe from death, sent abrode his Apostles to preach into all partes of the world, & now also before the father, executeth the office of an intercessor, and high priest: therefore is he sayd to haue risen agayne to helpe vs that we might obteyne iustification. Chrisostome semeth to lene vnto this sen­tence. The second exposition is, that the fayth of the death and of the resurrec­tion bringeth iustification: but Paule seioyned them, aptly to declare the analo­gy and proportiō, betwene them. Vnto the death of Christ, answereth very wel the forgeuenes of sinnes for by reason of them, death was dewe vnto vs. And as Christ as touching this corruptible life died, so also ought we, when we are iustified to dye vnto sinne. Agayne bycause iustification semeth herein to be de­clared in that we beginne a new life, therfore is it referred vnto the resurrection of Christ: for that he then semed to haue begonne a celestiall and happy life. Paul vsed in a maner the selfe same form of words in this same epistle, when he saith: wyth the harte we beleeue vnto ryghteousnesse: and wyth the mouth is confession made to saluation. For the faith of the harte, both worketh righteousnes, and also bringeth saluation: but bycause saluation and instauration are chiefly declared in action, therfore he ascribed it to confession. But whither of these expositions is the truer, nether will I contend nor also now declare. Of those things which haue now bene spoken we gather a most swete consolation: for therby we doo not only know the waight of sinne, but also we vnderstand that God bare a sin­gular good loue towards vs: as one which gaue his only begotten son, and y ^• [Page] vnto the death to deliuer vs from sinnes. Farther seing Christ is sayd to haue risen from the dead for our iustification, we easely se, that we are by him called backe to a new life: vnto which yet we cā not aspire, except we be of him elected.

VVHerefore being iustified by fayth, we haue peace to­wardes God, through our Lorde Iesus Christ. By whome also we haue accesse through fayth vnto this grace wherein we stand, and reioyce, vnder the hope of the glory of God. Nether do we this only, but also we reioyce in afflictions, knowing that affliction bringeth forth patience, and patience experience, and experience hope. And hope maketh not ashamed, because the loue of God is shed abroade into our hartes by the holy ghost, which is geuen vnto vs.

Wherefore being iustified by faith, we haue peace towardes God.] Here the Apostle beginneth by way of rehersall to conclude, that whiche he had before The ef­fectes of fayth and of iusti­fication. proued, and together therewithall set forth the effectes of faith and of iustification For, that vndoubtedly is an absolute or perfect doctrine, which sheweth, not only the nature of thinges, but also declareth the effectes. Now then the chiefest effect of iustification is, to deliuer vs from the terrors of death and of eternall damnati­on. And this is it which Paul calleth, To haue peace towardes God. Farther he sheweth that of this peace springeth a certayne reioysing, not only for the felicity, which we shall obtayne, but also euen for afflictions: that therefore we are sure of the good will and loue of God towardes vs, because we see Christ died for our sal­uatiō: but much more are we confirmed as touching the same, by reasō of his life, which he now liueth with the father. Moreouer he compareth Christ with Adam, and sheweth, that he hath brought farre greater benefites vnto mankinde, then did Adam bring losses.

Seing we are now iustified by fayth (sayth he) we haue peace towardes God. Sinne had seperated vs from him: and God to auenge sinne draue man out of Paradise: by meanes wherof we are become miserable and full of calami­tye. And agayne seing our owne conscience accuseth vs of wickednes, if we want Christ, then must we nedes abhorre God, and flye from hym, as from an auenger and punisher of sinne. And this is that hatred of the world, which Christ hath she­ed Where hēce commeth the hatred of the world againste the godly. What peace here signifieth. to be bent agaynst him and agaynst his, when he sayd. If the worlde hate me, it will also hate you. And of the Iewes he testefieth, That they hated his father. But now, after that we be thus iustified, we haue peace towardes God for that we are perswaded that he leaueth vs, and herein consisteth our whole felicitye. So Da­uid did not without iust cause say, that they are blessed, whose iniquities are forgeuen, and whose sinnes are couered. And by the name of peace is here properly signified, tranquility of conscience. There are some which in stede of [...], put [...] and for [...], that is, we haue rede [...], that is, Let vs haue peace: As though Paul after that he had forth the doctrine of faith, should now entreate of sincerenes of life, and should stirre vp the Romanes to mutuall loue and beneuolence one to­wards an other. And Origen semeth to leaue to this sentence. But Chrisostome most manifestly leaneth thereunto: for he bringeth two maner of expositions. The one is, that seing we are iustified by fayth, there remayneth, that contentions be put away, and that men liue in peace one towardes an other. And they say, that therefore Paul spake this, because there were some which contended, that the law should be holden as necessary vnto saluation: but Paul declareth, that there is no such nede, seing we are iustified by fayth. The second exposition is, that we should excercise charity, and sinne not. But this sentence can not stand sauing vpright the scope of this place, and wordes of the Apostle. For we sée, that here by a briefe [Page 98] rehearsall is entreated of the conclusion which is inferred of those thinges, which were before spoken. Farther the peace which the Apostle speaketh of, is not that peace which men haue one towardes an other. For he playnly sayth towards God: and those thinges which follow, we sée are spoken by the indicatiue moode. For he sayth, By whome we haue accesse vnto this grace wherein we stande. But Chrisostome hath herein also erred, when he demandeth, whether we can be with­out sinne, whē as we now haue iustification, & he maketh answere vnto himselfe, that this is an easy matter. Because (sayth he) it was a harder thing, that we which were subiecte to so greeuous sinnes, shoulde be deliuered from them, then that when we are iustified wee shoulde beware of them. For (sayth he) it is a muche greater matter to obtayne those thinges whiche wee haue not, then to defende those thinges whyche he haue alreadye obtayned. But wee haue before declared, that that (so long as we lyue here) can not be hoped for, namely, vtterly to want sinne. And if any man will contend, that this may be done by the power of God, we will not be agaynst him. For God could adorne a man with so great grace, that he should liue vtterly without sin. But we speake according to the sentēce of the scriptures, as the thing is indede, and as experience teacheth vs alwayes to happen. If we say Whether any man can here liue without sinne. (sayth Iohn) we haue no sinne, we deceaue our selues and the truth is not in vs. And Ierome agaynst the Pelagians derideth that power which nether is, nor hath bene, nor euer shall be put in execution. Ambrose maketh on our side, and manifestly in­terpreteth this place of the peace of the conscience, which we haue towardes God. Yea he herein compareth fayth and the law together: and saith, that fayth excelleth Fayth excelleth the law the law, for that it maketh peace, which the law could not do. Although whether we write it by [...]. or whether by [...], that is, whether we reade [...] or [...], that is, haue, or may haue, our expositiō hath place stil. For the Apostle ether sayth, that we now alredy haue that peace, or els exhorteth vs to haue it, and not any more, as we were wont before, to flye from God. But the common receaued reading by [...], is a great deale better. He addeth:

That by Christ we haue accesse vnto grace wherein we stand. If by Christ we haue accesse vnto God and vnto his grace, then may we inferre of the contra­ry, that without Christ we flye from God. To what ende then shall we call vpon Saintes? what other reconciliator haue we nede of, if by Christ is geuen vnto vs accesse vnto God? Because (say they) our complayntes are not brought vnto Em­perors and kinges, vnles we be brought in vnto them by Dukes, Earles, or Lordes. But as we haue before declared out of Amhrose, this is done because our Princes or men, nether do they sée what is done abroade in the streates, and in o­ther mens houses. Therefore towardes them we haue nede of many mediators. Agaynst i [...] uocation of sayntes. But God séeth all thinges, there is nothing hidden from Christ. Wherefore what­soeuer is attributed vnto any other, is taken away from his dignity and grace. Others contend, that we haue accesse vnto grace, by sorrowes, contritions, teares, satisfactions, & workes of truth. But as touching fayth, which Paul so oftentymes inculcateth, they speake not a word. And if a mā chance to vrge thē, they answere y ^• in all things they vnderstand fayth. And so in a thing most wayghty, and which is the chiefe poynt of the whole matter, they deale fraudulently and dalyenglye. But we say with Paul, that by Christ and fayth we haue accesse vnto the grace of reconciliation. And as for repentance and workes of charity, we say that they come as companions, which alwayes follow true fayth. Thou wilt demaund per­aduenture, what maner of peace & grace that is, which we haue, when as God v­seth gréeuously to punishe those sinnes, which he hath alredy remitted and forge­uen vnto his. For so we reade that he did to Dauid. We answere, that those tri­bulations which God inflicteth vpon the elect, after that he hath forgeuen them The afflict [...] ons of the godly haue not the na­ture of pu­nishments. their sinnes, if we will speake properly, haue not the nature of punishments. For they are rather fatherly corrections: wherby the saints are the better admonished, not to fall agayne into the like sinnes, and the church is tought, how sore God ha­teth sinne. Wherefore in these punishmentes is not disturbed the peace of the elect nether do they sometymes fly from such scourges. And this I speake of the spirite, [Page] and not of the fleshe. This thing only Dauid desireth, that the Lord would not correct him in his furye, or in his wrath. He refused not to be fatherly cha [...]sed. But The church can, not rele [...]se the afflicti­ons of the godly. these punishementes which God inflicteth vpon vs, whilest we liue here, are not in the power of the Church, that it can at pleasure and as it listeth it selfe alter, or lenifye, or mitigate them: as our aduersaryes haue fayned of the paynes of purgatory. Which their fayned deuise they can not confirme by any reason taken out of the holy scriptures. We must diligently also weigh the wordes of the Apostle. For as when he fayth:

That we stand in grace by fayth, he declareth that the property of fayth is, to erect and to confirme our mindes. Which property vndoubtedly it hath not, but by that it cleaueth vnto the woord of God. For so by it are broken the rages and tempests that rushe agaynst vs: so are we established not to wauer with euery wynde of doctrine, nor to change our opinion for euery chance of fortune. The phi­losophers, when they woulde amply set foorth the constancye of a iust man, com­pared it with a fower square stone, which howsoeuer it falleth, falleth right. But A compari­son of fayth with philo­sophy. fayth much more truely accōplisheth this, thē doth philosophy. Chrisostome addeth, That the good thinges of this world whatsoeuer they be, are nether firme nor constant: For they are oftentymes assayled with many dangers, and not seldome ouercome. And al­though whilest we liue here, we lose them not, yet when we dye, will we or nill we, we must nedes forsake them. But these spirituall things whereof we now intreate, are both firme, and shall after death be made more ample. But the same Chrisostome vpon this place is of vs warely to be red: For he sayth, that Paul in making mencion of those thinges, which we receaue of Christ, rehearseth many thinges. But when he commeth to those thinges which we haue of our selues, he setteth forth only one thing, namely, fayth▪ which (sayth he) we our selues bring of our owne. But we must surely sticke fast to thys ground, that fayth also is the gift of God, and is deriued from him into vs. Out of this place also may be gathered a most firme argument, that we are iustified by fayth only. Which shall be made playne by the effect after this maner. That by An argu­ment, wherby is pro­ued that we are iustified by faith one lye. which we are iustified, ought to make vs quiet before God. This thing can not workes bring to passe, but fayth only: Ergo, we are iustified by fayth, and not by workes. The maior is very playne, that we are not iustified, vnles we haue such a quiet mynde, that we abhorre not nor flye from the fight of God. And that our workes are not able to performe this, theyr vncleanes and vnpurenes declareth. Wherefore Dauid hath not without cause written, Enter not into iudgement with thy seruauntes Lord.

We reioyce in the hope and glory of God.] Here is declared the nature of this peace and tranquilitie of the minde: namely, that it maketh vs most assured and sure of perpetuall felicity: for we reioyce not, but for that which we now pos­sesse. And that we euen now also possesse eternall lyfe, Christ manifestly declareth We posses eternall life euen now also. when he saith: He that beleueth in me hath eternall lyfe. But bicause it is not yet ful, neither as yet appeareth, therfore. Paul addeth, In the hope of the glory of God. This glorye whiche we hope for, is a coniunction with God, that he maye wholye dwell and worke in vs: which thing when we shall haue attayned, we shall be a­dorned with the last and highest point of felicitye, neither shall there be left any place vnto misery. But when he sayth: In the hope of the glory of God. He sée­meth to speake that by preuention. For that as touching those which beleue, y ^e common opinion of men is excedingly deceiued. For the Ethenikes commonly deride Christians, for that they count themselues to be happye, when yet in the meane tyme they want not wicked affections, and are vexed with tribulations and aduer­sities. They thinke y ^• we should weigh our felicity by those things which we haue Our felici­ty is not to be weighed by those thinges which are in vs. of our owne. But we are of a farre other opinion: for we so far forth counte our selues happy as we are so counted of God, and that he imputeth vnto vs righteousnes: not that we are not in the meane tyme renewed both in minde and in bodye, although we are yet vnperfect. And euen this selfe same righteousnes whiche we haue now obteyned, and the renouation which is in vs, we in no case thynke to be of that force, that by it we can attayne vnto the rewardes of eternall lyfe. Thys [Page 99] peace, and felicitie, and reioycing, of which the Apostle now intreateth, is y ^•, which confirmed the Martirs, when in Christes quarell they did shed both their lyfe and What is this peace which is had by faith bloud. This is that hundreth folde, which is rendered also in this lyfe, & is of more value then all the riches and pleasures of this world. Wherefore when the Eth­nikes deriding vs, do boast of their riches and pleasures and power, we ought not to be moued. For we easely perceaue, that they with al these their goods are misera­ble and wretched: but on the other side we féele our selues happy, when we haue possession of this one good thyng, although we want all those thinges whiche they so highly estéeme. And here is to be marked the order, that the Apostle vseth in re­hersing the effectes of iustification. First, he setteth forth peace, wherby is declared The me­thode or order of the effectes of iustifica­tion. that the battaile that sin had stirred vp against vs, is now at an end. For sin beyng by the death of Christ blotted out, and the righteousnes of christ beingimputed vn­to vs of God through faith, of enemies we are made frendes, whereby is made opē vnto vs an entrance vnto his manifold grace, and to the obteinement of innume­rable benefites. For so long as y ^• warre endured, we were a great way of frō God, and strangers from the promises: but now that the peace is made by the media­tor, we are brought nearer, there is geuen vs frée accesse vnto God: which accesse y ^• Apostle worthely putteth in the second place: as which could not haue come vnto vs, vnles we had first obteyned peace. Farther thirdly, followeth reioycing in the hope of the glory of God. For who will not now hope, that he shal be adorned with the glory of God? Whome will not so assured an expectation, of so great a thyng of the glory (I say) of God, make ioyfull and glad? And of how great force and power this reioycing in the hope of the glory of God is, that which followeth declareth.

And not that onely, but also we reioyce in afflictions.] Of so greate force is this reioycing, that those thinges which men, especially wicked men, count for a dishonor, and from which they abhorre, and by which they iudge themselues vn­happy, those thinges (I say) Christians count for a prayse, and gladly embrace, and reioyce chiefly in them. For euen as the Planets direct their course farre otherwise A sim [...]i­tude. then doth the 8. speare (for it moueth from the East to the West, but the Planets from the West to the East) so godly mē gladly embrace those thinges, & of them & in them reioyce, which the wicked fly fro, and count ignominious: which is a thing vndoubtedly rare and worthy of admiration. For to reioyce of the promises, & for that he hath obteined the glory of God, it is not to be marueiled at. But in afflicti­tions to reioyce, passeth all humane reason. Farther, because it is no reioycing, vnles it be for principall & singuler good thinges, which we now so assuredly possesse, that they can not be takē from vs (for otherwise it should be no true reioycing, but rather a boasting) lest our reioycing for the hope of the glorye of God, should séeme vayne, because we haue not yet in very dede the fruicion thereof, he addeth what good thinges GOD in the meane tyme whilest we liue here bestoweth vppon vs: namely, tribulations, patience, experience, and hope which confoundeth not. Vn­doubtedly a very excellent and most profitable gradation, and worthy to be obser­ued An excellē [...] gradation. of vs all against doubtfull and feareful tymes. But godly men somtimes sigh, are sad, and are heauy, and complayne, when they fall into afflictions, how then do they reioyce? Here is no cōtradiction at all. For our outwarde man sigheth, is hea­uy, That godly men do at one time both sigh & reioyce, is no con­trariety. is sad, the flesh complayneth. But the spirite and our inward man reioyceth, & is glad. When Dauid went forth of the city from the face of Absalon bare footed, his hed vncouered, and with many teares, outwardly there appeared in him no sig­nification, but of misery and sorrowes. For Semei, which vpbrayded vnto him this misery, saw in him nothing but misery and sorrow. But who can doubt, but that he, as touching faith, and the inward man, reioyced excedingly for the fatherly cor­rection of God? For therunto was his minde bent, and therefore he spared Semei, when as Abisay would haue killed him. For how knowest thou (sayd he) whither the An example Lord hath commaunded hym to curse me? That one and y ^• selfe same man may haue contrary affections Dauid declareth, when he saith: Serue the Lord with feare, and reioyce in him wyth trembling. But afflictions (thou wilt say) are euill: how then can [Page] we reioyce in them? That they are euill no man will deny. For they are punish [...] ­ments of sinne, souldiours of death, the last enemy that shall be driuen out of the world, and at the length from godly men be vtterly remoued. For God shall wipe a­way all teares from the eyes of the saintes. We confesse that afflictiōs are of their own Afflictions of theyr owne na­ture are e­uell. nature euil: howbeit we say, that vnto the godly and vnto the elect of God, of whō we here speake, they are by the clemency of God, made good and profitable, For vnto thē al things work vnto good. For neither do they suffer these things to theyr hurt, but to their triumphe. And these things are like vnto the red sea, wherein Phara [...] was drowned, but Israel was saued: for in the wicked they stirre vp desperation, but in the godly a most assured hope. They are instrumentes, whereby in vs is shewed forth the goodnes and might of God, both in comfortyng vs, and also in e­recting vs. They are occasions of most excellent good things. The power of God is in our infirmitie made perfect. By these thinges as by a fatherly chastisement are corrected our daily falles: hautines and pride is kept vnder: the flesh and wanton­nes is restrained: our olde man is brought to corruption, but our inward man is renued, sluggishnes and slouthfulnes is shaken of, the confession of faith is wrong out, the imbecillitie of our strengthes is vncouered: and we are prouoked more feruently to pray and to implore the fauour of God, and daily the better vnderstand y ^e peruersenes of our owne nature. Farther by afflictions we are made like vnto Christ. For it behoued Christ to suffer, and so to obteyne his kingdome, & we also ought to follow the selfe same steppes. For the kingdome of God suffreth violence: and nar­row is the way which leadeth to lyfe. But euen as he after the obedience of the crosse was exalted, and had geuen vnto him a name aboue all names: so also if we shal suffer together with hym, we shall raigne also together with him, and it is a swéete thyng also vnto a louer to suffer for the thing that he loueth. Hereby also we accu­stome our selues to patience, that beyng become as harde as the adamant stone, when we are smitten we shall rather be weary, then once breake. For these are as it were exercises in the body of a man: by which is confirmed health, and strengths are gotten, rather then that by them they are taken away or weakened. Wherfore the godly do vpon good consideration reioyce in afflictions.

Knowing that affliction worketh patience.] Here is to be noted a phrase of speach much vsed in the holy scriptures: wherby that which longeth vnto the thing is attributed vnto the instrumēt or signe: & that this maner is oftentimes vsed in the sacramente, we haue many times proued by Augustines minde: al­though That which lon­geth vnto the thinge is attribu­ted vnto the instrument. our aduersaries are sore agaynst this. Here Paul attributeth vnto afflictions that which is the worke of God and of the holy ghost, namely to worke patience: by which affliction, forasmuch as they are of theyr owne nature euill and odious, patience is not gotten but rather shaken away: which thing in the wicked we se to be playne: who when they are somewhat greuouslye afflicted: burst out into blasphemies, and also oftentimes fall into desperation. And as a phisition of thinges venemous and hurtfull composeth most healthfull medi­cines: so almighty God by his wisedome out of afflictions, how euill so euer Afflictions of their owne na­worke not ture pacience. A simili­tude. Patience is referred to fortitude. The conso­lation that the Eth­nikes had in their af­flictions. they be bringeth forth most excellent vertues: amongst which is patience. This vertue pertayneth to fortitude, vnto which are referred all the thinges that the saintes suffer, whither it be in the stout bearing of afflictions, of the body or in the ouercomming of reason and mortifiing of the wisdom of the flesh. The Ethnikes also suffred many thinges with a valiant minde. But yet bare they them with no sound consolation. Only they sayd, that by sorrow they could nether chaūge them nor let them. For they ascribed them vnto the necessity of the mat­ter. Wherefore they sayd, that this is our lot, that as it were at a banquet we must ether drinke or depart. And if we chaunce to dye, ether after death we shal haue no fealing, or if there be any, we shallbe in a better state. In this maner did they frame themselues after a sort to beare al aduersities. But in godly mē the consideration of valiantnes and of patience is farre otherwise, they haue o­ther causes and other meanes wherby to confirme themselues. For they beare [Page 100] not these thinges, as though they happned rashly. But for that they know, that by a singular prouidence they come from the most louing and almighty God, from God (I say) theyr father, which with a louing minde, and by his right hād Consolati­ons of the godly. sendeth those afflictiōs, y ^• is, to the saluatiō of the Elect. And for the same cause they also with theyr hand, that is, patiētly receaue them and take them in good parte, cryinge with Dauid: It is good forme, that thou hast humbled me. and with Iames, All ioy they think cōsisteth in those aduersities which the most good and most wise God theyr father sendeth. They alwayes lift vp the eyes of theyr minde to these promises of Christ. Blessed are they which mourne, for they shall receaue consolation: Blessed are they that suffer persecution for righteousnes sake, for theyrs is the kingdome of heauen. They suffer al things valiantly: not bycause by sorrow they cā not be changed, but bycause they know, that in valiantly suffring, the offer themselues an acceptable sacrifice vnto God: and perswade themselues, that they shall one day be deliuered from those euills, for which are layd vp for them most ample and euerlasting ioyes with which no fortune, be it neuer so froward can be compared. For the suffringes of this time are not worthy the glory to come, which shallbe reuealed in vs. The Ethnikes oftentimes gaue ouer in the middest of theyr mi­series, bycause they wanted strengthes to perseuere, nether vnderstoode they from whence they should require strengths, by reason they knew not the true God, nor theyr owne imbecility. But holy men stand fast, abide by it, and per­seuer: Causes why the Ethnikes geue ouer in afflictiōs and the sayntes perseuer. for that knowing the infirmitye of theyr owne strengths they flye vnto Christ: who strengthning them, they are able to suffer all things: if he cōfort thē they doo not only perseuer, but also euen in the very feruentnes of the payne reioyce and be glad. The Apostles went from the sight of the Counsell reioysing, for that they were counted worthy to suffer contumely for the name of Christ.

Patience bringeth experience.] This experience is a certayne triall both of our selues, & of our owne strēgths, & also chiefly of the goodnes & might of God. For in this suffring of aduersityes we learne how greate the corruption of our nature is, which vnles the holy ghost helpe, when it is touched with any aduer­sity, streight way bursteth forth into blasphemies, and complaynts agaynst the prouidence of God. Hereby we learne how broken and weakned our strengths What tria [...] springeth of patience. An example be by reason of sinne. For we should sincke vnder afflictions, if we were not stayed vp by the might of Gods helpe. Of this thing we haue an excellent example set forth in Iob: for he being deliuered of God vnto the deuill to be tried, how great blasphemies powred he out in his affliction? How much complayneth he of the prouidence and iustice of God? The light of the holy ghost had no soner il­luminated him, but how agayne plucked he vp his spirits? How godly and holy an opinion had he of God? The peruersnes of our nature lieth hidden from vs. For the hart of man is vnserchable. But looke how soone fyre is striken out of the flint stone, so soone bursteth forth our peruersnes, when affliction oppresseth vs. And this triall (as sayth Peter) is as a fornace vnto gold. And therfore God an­swered vnto Abraham, when he was now redy to sacrifice his sonne, and had his sword redy drawen and stretched out to strike him, Now I know that thou fea rest God. God in dede knew that well inough before: but by that fact he brought to passe, that this obedience was the better knowen vnto others. For we are like vnto certaine spices, whose sauor is not smelt, vnles a man bruse them wel, we are also like vnto stones, whereout is fire striken, which shew not forth that force which they haue to burne, but when they are well pressed betwene the A simili­tude. fingers.

Experience bringeth hope.] So hath God disposed these his instrumēts that they helpe one an other, and one is the cause of an other. By reason of the hope of the glory of God afflictions are not troublesom vnto vs: but, God geuing vs strengths, we beare them with a valiant minde. In this paciēce we haue a greater profe [...] and triall of the power and goodnes of God towards vs. Thereof we conceaue a greater hope. So hope engendreth and bringeth patiēce, and againe [Page] patience hope. For when we consider, that God hath holpen vs to beare afflic­tions patiently, we hope, that he will also hereafter helpe vs, and at the length make vs blessed. The sicke man, for y ^• he hath confidence in the phisitiō, suffreth his botche or sore to be cut. Afterward as he feeleth himselfe relieued, he more & A simili­tude. more putteth confidence in the phisition: so that if neede were to cut his foote also, he would not be afeard to commite himselfe to his discretion. The deuill as much as he can driueth vs to desperation, and by afflictions goeth about to per­swade vs, that God is our enemy. But contrariwise the holy ghost saith, bicause thou hast quietly and patiently borne affliction, it ought to be a sure token vnto the, that God in it declareth his fauor towardes the. Wherefore haue hope, for he will vndoubtedly deliuer the. And although Iames putteth experience before Consiliatiō of Paul & Iames. patience, wheras Paul putteth it after, yet is there no disagreemēt betwene thē: For Paul meaneth that experience, which is geuen at length after the battayle, that we mought haue a full triall of our selues: and Iames meaneth the selfe same experience, but yet as it is gotten and engendred by the exercise of tribu­lations. But that which Iames addeth, Patience hath a perfect worke, may be ex­pounded A place of Iames. two maner of wayes: either that he exhorteth vs to perseuerance in suffring, that our patience may be absolute and perfect, as which falleth not away: or els, that we should be of a perfect mynde towardes those which afflict vs, of so perfect a mynde (I say) that we desire not to haue them recompensed for the iniuries, which they do vnto vs.

And hope confoundeth not.] This is a notable chayne, and an excellent connexion of Christian degrées. Of this chayne, the first linke is fastened to the A chaine. post of afflictiōs in this worlde: from thence the godly ascend to pacience: from pacience to experience: and from experience to hope, which hope, forasmuch as it maketh not ashamed, but remouing all doubt attaineth to God which is our chiefe felicitye, is fastened to him as of the laste linke of the chayne the high­est and chiefest. This selfe same propriety of Not confounding belōgeth to fayth also. For none that beleueth in hym shall be confounded. And that not without cause. For what can be of more nere affinity vnto fayth, then hope? The Lattine in­terpreter Hope and faith haue one and the selfe same propriety, not to make ashamed. A figura­tiue speach. turneth it, Non confundit, that is, confoundeth not. Howbeit, it mought be more properly turned, Non pudefacit, that is, maketh not asha­med. And it is a figuratiue kind of spech. For Pauls mind was to signifie, that the godly can not be frustrated, of their hope, for they whiche are frustrated, namely, when thinges fall out farre otherwyse then they hoped for, com­monly are ashamed. Wherefore Paul, by shame, vnderstandeth frustration, because shame alwayes followeth it. But the Lattine interpreter had a re­garde to that perturbation of the mynde, whiche followeth shame. For to confounde is nothinge els, but to perturbe or to trouble. Now if this sen­tence be true, as in deede it is moste true, namelye, that this hope confoun­deth Hope dependeth not of our works. Hope is most assu­red. not, it followeth, that it dependeth not of our woorkes. For otherwise it shoulde oftentymes fayle. But that it is true and certayne, Paul decla­reth not by one word only, but by thrée, and those of great efficacy. For first he vseth this word knowing, which betokeneth an assured knowledge of a thing. He maketh mencion also of reioycing, which can not haue place with godly and wise men, but of those good thinges which they assuredly and firmely possesse. At the last he addeth, that hope confoundeth not. And it is not without cause, that he oftentymes induceth perswasions of this certainty, for that therehēse chief­ly is consolation to be sought for in afflictions. When Christ hong vpon the crosse, the wicked rayled agaynst him, saying: he hoped in God, let him saue him, if he will haue him. Let him come downe from the crosse. &c. The selfe same thinges Remedy a­gaynst ray­ling spea­ches. Hope depē ­deth not of merites. are layd agaynst vs, not only by outward enemyes, but also by our fleshe and outward senses, and humane wisedome. How can we resist these, but by thys doctrine of the Apostle? hope confoundeth not: the hope which we haue put in the Lord maketh not ashamed. The Sophisters by this place contend to proue that [Page 101] hope springeth of merites: because Paul sayth it springeth of putiēce [...]as though we should thinke, that hope is geuen vnto vs by the merite of pacience. But in the meane tyme they marke not, that those thinges which Paul here by a cer­tayne order disposeth, ar not so compared the one to the other; as causes and ef­fectes. For who will say that afflictions are the cause of pacience: and if it be not so, why should they more affirme, that pacience is the cause of hope? The scripture most playnly teacheth, that he which putteth confidence in man or in any creature is accursed, for a man of whose promise we depend & assure our selues, may ether dye, or alter hys mynd, or also be letted, that he can not fayth fully perform that which he promised. And to put confidence either by cause of merites, or by reasō of works, is to put hope in man. Wherfore such hope wor­thely maketh ashamed: but y ^• hope which is fixed vpon God is certaine, neyther cā be deceaued. The Sophisters go about craftely to auoyd this sentēce by two places of Paul, the one to the Romanes, the other to Timothe. The place to Ti­mothe is thus, I know whome I haue beleued, and I am assured. But the other to the Romanes is thus, I am assured that nether death, nor life, nor angels. &c. By these places they thinke is ouerthrowne our sentence, for that they thinke that these wordes are to be vnderstand, not vniuersally of all beleuers, but only of Paul, and such other like which had a peculiar reuelation, that they shoulde obtayne saluation. But these their enterprises are in dayne. For here is now entreated Here is in treated of the nature of hope ge­nerally. of the nature and proprlety of hope: whereby is manifestly proued, that al they which are endewed with it, are sure of their saluation: so that they must nedes confesse, that they which doubt of their saluation ether haue not y ^• hope which longeth to a Christian, or els if they haue that hope, they must nedes be assured He which doubteth of saluation hath not the hope that lon­geth to a Christian. of their saluation: But if a man shall say, what if I shall be vnworthy, and therefore God will not bestowe vpon me the chiefe reward? I answere that this is a wrastling of the conscience and is to be ouercome by an assured hope. For the obtaynning whereof we must clene fast vnto the word of God. Such as is this. God is faythfull, which will not suffer you to be tempted aboue your power, but will together with the temptacion make away out: & such like places of the holy scripture, wherein God promiseth that he will geue perseuerance to hys vnto the ende. And to speake briefely, the hope of the godly leneth only vnto the good­nes, power, and mercy of the only God. This thing Basilius vnderstood right wel in his exposition vpon the 32. Psalme, when he interpreteth these words, hoping in his mercy. He (sayth he) which putteth not confidence in his owne proper deedes, ne­ther hopeth to be iustified by workes, hath his hope of saluation onlye in the mercy of God. For when he shall consider these thinges with himselfe, Beholde God, and his rewarde. &c. But the schole men haue tought farre otherwise. For the Mai­ster of the sentences in the thirde booke thus defineth hope: Hope is an assured expectacion of the blessednes to come, comming of the grace of God and of merites going before. Which definition how absurd it is, especially as touching the latter part it is very manifest in those, which are newly from most hainous & filthy sinnes conuerted vnto Christ. For they vndoubtedly can haue no good me­rites, for that before they wanted charitie, from which all our workes procede: yet They which are conu [...]rted vnto Christ want not hope al­though they want works and merites. They which are most wic­ked ought not to caste away all hope. there can be nothing more certaine, then y ^• they which are conuerted vnto Christ, cannot be without hope. Yea Augustine vpon the Psalm: From the depthe haue I called vnto the Lorde, exhorteth them that fall, and those which liue in the depth of euils, not to cast away hope, and that by the example of the thiefe and of many o­thers. It may now be demaunded of them, by what merites hope is confirmed in these mē. They customably answere, that merites do not alwayes go before hope, but alwayes go before the thing hoped for. And they so declare their opinion tou­ching this matter, that they teach y ^• merites go before hope either in very dede, or doubtles in thought. For men newly conuerted, commonly whilest they conceiue hope of saluation appoint in minde & in thought good workes, by which they thinke to merite the last reward. But what present hope can these good works imagined [Page] in y ^• mind, which are not yet wrought produce. For of a cause which yet is not, ca [...] not be produced an effect, which alredy is. We should rather contrariwise affirme: namelye, that this holye will springeth of faith and of hope, then that faith or hope should procede from it, as from the cause. But it is a sport to sée, how these mē turn themselues, when on the one side they say, that hope is an assured expectation, and yet on the other side they will haue this to be a most firme doctrine, that no man can be assured of his saluation, vnlesse it be singulerly reueled vnto hym of GOD. Here they perceiue themselues fast tied, and they confesse that it is an harde mat­ter to vnderstande what manner of certaintie the certaintie of hope is. Here the poore soules swete, and go to worke, and faine and imagine many thinges. First; The cer­tainty of hope com­meth of the certainty of fayth. they teache that all certaintie of hope commeth of the certaintie of fayth: and this in dede is not amisse. For therfore we certainly hope, bicause by saith, we embrace the most certain promise of God. But they go on farther, and say, that by faith we generally and absolutely beleue that all the electe and predestinate shall be saued, but hope maketh vs to haue confidence that we are of the number of the electe, as though hope had a perticuler knowledge vnder faith: so that that which was gene­rally apprehended by faith, is by hope applied vnto euery one of vs a parte. Wher­fore they affirme that this certaintie of hope is by supposition, if we be of the number of the elect, and if we continue vnto the ende. And this kinde of certaintye they will haue to consist of very likely coniectures. And at the length they conclude, that the certaintie of hope is lesser then the certaintie of faith. But we contrariwise make the certaintie of either of them alike. For looke how much faith we haue, so The cer­tainty of hope and of fayth is a­like. much hope also haue we. For faith retaineth not with it self any part of certainty, which it deliuereth not ouer vnto hope. That is a fayned fond deuise, which they bring touching applicatiō, y ^• by hope we shuld priuately aply vnto our selues those things which we haue by faith generally and absolutely beleued. For we do not only beleue that God is good, or the father or author of mans felicitie: but also euery godly man by faith assureth himselfe, that God both is & will be vnto him good, is & will be vnto him a father, is and will be vnto him the author of felicitie. Hereof Faith ap­plieth those thinges which it be­leueth vnto him in whom it is. commeth that certaintie of hope. And therfore is it that Paul writeth, that it can not confound. And seing faith hath a respect vnto God, as to one that speaketh the truth, and hope vnto him, as to one that is faithfull and most redy to performe his promises, and God himselfe is no lesse faithfull in performing, then true in promi­sing, we may manifestly conclude, that hope hath as much certaintie as hath faith. Neither can that any thing helpe him, which they cauill at the length: namely, y ^• Certaintye as touching the obiect & subiect. hope hath certaintie as touching the obiect, but not as touching the subiect. For when (say they) it hath a respect vnto the clemency, goodnes, grace, and power of God, there is no let in those thinges, but that euery one might be saued. And ther­fore on that behalfe, they put a perfect certaintie. But if a man consider the subiect the mynd (I say) and will of him that hopeth, for as much as this minde and wyll is flexible, and wauereth, and may be chaunged, it can neuer be certaine or sure of saluation. But these men seme to me to deale euen as they do, which in a siege de­fending their citie, diligently shut and defend all other gates, but yet in the meane tyme leaue one open, thorough which the enemies enter in, and waste and spoyle all, which done they perceiue that they lost all their labour. So these men take ex­ceding great paines, that there should séeme to be no vncertaintie as touching the goodnes, power, and clemency of God, or merite of Christ. Howbeit in the meane tyme, they appoint our will to be so subiect vnto chaunging, that it neither can nor ought promise vnto it selfe perseueraunce no not out of the worde of God. And so they vtterly take away all certaintie, so that this saying of Paul, Hope confoundeth not, can haue no place, neither doth the certainty, which they go about to establish, any thinge profite. For if we looke vpon the holy scriptures, we shall not only vn­derstand, that God is generally good and mighty, but also that he is euer vnto v [...] good and mercifull, and therefore he will confirme our will, that it shall neuer f [...]ll away from hym. For as we haue a little before mencioned: He will not suffer vs to [Page 102] be tempted, aboue that which we are able to beare: but together with the temptation, will make away out. And in the first chapter of the first to the Corrinthians. He shall confirme you vnto the ende blameles, agaynst the day of our Lord Iesus Christ. For God is fayhfull by whome ye are called. There are besides a great many other testimo­nies The testi­monies of God pro­mise vnto vs perseue­rance. What the certainty of hope is. Hope cal­leth those thinges which are to com [...] as alredy done in the holy scriptures which promise vnto vs both perseuerance and con­firmation of our will by Christ: wherefore we say that this certaynty of hope is a firme cleauing vnto the promyses offred vnto vs, and receaued by fayth, for that we knowe that we shall not geue ouer, but continue euen vnto the last ende. And of so greate force is this hope, that as Augustine wit­nesseth vnto Dardanus, and in many other places, it calleth thynges that are to come, already done: as the same Augustine very well declareth by many places of Saynte Paule, and especially vnto the Romanes, vnto the Ephesians, and vnto the Collossians. For vnto the Ephesians we are sayde, to be already rysen from the deade, and to be already set at the right hande of God together with Christ in the heauenly places. Vnto the Colossians, If ye haue risen together with Christ &c. And in an other place, He hath saued vs by the la­uacre of regeneration. And vnto the Romanes, By hope we are made safe. This cer­tainty springeth chiefely of a worthy estimation, which by fayth we conceaue Whereof springeth the certain­ty of hope. touching the constācy of God, which no vnworthines of ours cā make frustrate and if we looke vpon this vnworthines withdrawing vs from this confidence, we ought agaynst hope to beleue in hope, and though it neuer so much cry out agaynst vs, we ought to haue full confidēce, that we shal by Christ be made safe setting before vs our father Abraham whose steps we ought by fayth to cleaue vnto, he as touchinge the promise that he should haue issue had no consideratiō vnto his age, or to his wife which was past childbearing: but had a respect only vnto him which made the promise & had a consideratiō vnto his might, and therfore he most firmely setled with himselfe, that that should come to passe which God had promised. So although that we be vnworthy, and that our filthynes & sinnes are a let vnto vs, yet let vs haue no distrust, but that we shal by Christ be made safe: vnles we will be infected with infidelity, from which Abrahā so much abhorred: for he doubted not through vnbeliefe, sayth the Apostle. Wherfore this vncertaynty of our aduersaries is vtterly taken away from the minds of the godly. For, for this cause (as the Apostle testifieth) would God haue vs to be iustified by fayth & not by works, that the promise should abide certaine, and What is to geue glory vnto God. The vn­godly ought to haue hope. vnshaken. And this is in deede to geue the glory vnto God whiche thinge Abraham did. For he notwithstanding those wonderfull great impediments, hoped, that that vndoubtedly should come to passe which God had promised. Iob also so little estemed these letts that he sayd, Although he kill me, yet will I hope in him. By which words he declareth, that it is the part of the godly, althoughe they be se­uerely afflicted of God, & appeare to be hated of him, yet not to cast away hope Wherfore him let vs imitate & if our fallinges and vnworthynes themselues against vs, yet let vs not distrust. Let vs in the meane time detest our bices, and as much as lieth in vs amend them: but yet through them let vs by no meanes be deiected from the hope of saluation. For if, when the promises of God are of fred, we should looke vpon our owne worthines, we should be stirred vp to des­peration, There should be no peace if we stood in doubt of sal­uation. rather then to any hope. For there is no man, whose minde is not ladē with many and greuous sinnes. Farther Paul teacheth vs, that peace towards God is had by Christe, and by the fayth which is towardes him: which peace vndoubtedly should ether be none at all, or ells very troublesome if we should continually doubt of his good will towards vs. Do we not alwayes in our praiers call him father? But no sonne which followeth naturall affection, doubteth of his fathers good will towards him, How then do we call him father, whome we suspect to be our enemy. There mought be brought a great mani other such The fa­thers taught the certainety of saluation like reasōs for the certainty of hope. But now I will in few words declare, that the fathers also in theyr writings taught the selfe same certainty. Chrisostome [Page] vpon this place thus writeth: do not (saith he) though thou be neuer so vnworthy dis­corage thy selfe, seing thou hast so great a defēce & refuge, namely, the loue or fauor of the iudge. And a little afterward he saith, For that cause the Apostle himselfe when he saith, hope confoūdeth not, ascribeth all the things which we haue receaued, not vnto our good dedes, but vnto the loue of God. Ambrose also saith That forasmuch as it is impossible, that they which are deare vnto him, should be deceaued, he would make vs assured of the promise: because it is God, which hath promised, & hath promised to those whome he counteth for deare. Augustine in his sermō which he made vpō y ^• mōday in y ^• Roga­tiō weke: Why (sayth he) doth your hand tremble, when you knocke, & why is your con­sciēce halfe on slepe when you beg? I am the dore of life, I abhorre not him that knocketh though he be vncleane And vpō the 41. Psalme he sayth. Put not hope in thy selfe, but in thy God. For if thou puttest hope in thy selfe, thou shalt fill thy soule full of trouble: for that it hath not yet found how it may be secure or assured of the. By these words he de­clareth that security which we haue, cōmeth not of our selues, but of God. And vpō the 27. psalm when he expoundeth these words of Paul out of the secōd chap­ter to y ^• Ephesiās, we also were by nature the childrē of wrath, as are others. Why doth he say we were? Bycause sayth he by hope nowe we are not: for in deede we are so still But we speake that which is better, namely, that which we are in hope, bycause we are certaine of our hope. For our hope is not vncertaine, so that we should doubt of it. And Chrisostome vpon the. 5. chapter vnto the Romanes sayth, that we ought no les to be fully perswaded of those things which we shall receaue, thē we ar of those things which we haue alredy receaued. Cyprian also in his sermon of the pestilence, when he sawe the godly fearefull to dye, many wayes confirmeth them to be sure of theyr sal­uation: and amōgst all other things saith, that they are afeard and abhorre death which are without hope or fayth. And Bernardus wonderfully reioyseth of the [...] of Christ, of his wounds and crosse. In that rocke he sayth he standeth, and shall not fall for no violence done against him. He maketh mencion also of many excellent things touching this firm and cōstant certainty. Wherfore those things which we haue auouched of the constancy and security of hope, agree not only with the holy scriptures, and with most sure reasons, but also with the sentences of the fathers. Now it shalbe good to define hope, that y ^• certainty therof may the more plainly be known. Wherfore hope is a faculty or power breathed into vs Definition of hope. by the holy ghost, wherby we with an assured and patient minde wayte for, that the saluation begonne by Christ, and receaued of vs by fayth, should one day be perfited in vs, not for our merites, but through the mercy of god. First it is said to be instilled of the holighost, bicause that springeth not of nature, or of our cō tinual actiōs. It is indede after faith, although not in time, yet in nature: which thing we may perceaue by epistle vnto the Hebrues. Where it is written that Hope is af­ter faith. that faith is the foūdatiō of things to be hoped for. For forasmuch as y ^e things which we hope for, ar not euidēt & manifest, but ar a gret way far of frō vs they ought to cleaue fast vnto faith, wherby as by a certain brase or sure post they may be staied vp. And y ^• hope cōtaineth expectatiō or wayting for, y ^• epistle to y ^e Romanes Hope con­taineth ex­pectacion or waiting for. Hope hath a respecte vnto thin­ges of great difficulty. A simili­tude. expressedly declareth in the 8. chapter, when he sayth, The hope which is sene is not hope. For how doth a man hope for that which he seeth. But if we hope for that which we see not, we do by pacience wayte for it. Nether is this to be ouerhipped, y ^• that good thing vnto which hope hath a respect, is hard and difficile. For natu­rally in liuing creatures the affection of hope consisteth in the grosser part of the mynde, which they call the angry part: whereby the liuing creature is moued to labour to gette that good thing which is set before it, although there séeme to be some lettes agaynst it. For by such an affection it is stirred vp to ouercome, whatsoeuer let commeth in the way. The woolfe being hungry meteth with a bull: and by the lust that he hath, he coueteth that pray. But when he seeth the great difficulty that hāgeth ouer him, for that he must haue a sore battaile and conflict, he is of the angry power of the mynde, by hope stirred vp, and is not a­ferd to put himselfe into danger, and to fight. And so at the length, hauing put away all lettes, he obtayneth his pray. So hath God in the nobler part of our [Page 103] mynde placed hope: whereby is brought to passe, that when the chiefe felicity, Hope is placed in the nobler part of the minde. In hope heauines is ioyned together with ioy. which is a thing both difficult, and farre of from vs; is set, before vs we should not be feared away, but by fayth haue boldnes, and accesse vnto God, as Paul sayth in the 2. chapter to the Ephesians. And forasmuch as this felicity is a great space distant from the godly, it can not be otherwyse, but that in hoping they haue some griefe, and that they in themselues sorrow, that their present condi­tion or state should be so farre remoued from felicity. But on the other side, when they are certayne and assured, that they shall attayne vnto that end, they can not but be affected with an incredible ioye. And so this faculty of hope is mingled with the affectes of ioy and sorrow. And the Apostle hath signified vn­to vs some part of the sorrow thereof in that place to the Romanes: which we haue alredy cited, when he sayth: Euery creature groneth, and trauayleth in payne together with vs euen vnto this present: And not only the creature, but we also which haue the first fruites of the spirite, euen we do sigh in our selues wayting for the adoption, euen the redemption of our body. And, that ioy is ioyned with the self same hope, he declareth in the 12. chapter of the selfe same epistle, saying, reioysing in hope. And although fortitude and long suffring séeme to bring vnto our myndes expectati­on or wayting for, yet those vertues haue not this expectation but at hopes Other ver­tues haue expectation of hope. hand, which we haue now described. Nether is it to be meruayled at, that one vertue should receaue any thing of an other vertue: for they whiche are any thing acquaynted with the Ethikes know, that liberality, temperance and such other vertues, haue much helpe at the handes of prudence: for by the ayde thereof, they haue a mediocrity appoynted them to follow. This is the diffe­rence, that chiefely distinguisheth hope from fayth, namely, that by fayth we admitte and embrace the promises, offred vnto vs of God: but by the helpe of hope we patiently waite, that those promises should at the length be performed vnto vs. Nether was hope for any other cause geuē of God, but that we should Why hope was geuen▪ not cease of from following after that good thing, which we perceaue can not be obtained by our owne déedes: for nether are they by any meanes to be com­pared w ^t it. For the Apostle sayth, The suffringes of this tyme are not worthy the glo­ry to come, which shalbe reuealed in vs. For that they which are endued with hope, are assured in themselues, that that which they want in the strengthes of nature and in workes, shalbe supplied by the mercy of God, and obedience of Christ. And if a man demand, whether a pure life and holy workes can any thing a­uayle vnto the certaynty of hope, we will easely graunt it may, so that we se­clude Workes ar no small helpe to the certainty of hope. the bying and selling of merites. For our workes of themselues haue no­thing at all, whereby they can produce hope. Howbeit the perswasion of faith, may by them conceaue an argument to confirme hope, and to reason in thys sort: God hath now of hys meare liberality geuen me grace, to do this or that good worke: to put away this or that vice out of my mynde. Wherefore he will yet geue greater thinges, nether will he deny me the thinges which are re­mayning vnto saluation. If the Sophisters had sayd thus, they mought haue bene borne withall: for it is not strange from the reason of the Apostle. For as we shall a little afterward see, he would haue vs by those thinges, which God hath alredy graūted vnto vs, to be certaynly perswaded of his perpetuall loue towardes vs. But these men haue both written and tought, that hope it selfe dependeth of merites, and so dependeth, that to hope without them, they say, is presumption and rashenes. But it semeth that somwhat may be obiected out of the holy scriptures, which may make agaynst this sentence of Paul wherein he sayth, that hope confoundeth not. For to Timothe it is written, In my first de­fence Whether Paule wer euer fru­strate of his hope. no man was on my side: all men forsooke me, God grant it be not imputed vnto thē: but the Lord was on my side, and I was deliuered out of the mouth of the lion: and the Lord shall deliuer me from euery euill worke. Here Paul hoped that he should escape the persecution of Nero: but he was deceaued: for vnder him he was slayne. And agayne to y ^• Phillippians whē he had sayd, that he was greatly in doubt on both those sides, for that on the one side he desired to be losed and to be with Christ, and on the [Page] otherside he saw that it was necessary for him to abide in the fleshe for their sakes, he ad­deth this: And this I am sure of, that I shall abide, and with you all continue, for your furtherance, and ioy of your fayth. Here also agayne it appeareth, that the Apostle hoped that he should be deliuered from that captiuity: which yet followed not. Wherefore it may séeme, that that hope confounded him. To aunswere vnto these thinges we will repeate that which we before sayde, namely, that hope receaueth hys certaynty of fayth: and fayth hath hys certaynty of the worde of God. Wherefore it followeth, that eyther of them is as certayne as are the promyses which are offred. And God hath symplye and with­out condition promysed vnto vs remission of sinnes and eternall lyfe, and The pro­mes of the forgeuenes of sinnes and of eter­nall life is simple and without cō ­dition. We haue no absolute promise touching the perils of this life. hath commaunded that we shoulde wythout all doubting both beleue and hope for them. Wherfore in these thinges nether fayth nor hope can deceaue vs: But touching the perilles and aduersity of this life we haue no plaine and absolute promise, but as they vse to speake, vnder distunction. For God hath promised that he will ether deliuer vs, or ells comfort vs in the dangers, that we shall not fall away, but constantly confesse his name, or if we chaunce to fall he hath promised to restore vs againe, y ^• we may attaine vnto eternall life. Wher­fore it is not mete that the certainty of hope should be fixed in one of these parts only. Which thing if sometimes good men do, y ^• springeth of humane affection and not of Christian hope, and therfore it is no meruayle if they sometimes be deceaued. But nowe to returne vnto Paul: he of a certaine greate loue hoped, to abide longer with the Phillippians, & to edefie them. And for that he had not Why Paul was some­times de­ceaued in his hope. this oute of the woorde of God, it easely came to passe that he was deceaued. But the summe of the piety belonging to the Gospel is, that we assuredly settle our selues that God loueth vs, and will at the length make vs blessed. And if somtimes the mindes of the saintes are disturbed, as though they doubted of the promises of God, or of theyr saluation, this happneth not through the default ether of fayth or of hope: but bycause so long as we liue here, we are not perfectly In the saints arise certaine doubtes of saluation furnished: wherfore this doubting springeth of the flesh & of humane wisdōe: we agree indede with our aduersaries in this, that certaine doubts aryse, som­times of saluation euen in the godly. But herein we disagree from thē, for that they attribute this vnto hope: but we say that it commeth of humane infirmity only, and that it is daily to be corrected, so that let a man thinke that he hath so much profited in fayth and hope, how much he feleth himselfe y ^e more constant and firme. But how these euills spring not of fayth or of hope, but of our owne corruption, we haue before declared by an apte similitude, and will now repete the same againe. No man can deny but that the mathematicall sciēces ar most certaine. Wherfore he which hath learned them exactly, boldly pronounceth, & nothing doubteth of theyr conclusions. But he which is but meanely instructed in this faculty, oftentimes doubteth and standeth in a perplexity, for that he hath not yet perfectly attained vnto those sciences. So also are we tossed with doubts, not through faith or hope, but by reasō we hope not nor beleue so much as is nedfull. But some man will say, that we are paraduenture hereby decea­ued, for that in the steade of the true faith or hope, we haue only their shadowes For we can not easely discern the true hope and faith from the counterfeat and fained hope and faith. I answere, that by this instance can not be taken away the properties of fayth or of hope: for although one or two can not discerne thē, Howe the true fayth and hope are discer­ned from the counter fayt. The holy ghost is not knowen by [...]ay other thinge then by it selfe. yet they remaine stil firme in their owne nature. As we se it is in liberality and prodigality. For there are many which can not distinguishe one from the other and yet are not therefore theyr proprieties and conditions taken away. Paul in this place entreateth of the nature & propriety of hope. If thou wilt afterward demaund how these faculties or powers are discerned frō the counterfeate, we answere that they are declared by the force and power of the holy ghost: which holy ghost hath in all spirituall things no other light more clere thē it selfe wherby to be illustrated: which thing we se also true in the Sonne. For it is not declared [Page 104] to be the Sonne, but by his owne light. Wherefore Paul vnto y ^• Romanes ve­ry aptly sayd, It is the spirite which heareth witnes vnto our spirite, that we are the children of God. But besides this light of the holy ghost is required also the exa­mination of our selues: whereof Paul thus speaketh in the latter epistle to the Our exa­mination also is requi­red to y ^• trial of our fayth and hope. Corrinthians: Try your selues whither ye be in fayth. In which triall we must make a distinctiō of hope. For there is one hope which hath alwaies ioyned w ^t it repentance, and a desire of amendment of life: of which kinde of hope the Apostle speaketh when he sayth, that it confoundeth not. For it hath alwayes these compa­nions ioyned with it, namely, fayth, and charity. Wherfore when we teach the certainty therof, we open not a window vnto vices, as our aduersaris slaunder Our cer­tainety ope­neth not a way to sins Our cer­tainety is not security of the the flesh. vs, nether doo we stirre vp men to lose life. For this true hope stirreth not vs vp to these things: but rather impelleth vs to liue accordingly to that hope. There is an other hope which may rather be called security of the flesh: wherof Augu­stine thus rightly speaketh: Suche as cleaue vnto it, by hopinge perishe. And those are they which say, God is good, & loueth vs: Christ died for our saluatiō: howsoeuer we lead our life, we shall obteyne saluation. Of this hope we must diligently beware: for it is far distant from repentance, & a desire to liue wel: & being of y ^• nature, it vter­ly driueth away from it faith and charity. This hope miserably deceaueth men. Wherefore of it Paul here speaketh not. Now remayneth to se, whither the blessed spirites or soules may in heauen haue this true hope, wherwith the god­ly are now adorned. For on the one side we knowe that they wayte for the resurrection of the bodies, and the last iudgment: which shall be vnto them very wel come: wherefore in that behalfe they seeme not to be vtterly voyde of hope. A­gayne one the other side, the Apostle vnto the Corrin: describeth fayth hope, and charitye: but of these three he sayth, that only charity falleth not away. By which woordes he manifestly teacheth, that true hope can haue no place when Whether Christ and the saynte [...] haue still hope. we be in heauen. And y ^• whiche we haue sayd of the godly, may also be called in question touching Christ: for he also semeth to haue hoped, that he should rise agayne, and that he should cary vp his humane nature into heauen. To these things we answere, that it ought not to be denied, but that both Christ hoped, and also the soules of the blessed doo yet after a sort hope. But we deny, that it is such a hope as is ours, which we haue in this life. Bicause, as we haue before declared out of the woordes of the Apostle, our hope hath ioyned with it, as companions, sighing and sorrowe: which thinges vndoubtedly in the eternall felici­ty, which the blessed haue fruition of in heauen, can haue no place. Farther our hope cleaueth fast vnto fayth which engendereth an vnperfect and an obscure knowledge: For as Paul sayth vnto the Corrint: We se now by a glasse in a ridle, & we know but by a part. But y ^e saints in heauē know most perfectly & most clearly. Moreouer forasmuch as fayth, hath chiefely a respect vnto the last & chiefe good thing, there ought not to be ascribed vnto y ^e blessed which now hold & pos­sesse that good thing such a hope as is ours. For the true & proper hope cā haue Hope is in life as an anker. no place in eternall felicity. It is only so longe as we liue here geuen vnto vs as an anker: for so the epistle which is written vnto the Hebrues calleth it. For so long as we are tossed with the waues and tempests of this world, vnles our minde be confirmed and stablished by the anker of hope, our shippe will ease­ly dashe agaynst the sandes and rockes. Chrisostome calleth it a golden chayne let downe from heauen: which chayne if we take holde of, we shalbe drawen vp Hope is in a chaine. into heauen. Wherefore we must diligently prouide, that this hope be dayly more and more confirmed in vs: which thinge shal then chiefely come to passe, if (as Paul straight way declareth) we diligently wayght the singular benefites of God. Which benefites forasmuch as they are most playnly contayned in the Hope is confirmed by the consideration of Gods benefites. holy scriptues, by reading of them our hope shalbe very much cōfirmed. Which thing Paul most clearely taught in this epistle when he sayd, Whatsoeuer thinges are written, are written for our learning: that through patience and consolation of the scriptures we should haue hope Which selfe same thing Dauid also sayth, They [Page] hope in thee, which haue knowen thy name. Wherefore seing the nature and nam [...] of God is no where better vnderstand then in the holy scriptures, it followeth, that by thē we ought to confirm our hope: which thing if we diligently obserue, our mynde shall not be discouraged, when God (as oftentymes his maner is) permitteth our doinges to come euen to shame: which thing we sée happened in God semeth sometimes to forsake his. Christ our sauior. For he was so vtterly forsaken of God, that he was put vp­on the crosse, and died a most ignominious death betwéene two thieues. Dauid also was brought to that poynt, that not only being expelled out of the king­dome of Israell, he was fayne to wander in desert places, but also was in a maner fast holden and closed in the handes of Saule. The selfe same thing we sée very oftentymes to haue happened in other of the Saints, that they were iud­ged in a maner to haue bene deceaued, and to haue fallen from their hope. But the spirite of Christ geueth strength that men are able in the middest of their calamityes to reioyce and to say: These thinges shoulde haue no power in vs, if it were not geuen thē frō aboue. Which sētence Christ layd agaynst Pilate, when he boasted of his power. The 42. Psalme also hath excellently wel tought vs, how we ought to comfort our selues, and with a good hope to erect our mynde. For thus it is written: Why art thou deiected oh my soule? Why art thou Why God spoyleth his of outward helpes. so discouraged? Hope in God: for I will yet make my confession vnto him. My health is in his countenance. Nether doth God for any other cause commonly depriue his of outward helpes and aydes of this world, but to gather together their dis­persed hope, & not to suffer it to leane vnto too many aydes. And these sondry and manifolde aydes he changeth for one principall ayde, and the same most firme: to the ende we should wholy depend of him. By this difference of a firme hope, Christians much differ from Epicures and Ethnikes. For if there come any great calamity vnto them, straight way they exclame and cry out: If there The Eth­nikes howe they are de­stitute of hope. be a God that hath a care ouer these thinges: If there be a God that séeth these thinges. So they call not vpon God: but being in dispayre vtterly discourage themselues. But contrariwise godly men most constantly crye vnto God: ne­ther doubt they but that their prayers reach vp euen vnto heauē: and that God hath a care both ouer, them and all theirs. But because humane wisedome con­tinually wrastleth, and faineth, that it doubteth not indede of the power of God, but only doubteth of hys will, therefore let vs sée, how of this thinge Paul hath made vs certayne.

Because the loue of God is shed abroade into our hartes by the holy ghost, which is geuen vnto vs.] These wordes, signify all one as if he had sayd, hereby thou mayst gather that thy hope shall not be made frustrate, for that God lo­ueth thee. Which loue the holy ghost hereby perswadeth thée of, for that the only sonne of God was for thy sake deliuered vnto the death. Wherefore now oughest thou not any more to be in doubt of the will of God. It is geuen vnto the fréely, and that (as it is afterward sayd) when thou wast an enemy, weake, wicked, and a sinner. All which things declare, that God loued thee not meane­ly, but most aboundantly. Nether hath he only geuen thee these thinges, but also hath geuen thee the holy ghost, that thou mightest throughly féele them. And this is done in regeneration: for there, whilest by fayth thou takest holde that Christ died for thee, thou art borne agayne, and made partaker of the na­ture of God. For euen as the spirite of man maketh a man, so the spirit of God By the ho­ly Ghost we are a­dopted. by adoption maketh vs the children of God: whiche spirite if it were geuen vs (as sayth Chrisostome) euen now from the beginning before we lauboured, vn­doubtedly many more thinges shall be geuen vnto vs, seing that we go aboute continually to frame our selues to the will of God. Now we take holde of the roote and fountayne of all good thinges. From this spirite commeth that glo­rious resurrection, as we are taught by this epistle. For he which raysed vp Christ Of the holy Ghost is the resur­rection. from the dead (sayth Paul) shall rayse vp also your mortall bodies, because of his spirite which dwelleth in you. Nether is this life which we liue in Christ coūted to come [Page 105] from any els where, then from the holy ghost. For the wisedome of the flesh (saith Paul) is enmity agaynst God. But the wisedome of the spirite is life and peace. God would that we should in this life haue a pledge, and ernest peny, and a triall of the saluation to come. And therefore in those, which are in Christ, he hath en­grauen and emprinted his spirite. Nether nede we (sayth Ambrose) forasmuch as we are so deare vnto God, to be aferd that we should of him be deceaued. And Paul hath not without a cause made mencion of the holy ghost: For he it is, which beareth witnes vnto our spirite, that we are the sonnes of God, and by him we chiefely ac­knowledge the thinges that are geuē vs of God. For as it is written in the first to the Corrinthians: we haue not receaued the spirite of this world, but the spirit which is God, to know the thinges which are geuen vs of God. But because we can not by certayne demonstracions, or by experience of the sence teach vnto the infi­dels this loue of God, whereof the holy ghost maketh vs assured, therefore it is A simili­tude. sayd to be powred into our hartes. For we are in this life like strangers: which although at home they come of a noble parentage and are rich, yet so long as they are abiding amōgst strange nations, they are not had in estimation. But yet they knowing their owne nobility, reioyce in their hart, and passe not vp­on the vayne opinions that other men haue of them. So we hauing the loue of God shed abroade into our hartes, when we are as fooles & miserable men deri­ded of the wicked, are nothing at all moued with their iudgement, being fully contented with our state and condition. Augustine somewhat otherwise expoun­deth this place. For he thought, that by loue is to be vnderstand that loue wher­with we loue God: which exposition in my iudgement can haue no place. For we haue not therefore our hope vnshaken, because we loue God, but because we are loued of God. Farther the scope of Paul is, to confirme our hope by the benefit of the death of Christ: which maketh vs assured, not of our loue towards God, but contrariwise of Gods loue towardes vs. Wherefore he concludeth his argument with these wordes: And God hath set forth his loue to wardes vs. &c. Although we also gladly acknowledge with Augustine, that the hope of godly men is somewhat confirmed, for that they now feele by the holy ghost, that they are inflamed with the loue of God, when they vnderstand that for their sake the sonne of God was of hym deliuered vnto the death. And that our loue is deriued of that loue of God wherewith he embraseth vs, it is playne and ma­nifest: Our loue springeth of the loue of God. but as touching the sence of the Apostle the former exposition is more naturall.

For Christ when we were yet weake, according to the consideration of the time, died for the vngodly. For a man will scarce dye for a righteous man. For for a good man it may be that one dare dye. But God setteth forth his loue towardes vs, seing that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for vs. Much more then being now iustified by his blood, we shalbe saued frō wrath thorough him. For if whē we wer enemies we wer recōciled vnto God by the death of his sonne much more being reconciled we shalbe saued by his life. And not only this, but we also reioyce in God through our Lord Iesus Christ: by whome we haue now receaued the attonement.

For Christ when we were yet weake &c.] Now he expresseth the reasō wherby we may knowe, that God loueth vs: namely, for that he gaue his sonne for vs, whē we were yet weake, sinners, vngodly, & enemies. Wherfore we manifestly gather, that y ^• hope cā not confound vs, wherby we haue full confidence, y ^• seing we are now regenerate and reconciled vnto God, we shal at the length obteine eternall felicity. For if he vouchased to geue so much for enemies and sinners sakes, vndoubtedly he wil geue much more vnto his frindes and childrē. Wherfore The Me­thode of Paules reason. Paul first setteth forth the benefite bestowed vpon mākind: the sonne of God (I say) which was geuē vnto the death. Secondly he maketh a comparisō, wherby [Page] is excedingly confirmed the hope of the faythfull. Last of all he sheweth, that we doo not only hope, but also excedingly reioyce of this loue of God towards vs. As touching the first part, he doth not coldly or sclēderly declare how much good God hath bestowed vpon vs, when he gaue his sonne for our saluatiō: but with greate amplificatiō he setteth forth the matter, namely, that his sonne was not geuen for all men, but for those which were vtterly vnworthy of all mercy. For before we wer by the benefite of God made pertakers of this redemption, we could by no helpe, or force of our owne, helpe our selues. And therfore Christ is sayd to be geuen for weake ones, which wholy neded all maner of helpe. And those selfe same being wicked and vngodly refused the helpe offred vnto them. And when they were sinners, these euells dayly encreased more and more. For both the infirmity was encreased, and the remedy grew the more in hatred by reason of theyr impiety, which more and more encresed. This also helped there­vnto, for that men were now declared to be open enemies. And it was a greate matter to vndoo and make voide those thinges: which were once decreed. This is the meaning of these wordes, vveake, vngodly, sinners, and enemies.

For a righteous man, and for a good man.] Seing that all men are loth to dye, thereby is manifest, how greate was the loue of Christ towards vs, which would dye for such as once were we, as hath now bene declared.

For the righteous.] Some hereby haue vnderstand a iust cause: For they whiche haue deserued death canne skarslye bee perswaded, too take theyr death patient.

For the Good.] That is they more willingly dye for that which is profita­ble and plesant, as the parentes for theyr children, the husbands for their wiues, merchants for theyr merchandise. Origen bringeth an example of the Martirs, which suffer death for Christs sake, who is in very dede good. Others make mē cion of the Decians, Curtians, Codrians, and the bretherne called Phileni, which of theyr owne accorde gaue theyr liues for theyr countrey. For all these semed to haue bene moued to geue themselues to the death, both for that which is iust, & for that which is profitable. For it was a thing iust, that they should be so kind vnto theyr countrey, in the defence thereof to be willinge to shedde theyr liues. Farther also by theyr death they semed to preserue those, who were vnto them most deare. Vndoubtedly for my part I thinke with Chrisostome, that by these woords Iust and Good, are simply to be vnderstand good men and iust men: al­though Ierome to Algasia in his 7. question taketh Iust and good substātiuely, for a thing iust and good. But why Paul sayd, Scarce for a iust man, and addeth: per­aduenture for a good man, I thinke this to be the cause: for that they which seemed sometimes to dye for others (which thing yet very rarely happened) the thyng They which seme to dye for o­thers, dye for their owne sake. being well considered, may be sayd to haue died for their owne sake, and not for any other mans sake. Either for y ^• they would winne glory, or els for that they saw that all thinges went against them: and not being able to abide that, they chose rather to die. But how farre the Decians and Curtians, and suche other like were distant from the pure loue of Christ, may be declared by many argumēts. The death of the Cur­tians and of the De­cians far inferior to the death of Christ. For first, they were not of that dignity, that they should be compared w ^t Christ: wherfore, their life which they gaue, was not of like valew. Farther, woulde they or nilde they, they should at one time or other haue died, and peraduenture euen the selfe same tyme, when the host was like to haue bene vanquished of the enemies. But when death hangeth ouer mens heds, it commonly maketh them the more fierce and bold, as we read of Solon: for he, when he had raysed vp the citizens against the Tyranne Pisistratus, beyng demaunded what thyng made him so bold alone aboue others, to take vpon him such an enterprise, answered, his olde age. For when he saw that he should within a while afterwarde dye, he easely perswaded himself willingly to dye for his country sake: but Christ not beyng obnoxious to death, and yet for our sakes geuing himself vnto the death, declared himselfe a much greater loue towards vs, then they did towards their [Page 106] country. Farther they died for their coūtry, which was swete vnto thē, for their wiues, for their children, & for their lawes: but Christ would be slain for weake persōs, for sinners, for enemies. Before thē was set glory: for whē they in such sort died, they were an admiratiō to all mē, & wer publikely highly cōmended & praised: but Christ died a most vile death, so y ^• also he was reckened amongest thieues, when as otherwise he was of all men the most innocentest. Last of all they when they died, had no consideration of God: but Christ, whatsoeuer he did, did it of an obedience toward the eternall God his father. Wherefore whe­ther we looke vpon our selues, or vpon Christ which suffred, we can fynde no cause of his death, but the meare loue of God towardes vs: for we were so miserable and paste grace, that we coulde by no merite of ours allure God to loue vs. Further Christ was so perfect, and so heaped vp with all maner of fe­licity, that he had no nede of that death, thereby to attayne the more commo­dity. What a pure loue is And that is counted a singular and pure loue, which nether followeth his owne commodities, nor is after a sort violently drawen of the worthynes of the thing it selfe. And herein vndoubtedly Christ hath excellently well resembled his father, and declared himselfe to be the sonne of God. For he rayneth vpon the iust & the vniust, & graunteth life, & doth good to men that are contumelious a­gaynst How much Christ ex­celled the Philoso­phers. him: and as ( Iohn sayth) loued vs first. Some of the Ethnike philosophers thought, that they had done a very great acte, when they were not moued with iniuries, and for that cause they were counted like vnto God: but Christ farre excelled thē. For he was not only not agaynst wicked ones & his enemies, but also loued them, and so loued them, that he gaue his life for them. Wherefore forasmuch as God is constant, nether will easely chaunge hys will, and seing that he hath geuen vnto vs so much, vndoubtedly he will afterward geue grea­ter thinges: and seing that he hath once begonne to be beneficiall vnto vs, he will not ceasse of, vntill he haue adorned vs with all maner of benefites. He hath God is he­therto foūr faythfull in his promi­ses. bene found faithfull in many promises, he promised to take vpon him humane fleshe, he tooke it: to preach the Gospell, he preached it: To dye for our saluati­on, he died: To rise agayne from the dead, he rose agayne: To ascende vp into heauen, he ascended vp: To geue the holy ghost, he gaue it: To cal the Gentles, he hath called them. What is now behynde, but the last resurrection, and euer­lasting glory to be rēdred vnto the faythfull? Vndoubtedly if he haue faythful­ly performed all other thinges, he will not in this one thing which is remaining breake hys fayth. There were two thinges to be done (saith Chrisostome) which semed very hard: namely, that sinners should be iustified, and that the Lord should dye for thē. And forasmuch as both these things are now done, the thinges which are remayning shall vndoubtedly be performed. And Ambrose saith, that the thinges which are remaining to be done, are now made very easy. And where as Paul sayth:

According to the time.] It may be referred vnto the death of Christ, which happened not at euery tyme, but at a tyme certayne, opportune, and appointed of God. For if all thinges haue their appoynted tyme, much more is the same to be affirmed of the death of Christ. Wherfore Paul saith, y ^• he was geuen, whē now was come the fulnes of time. And Christ many times said, either that his houre was now come, or that it was not yet come. That particle also may be added to that which is sayd, that we were weake: namely, as the consideration of the tyme required. For when we were strangers from Christ, we lyued a weake life: which yet is not so to be taken, as though the consideration of the tyme coulde excuse that infirmitye. For tyme vndoubtedly brought not that infirmity vnto vs: for men were rather made weake by their owne transgres­sion. Although Ambrose vnderstand those wordes, According to the tyme, of the three dayes wherein Christ lay deade in the sepulchre. But it skilleth not much which of these three interpretations a man followe. But chiefely by these wordes of the Apostle we ought to consider, what estate they are in, which are not yet regenerate, nor made partakers of the death of Christ. For Paul pro­nounceth [Page] them to be weake, sinners, enemies, and wicked men. Where then ran What is the estate of those that are not regenerate. Against workes preparatory. these workes of preparation haue place, for which our aduersaries make so muche ado? But these men dreame I know not of what middle state? wherein men lyue not altogether godly, nor vtterly vngodly. Amongest which kinde of men they rec­ken Cornelius the Centurion, whose almes were gratefull and acceptable, and his prayers heard of the Lord, when as yet he beleued not in Christ. But as touchyng him, if (as these mē say) he were not yet a pertaker of the death of Christ, nor by a­ny means regenerate, vndoubtedly by the testimony of Paul he was both an ene­my of God, and an vngodly person, and therfore neither he himself nor his works could be acceptable vnto God. Wherfore, we must say, that when he prayed and gaue almes, he was not vtterly a stranger from Christ, although he were not yet so fully instructed of Christ, as mought be sufficient vnto Christian religion. But we, which ar, now by the grace and benefite of God brought vnto this knowledge, ought to geue thankes vnto God for his great loue, and to lead our life in all inno­cencie and puritie. And this is to do that which the time requireth, lest that be vp­braided vnto our ingratitude, which Christ reproued in the Pharisies: Namely, that they obserued the face of heauen: but yet knew not the tyme of their visitation. So Paul interpreteth that place of Esay: Behold now the acceptable tyme, behold now the day of saluation. And that which Paul here writeth, the selfe same in a maner repe­teth he in the viij. chapiter, where he thus speaketh: If God be on our side, who shall be against vs? Seyng he hath not spared hys owne sonne, but hath deliuered hym for vs all, howe hathe he not together with him geuen vs all thinges? Who shall accuse the elect of God? It is God which iustifieth, who shall condemne? It is Christ whiche died: yea and which rose agayne, and sitteth at the right hand of the father, and maketh intercession for vs. These thinges serue wonderfully to the confirmation of our hope, as in due place we shall declare.

And God setteth forth his loue towardes vs.] It is rightly said, that GOD Nothyng more deare then chil­dren. did then set forth his loue towardes vs, when he deliuered his sonne vnto y ^e death of the crosse for our sakes. For there is nothing to mē more dere, or that they more esteme then their children: and therfore we rede that wicked mothers, when they would testifie vnto their adulterous louers their most feruent loue, and faythe of their perpetuall vse and company, slue their owne children, for that they saw they had no other more assured argument, wherby to testifie their good will towardes them. So God, when for our sakes he deliuered his sonne vnto the death, and that vnto a most shamefull death, gaue vnto vs a most sure token of his exceding great loue towards vs. That he created the world for our sakes, was in dede a great sign of his good will towardes vs, although in it rather shyned forth his power, and de­uine might, and wisedome. For it is the part of liberall and frée harted Lordes, to geue and to bestow many things vpon their subiects. Howbeit Lordes wil neuer go so farre, that they will endaunger themselues for their seruantes sake. Where­fore when God gaue his sonne vnto the death for our sakes, therin (as Paul sayth) Why God hath she­wed so great loue towardes vs. he most of all did set forth his loue towards vs. Which thing he therefore did, to stir vs vp to loue him againe. God had commaunded vs in his law, that we should loue him with all our hart, with all our soule, and with all our strengthes: and that we might the willinglier performe this, he would first declare his good will towardes vs: that it might appere that he loued, & cared for vs more then for himself. For he would dye euen for our sakes: which death yet we so contemne, that we will suffer nothyng for it, nor restraine our selues from any commodities of the body, or de­lightes of the flesh. His will was, that all men should be in good case, and one aloue in the meane tyme to suffer: but we desire to be in good case our selues alone, al­though all other in the meane time perish. But it is not possible that there should be in vs so great a contēpt both of our owne saluatiō & also of the saluatiō, of other men, but that either we beleue not so great a benefite of God, or els we do not earnestly inough weigh if. There was neuer wower, that with so great a desire and seruent loue maried his spouse, as Christ hath maried vnto himselfe his churche. [Page 107] Neither hath any man at any tyme maried a wife so vnlike and vnworthy for The church an vnlike spouse for Christ. hym to ioyne with all, as Christ hath done the Church. For in what estate she was before Christ met with her, Ezecbiell describeth in 6. chapter, where he sayth, that she lay vpon the nether was her nauell string cut of, nether was she washed with water, nor poudred with salt: and there was no eye whiche hadde compas­sion on her. Paul also both here, and likewise in many other places, at large de­clareth in what estate we were before we came vnto Christ. Vnto the Ephesi­ans he doth not only say, that we were by nature the children of wrath, but also he addeth, ye were once darknes, but now ye are light in the Lord. Vnto Titus he saith: We were as fooles, not obediente, but wādring out of the way, geuing our selues to sun­dry lustes, liuing in malice and enuy, hatefull, and seking to displease one an other. In the first to the Corrinthyans, when he had reckened a beaderoll of most haynous sinnes, he sayth, these thinges vndoubtedly were ye sometimes: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified. Wherefore we haue the sonne of God geuē vnto vs as a pledge of the loue of God. He placed not in his stede an Angell, or an Archangell, al­though he mought so haue done. He vouchsafed to come himselfe, and to suffer a most bitter death vpon the crosse. It behoued, that for our redemption there What was required in the price of our redem­tion. Why the death of Christ was so accepta­ble vnto the father. should be some such good thing offred vnto God, which mought ether equally or els more please God, then all the sinnes of the worlde had displeased hym. This thing hath Christ offred for vs. And if a man demaunde why the death of Christ was so acceptable vnto God, there can no other reason be geuen, but his vnmeasurable charity and loue. God coulde indede haue ben contented with any other thing. But his will was rather to haue this thing: not by the afflicti­on and punishementes of Christ to feede his eyes or mynde: for that had bene the poynt of a cruell father, nether for that he foresaw the great loue and mo­desty in his sonne: although these thinges were in Christ most singular, and of very great force w ^t the father: but, as indede I iudge, for y ^• he saw, that by this only meanes his loue towardes vs mought be most perfectly declared, and al­so to set forth an example of a most holy life for men to follow. For if thou de­maunde Whether i [...] were of ne­cessity that Christ should dye. whether it were of necessity, that the sonne of God should in such sorte dye: I answere, that here is to be put no necessity of compulsion: for there is nothing in God that is by violēce, nether also was there any necessity of nature. For although there are in the deuine nature many thinges of necessity, as is, that it be one, that it be three, and that it begatte a sonne, and suche other, yet were it a wickednes to thinke, that anye externe effecte commeth from him by naturall necessitye: when as whatsoeuer he doth, he doth it freelye, and of his owne accorde, and it is free vnto him not to do what he will not. Nether do we here put any necessity by supposition of the ende. For the saluation of mā mought haue bene wrought by many other wayes and meanes, so that hys will had bene so. But it was of necessity y ^• Christ should dye, by supposition of the deuine prouidence and counsell: for that God had decreed it should be so. And this he did chiefely to declare his infinite loue.

Much more thē being now iustified by his blood, vve shalbe saued from wrath through him. For if when we were enemies, we were reconciled vnto God by the death of his sonne: much more being reconciled vve shalbe saued by his life.] Here is brought a comparison of diuers estates, both of Christ and of vs, we were before weake, vngodly, sinners, enemies. But now our cōdition or estate is changed, for we are nowe made frendes, we are now iustified, and reconci­led vnto God, Christ by his death wrought much for vs: but now he liueth and that an eternal life, wherein he raigneth with y ^• father. It was a greater matter It is a greater matter to iustifye, then to bringe to blessednes them that are iustified to restore vs to life, to iustifie vs, and to reconcile vs vnto God, then it is to bring vs being now iustified vnto felicity, and the foresayd thinges hath he brought to passe by his death: wherefore that which remaineth he shal much more easie­ly accomplishe being now placed in life and in his kingdome: for that whiche remayneth is lesse, and Christ to bring this to passe for vs, is after a sort mightier [Page] then himself, Now resteth to declare, how men not yet reconciled are called the enemies of God. Of this may two reasons be geuen: the one is touched in the How before iustification we are cal­led the ene­mies of God. epistle vnto the Hebrues where it is said, That it is vnpossible without faith to please God. And forasmuche as men that are straungers from Christe wante fayth, and seinge that they beleue not the oracles of God, they beare witnesse that God is a lier: and therefore they can not please him. An other reason is, for that they are still oppressed with vices, and by meanes of theyr naturall luste they all the wayes they canne resiste the will and lawes of God. Where­fore they are woorthelye called enemyes. But Paule affirmeth, that by the death of Christe we are iustified: whiche is first vnderstande, before God by im­putatiō. Secondly also, bycause dayly is augmented in vs a new righteousnes, How we are iustified by the deth of Christ. which in liuing holily we get, by the instauratiō of our strength which we haue now receaued of the holy ghost. Although we must cleane fast only to y ^e first iu­stification: for in it is the stay of our saluation. For the other righteousnes, for asmuche as it is vnperfect, is not able to stande before the iudgement seate of God. When the Apostle sayth,

That vve shalbe saued from vvrath.] By wrath he vnderstandeth not a dis­turbance What wrath is in God. or perturbation of the minde. For these thinges can haue no place in God. But as Augustine hath wel interpreted in his bokes of the Trinity, wrath in God signifieth a iust vengeance. And God is sayd to be angry: when he shew­eth forth the effectes of an angry man: which are to punishe, and to auenge. So he is sayd to repent himselfe, that he had made man: bycause like a man that repenteth himselfe, he would ouerthrow his worke. And the reconciliatiō, wher of the Apostle here speaketh, is referred to this kinde of wrath, and signifieth y ^t the vengeāce is now at an end. Contrariwise it is sayd in the Gospel of Iohn, That the wrath of God abideth vpon him, which beleueth not in the sonne of God. wherfore we, seing we are now recōciled vnto God by the death of his Sonne, ought Vpon thē that are iu­stified is no thing sent of God but with a fa­therly mind to be fully perswaded in our selues, that for asmuche as the wrath of God is en­ded and taken away, nothing can by him be sent vpon vs, but of a frendly and fatherly minde. Otherwise afflictions and aduersities mought of theyr own nature driue a feare into vs, and perswade vs, that God is angry with vs. Which thing, forasmuche as by the death of Christ is the reconciliation made, can by no meanes come to passe. And this reconciliation pertayneth not only to those faythfull, which then liued, when Christ died vpon the crosse, but also to all as The recon­ciliation made by Christ hath a respecte to all times wel those which from Adams time went before those seasons, as also to those which shall be euen vnto the end of the world. And so great was the goodnes of God in this sacrifice, that whereas therein were committed of men many hor­rible actes (for they both condemned an innocent man, and also most spitefully crucified the Lord of glory) yet the deuine clemency was nothing at all offen­ded The wic­kednes of them that crucified Christ, di­minished not the dignity of that price. with this so great iniquity and ingratitude, but that it counted as most ac­ceptable the obedience of Christe, and his infinite loue, and vnmesurable pati­ence, & accepted it for the redemption of mankinde. Now resteth to se what this so great loue of God requireth agayne at our handes: for there are many thinges which it requireth. For first euen as Christ applied all his will and en­deuor to redeme vs, so is it our part on the other side, vtterly and all whole to addict our selues vnto him. And as he setting a side all thinges, had a care only of our saluatiō, so also ought we to plucke away our minde, from all things & not any more to seke our owne thinges, but only the thinges that longe vnto What thys so great loue of God re­quireth a­gaine at our hand. Christ. They may be an example vnto vs, which haue returned into fauour a­gayne with theyr enemies: for they, lest they shoulde seme to haue done anye thing counterfeately or faynedly, leue no dewty vndone, whereby to win their new reconciled frendes: and of this thing they haue a greate care not to be thought to retaine still any remnāts of enmity or hatred closed vp in the mind: as we rede Cicero, Crassus, Pompeius, and many others did. Farther also we must take hede, that seing by the mercy of God, through the death of Christ we are [Page 108] place, we doo not through wicked and filthy actes throwe our selues downe hedlong from thence. For they which after they haue once ben reconciled cease not to contaminate themselues with vices, do not only fall downe hedlonge frō theyr most excellent estate or condition, but also, as it is written vnto the He­brues, Do tread vnder foote the sonne of God, and do pollute his blood which was shed for them. By this place also we are taught to loue our enemies: not after the com­mon maner, as when men say, y ^• they wishe wel vnto theyr enemy, it is inough they thinke, if they hate him not: but yet in the meane time they will take no paynes ether to bring him to amendment, or to saluation. And which is more haynous, they are not onely not beneficyall towardes theyr enemies, but also through theyr sluggishnes they suffer theyr weake bretherne to perish, they winke at theyr sinnes, nether vse they any admonitions or reprehensions, that they might be amended. There are besides infinite other instructions, which The loue of God most plentifully tea­cheth vs many thinges. the loue of God teacheth vs. For we haue no booke stuffed with more plentifull doctrine then the death of Christ: whiche if we diligentlye examine, we shall be tought in a maner al dueties necessary vnto saluation. Lastlye is to be noted that these thinges which Paul in this place mēcioneth, are had, although indede more briefly, yet fully inoughe, in the 6. chapter of the Gospell of Iohn: So God loued the world that he gaue his only begotten sonnes that euery one that beleueth in him should not perish. Here also we heare that through the loue of God the sonne was deliuered for vs. And whereas Paule sayth, enemies, vveake, vngodly, & sinners, the same hath the Euangelist signified by this one word, vvorld. And whereas Paul sayth, That thorough him vve are iustified, recōciled, and shalbe saued from vvrath, that hath the Euangelist expressed in these wordes: That he vvhich be­leueth in him should not perishe.

And not only this, but vve also reioyce in God through our Lord Iesus Christ, by vvhome vve haue novv obtayned the reconciliation.] This was the third part, which the Apostle vsed in making mencion of the benefite of Christ, after that he had both layd him forth before vs, and also by amplification, as it was mete, commended him vnto vs. Wherefore Paul sayth, that so great is the gift of God, that thereof we excedingly reioyce. We are not only (sayth he) certayne that we shall be saued, but also we reioyce, not in our selues, but in God, not through our workes, but through Iesus Christ, by whome we haue obtayned reconciliation. When he sayth, that we reioyce of this benefite of God: he priuely reproueth those, which counted it a thinge full of shame to pro­fesse Christian religion or to wayte for saluation at the handes of a man cruci­fied, and put to a most shamefull death. Herein (sayth Paul) is nothing vile or whereof we should be ashamed: yea rather all thinges are most honorable and full of great dignity. For here we can looke vpon nothing which testefieth not Reioysinge is opposed to filthines & shame vnto vs the singular loue of God towards vs. This sentence of Paul agréeth ve­ry well with these words of Ieremy in the 9. chapter: Let not the wise man reioyce in his wisedome, nor the mighty man in his might, nor the rich man in his riches, but he which reioyseth, let him reioyce in this, that he knoweth and vnderstandeth me which What our reioysing is worke mercy, righteousnes, and iudgement, and loue these thinges in the earth. The pro­phet meaneth the selfe same thing that Paul doth, namely, that no man should reioyce ether for the good thinges of the mynde, or of the body, or of fortune, but only let him reioyce of this, that he knoweth the Lord. And the vnmeasu­rable loue of God can by no other thing be better or clearlyer vnderstand, then by the death of Christ. This is our fayth: this is the chiefest knowledge that we can haue of the goodnes of God. Hereby we vnderstand, that God hath wrought By the death of Christ is God chiefly knowne. mercy, when he would by this meanes redeme vs: to haue wrought iudgemēt and righteousnes, whē as he would not suffer our sinnes to escape vnpunished, but hath so seuerely auenged them in Christ. But because our fayth ought not to be idle, but to repay agayne the selfe same thinges, that we haue receaued of Christ, therefore the Prophet addeth, that God both loueth and requireth the selfe [Page] same thinges in the earth, that is, in vs. VVe reioyce, sayth Paul, and also the pro­phete, in the knowledge & fayth of so great a gift bestowed vpō vs by God. But they reioyce not, which coldly weigh these thinges: but they which feale them inwardly in the mynde, and so feele them, that they are ernestly affected. This is to reioyce in the Lord, and not in our owne workes. Wherefore that which Paul before sayd, that the elect reioyce in tribulations, herehence dependeth: for we Why we reioyce in afflictions. do not reioyce of the afflictions, as they are of themselues, but for that we feele by them, that God loueth vs. Last of all our glory herein consisteth, that we haue gotten God himselfe to loue vs, and to be our father: then which felicitye could nothing haue happened vnto vs more to be desired. Nether is this to be passed ouer, that Ambrose hath noted vpon this place: that we ought not only to geue thankes vnto God for the saluation and security which we haue re­ceaued, but also that we reioyce in God through Iesus Christ. By which words Ambrose a­voucheth the security of saluation we gather, that he asserteth the security of saluation as well as we: to the ende our reioysing mought be concerning such thinges as we haue now assuredly in our hands. Farther also hereby it most euidently appeareth, that those words of the Apostle which he before spake, That the loue of God is shed abroade into our hartes, are to be vnderstand of that loue wherewith God loueth vs. For of that loue this sure token we haue, in that God hath geuen his son vnto vs. Farther the Apostle entending to make vs certayne of our saluation, and to con­firme vs in our hope coulde take no argument at all of our loue towardes God: for our loue is alwayes mayned and vnperfect. And therefore if a mans hope were doubtfull and vncertayne, and should by this meanes be confirmed, and willed to be of good cheare, for that he beareth a loue towardes God, he mought answere straight way, that he for that cause most of all doubteth, for that he seeth his loue to be weake and colde, and that he loueth not God so much as he ought to do: and by that occasion he can not attayne to so greate a rewarde. Wherefore Paul hath appoynted an other way, and confirmeth our hope by the gift of God. And he thought it not sufficient simply thus to say: but excellently amplifieth it by the contraries and opposites. Out of this fountayne are to be Wher [...]hēce are to be sought con­solations in afflictions. sought consolations for the afflicted, when by reason of aduersities they suspect that they are hated of God. Here ought they to call to remembrance, what ones they were before they came vnto Christ: what God did for their sakes, whē they were yet enemyes, which for their saluation woulde haue his sonne crucified. And that they haue to their head Iesus Christ in heauen, whose members, and partes they are: And let it be demanunded of them, whether Christ can hate himselfe, and destroy hys owne members? Wherfore they ought to thinke that their afflictions conduce to eternall saluation, and are profitably inflicted of their louing father.

Wherefore euē as by one man sinne entred into the world, and by sinne death, and so death went ouer all men, for that all men haue sinned. For euen vnto the law was sinne in the worlde. But sinne is not imputed whilest there is no law. But death raigneth from Adam to Moses, ouer thē also that sinned not after the like maner of the transgression of Adam, which was the figure of that which was to come. But yet the gift is not so as is the offence.

VVherefore euen as by one man &c.] Some thinke that Paul therefore writeth these thinges, for that after he had by most firme reasons proued, that we are not iustified by our owne workes or merites, but only by faith in Christ and by grace, now he mindeth more largely to set forth the principall pointes, of which all these argumentes which he hath hetherto brought, depend, name­ly, sinne, the lawe, and grace: And therefore maketh this treatise aparte, wher­by to declare the strength and force of the former argumentes. Which whether [Page 109] it be so or no, let other men iudge. In myne opinion vndoubtedly these thinges may very well be knitte together with the thinges that haue bene alredy spo­ken. The Me­thode of Paules treatise. For a man mought thinke that the passion of Christ and his death, was profitable vnto Christ himselfe only, and not also vnto vs: for that it mought be thought that the righteousnes of one man can not redound vnto an other. But Paul will declare, that euen as the fall of the first man was spred abroade ouer all men, so the righteousnes of Christ hath redounded vpon all the beleuers: and that his benefite is of no lesse force then was the sinne of Adam. And by thys meanes he declareth the way, whereby by the death & crosse of Christ we may be iustified and obtayne saluation. nether is this a small helpe to confirme our hope, when we perceaue, that if we cleue vnto Christ we shall through hym be no les endewed with the chiefest good thing, then we haue bene by Adam infected with the extreamest euill thing. Many thinges are in this place not without greate consideration set forth touching sinne. For the knowledge thereof wor­keth this in vs, to cause vs not to be ingrate for the benefite which we haue re­ceaued. The know­lege of sinne how it is profitable. For he which séeth out of what and howe great euils he hath bene deli­uered, séeth also, how great is the liberality and goodnes of the deliuerer and of him that hath set him at liberty. The knowledge of sinnes setteth forth also the worthynes of the iustification receaued by Christ. Wherefore Paul enquireth What thinges are reasoned of touching sinne. from whence sinne had his beginning, what it brought, how it was knowen, and last of all, by what meanes it was driuen away. Wherefore he declareth, that sinne entred in by Adam, that it brought death, that it was knowen by the lawe: that it was driuen away and ouercome by the death of Christ, and fayth in hym.

Euen as by one man sinne entred into the world, and by sinne death.] Here semeth to be vsed the figure Anantapodoton is a figure in writing where some little clause is left out ether in the beginning, middle, or ende. Anantapodotō, so that on the other side there should haue bene added, So by one Iesus Christ entred in righteousnes, and by righteousnes, lyfe. And Origene affirmeth, that Paul would not adde thys, for feare of making men slouthfull and sluggishe: as though they hauing now ob­teined righteousnes and eternall lyfe, should thinke, that they now nede no farther to consider vpon eternall lyfe. And for that cause he sayth: that the Apostle in an o­ther place added this selfe same sentence in the Future tempse, and not in the pre­terperfect tempse: as when he writeth vnto the Corinthians: Euen as in Adam all men die, so in Christ all men shall be quickened. But this reason is of no great force. For the holy scripture is not wont to be moued with so light daungers, to kepe in silence the benefites of God: yea rather it euery where setteth them forth al whole and in ample maner, as they are: and doth not gelde them nor shorten them of, as Origene thinketh. But as for slouthfulnes and sluggishnes, they are by infinite o­ther places of the scipture sufficiently shaken of. For there are in the holy Scrip­tures exhortations by promises and threatninges, wherby to stir vs vp to holines of life, and to the endeuour to do good workes. And Origene also himselfe confesseth, that that which the Apostle here omitteth, he afterward faithfully addeth, whē he thus writeth, Wherfore, euen as by the sinne of one man euill was spread abrode ouer all men to condemnation: so by the righteousnes of one man was good sprede abrode ouer all men to iustification of lyfe. And a little before, For if by the offence of one man ma­ny haue died, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, whiche came thorough one man Iesus Christe, hath abounded vnto many. Erasmus thinketh that this discommoditie may by an other way be holpen: so that the parte aunswering be set after this coniunction [...], that is, and. And the lyke kinde of speakyng he bryngeth out of Mathew, in the Lordes prayer, [...]. In these words semeth to be wanting this coniunction [...], that is, So. So that the sence is, Euen as in heauen so also in earth. And after this selfe same maner he thinketh is to be made per­fect this sentence of the Apostle. Wherfore, euen as by one mā sinne entred into y ^• world, so also by sinne entred in death. But I rather thinke that here is vsed y ^• Figure Anantapodoton. For I sée, that Paul is after a sorte rapte by y ^e force of y ^e spi­rite [Page] to expresse y ^• great destruction brought in by sinne. Which being done, he most manifestly (as Origene confesseth) in the second interpretation putteth that whiche wanted in the other. But the better to vnderstand these wordes of the Apostle, we haue thrée thinges by him set forth, which are diligently to be peised: first, what the Apostle meaneth by sinne: Secondly, what that one man is, by whom sinne entred This word sinne how ample it is. into the world: Thirdly, by what meanes sinne is spred abrode: As touching y ^• first the Apostle amply and largely vseth this worde Sinne, namely to signifie whatsoe­uer is repugnaunt vnto the law of God, and vnto his will. For therby man departeth from the institution of nature, & from that image whereunto he was created. For God so created him at the beginning, that in him should shine forth his image: whiche thing vndoubtedly cannot be, when we resist the law of God. And this is Why many pleasures are forbid­den men. the onely and true cause, why man is not permitted to delight himselfe wyth all kind of plesures. For if he should so, he should make himself like vnto brute beasts, and not lyke vnto God his creator. For God would haue man to be in this worlde hys vickar, and therfore to be most like vnto hym. And sinne beyng so largely ta­ken, comprehendeth not onely Originall sinne, that is, our depraued nature, & cor­rupt strengthes both of the body and of the soule, but also all those euils whiche fol­low of it: namely, the first motions of the mind to things forbidden, also wicked de­liberations, noughty endeuors, and vitious customes. Wherefore, the Apostle in this one name of sinne, comprehendeth both the roote it selfe, & all the fruites ther­of. Vnder the name of sin the Apostle comprehen­deth the roote and frutes thereof. The Ety­mology of this woord sinne. What is the rule of our nature. Neither must we geue eare vnto them which bable, that these thinges are not sinnes. For seyng the holy ghost calleth them by this name, I sée no cause why, but that we also ought so to speake, and to cleaue vnto this doctrine. Farther, also that these first motions of the mynde, and corruption of nature are sinnes: the very eti­mology of the word plainly declareth. For this worde [...], that is, sinne, com­meth of this verbe [...]: which signifieth to erre from y ^e marke set before vs, by what means so euer it be. And forasmuch, as this is the rule of our nature, and of all our actions, to be in all thinges very like and conformable vnto God, vndou­tedly seing we are prone vnto those thinges which are forbidden vs by the lawe of God, and are euen straight way at the first brunt caried hedlong vnto them, we must nedes without all controuersie be sayd to sinne, that is, to erre from the scope and ende set before vs. Of the lyke signification is also the Hebrew worde: for, that whiche is in y ^• tonge called Chataah, that is, Synne, is deryued of this verbe Chata, whiche thou shalte fynde in the booke of the Iudges, the xx. chapiter vsed in the selfe same sence, in whiche I before sayde in the Gréeke worde, [...], is taken, that is, to erre from the marke. For there it is written, of the seuen hundred children of Beniamin, that they were so accustomed to throwe stones out of a sling, that they would hitte euen a heare, and nothing erre from it. Farther, experience it selfe teacheth how greate these euills are, euen in vs that are regenerate. For we are by them so letted, that we cā not fulfill the law of God: How the law is per­formed of men regenerate. and yet are we bound to obserue the same in all poyntes. We are commanded also not to lust: whiche precept howe muche it is broken of vs by reason of our pronesse to sinnes and fyrst motions to vices, euery man hath ex­perience thereof in himselfe, and can be a witnes vnto himselfe: And if the Fa­thers They are perfecte whiche vn­derstande theyr owne wants. seme sometimes to write, that the law may be fulfilled of mē regenerate, they thē spake of an obediēce begonne, & of such a fulfilling, as hath ioyned with it much imperfection. For euen they affirme, that those are perfect, and doo performe the law of God, which vnderstand theyr owne wants, so that they daily None no not the most holiest hath all the vertues ab­solutely. say with others, Forgeue vs our trespasses: and acknowledge with Paul, that they haue a greate way farther to go. The selfe same fathers also confesse, that none can be found, no not the most holiest man that euer was, that hath all vertues abso­lutly: For as Ierome sayth: He which excelleth others in one vertue, oftentimes faileth in an other vertue. And he citeth Cicero which sayd, That there can not easely be found one which is most excellent either in the knowledge of the Law, or in the arte of Rethorike: but to finde one that hath excelled in both kindes together, it was neuer hard of. Wherfore y ^e Apostle to the end he would make playne most [Page 110] notably set forth the perfect benefite of God geuen vs by Christ, doth not one­ly touche Originall sinne, but also in this one word sinne cōprehēdeth all kindes of vices, which springe out of it, Now let vs se by which one mā Paul saith, that By Adam as by a common roote and Masse entred in sinne into the worlde. sinne had suche entrance in the world. That man was the first Adam, who was as a certaine common masse or lompe, wherein was conteyned all mankind: which lompe beinge corrupted, we can not be brought forth into this world, but with corruption and vnclenes. And although Eue trāsgressed before the man, yet the beginning of sinning is ascribed vnto Adam: for that succession is attributed vnto men, and not vnto women. Howbeit Ambrose by one man vnderstode Eue. The cor­ruption is not ascribed vnto Eue but vnto Adam. But forasmuche as this woord one, is the masculine gender, the signification thereof can not but hardly and with much wresting be applied vnto the womā. Others thinke, that both as well Adam as Eue are by this commō word Man vn­derstand: so that this phrase of speach differeth not much frō that, which is in the 2. chapter of the booke of Genesis, Male and female created be them. Nether doo they much regard this adiectiue one, for that the scripture testifieth, that Adam and Eue were one and the selfe same fleshe. The first interpretation is more simple and playner, and therefore I the gladlier follow it. And we ought to remember, that Paul writeth vnto Timothe, that although both these first parēts sinned, yet was there not in ech one and the selfe same maner of transgression. For he sayth that Adam was not deceaued. Which selfe thinge also maye be gathered of that, Adam was not decea­ued. which they answered vnto God, when he reproued them. For the woman whē she was asked why she did it, accused the serpent, The serpēt (said she) deceaued me. But Adam when he was demaunded the same question sayd not, that he was deceaued: but answered, The woman which thou gauest me, deliuered me the aple and I did eate. This is not so to be taken, as though we should affirme that there was There was errour in Adam whē he trans­gressed. no error in the man, when he transgressed. For as we are playnly tought in the Ethnikes, in euery kinde of sinne alwayes happeneth some error. This thing only we are tought, that the man was not so grossely deceaued, as was the wo­man. And this not a little furthered the argument of Paul. For in that place he commaunded, that women should kepe silence in the Church, for that she is an instrument apt to deceates. And this he confirmed by an example of our first parentes. For she which hath once moued the man to sinne, is not likely to be able to enstruct him a right: and it is not mete that she which could be seduced by the deuill, & be deceaued of the serpēt, should beare degree of rule in the Church. Howbeit the booke of Ecclesiasticus sayth, that sinne had his beginning of the Sinne had his begin­ning of the woman. woman, which is not to be denied, if we consider the history of the booke of Genesis. But Paul as we haue sayd, followeth the accustomed maner of the scripture, which ascribeth succession and propagation vnto the men, and not vnto the women. For he ment not at this presēt to teache, whither Adam or Eue sinned first. But his minde is to declare the roote, from whence sinne was spred abrode in­to the world. And so also is that answered vnto, which may be obiected out of the booke of wisedome, That through the enuy of the Deuill sinne entred into the world. Iohn also writeth that the Deuill sinned euen from the beginning. For here is Sinne had his begin­ginning of the deuill. not entreated of imitation of an other mans sinne, or of the perswasion to sin­ning. Otherwise it is true, that the first example of sinne came from the diuell, and that he was motioner and author of transgressions. But this is nowe the Here is en­treated of the begin­ning of sin by propagation. scope of the Apostle, to teach, out of what thing as from the ground and begin­ning sinne was by propagation traduced into mankinde. And that this was the entent of the Apostle, may be proued by that Antithesis, which he maketh be­twéene Christ and the first Adam. For the Lord hath not renued vs or made vs iust, only by setting forth himselfe as an example to be imnitated, or by shew­ing himselfe a faythfull instructer, but by wholy changing vs, & renuing vs by We are by Adam infected with a certaine cō ­tagiousnes. the holy ghost and grace. Wherefore. Augustine semeth to haue very well expres­sed the discommodity brought in by Adam, when he sayth, that he hath brought into a consumption all mankinde, by which words he signifieth, that Adam hath [Page] infected vs all with a certayne contagiousnes. But the Pelagians agaynst this sentence were wont to vse this argument: That which is not, can not hurt: but An argu­ment of the Pelagians. originall sinne if there be any, is now by fayth in Christ, and by baptisme blot­ted out, and is no more: and therefore in children that are baptised it can not hurt. But that which these men take as graunted, namely, that in them that be­leue and are baptised originall sinne is blotted out, is not absolutely true. For in euery sinne are two thinges to be considered. The action or wicked affection, Two thinges to be conside­red in sins. Wherein other sins. differ from original sin. which is as it were the matter: and the offence or obligation to punishement, which they call reatus, that is, guiltynes. And originall sinne herein differeth from those sinnes, which they call actuall, for that in them the matter abideth not still. For so soone as a man hath ether committed adultery, or spoken blas­phemy, those actions strayghtway as soone as the thing is done ceasse to be, ne­ther are any more extant. Only there remayneth the offence agaynst God, and guiltines. Wherefore seing by fayth and repentance the obligation vnto pu­nishement, or offence agaynst God is remitted, we will easely graunt, that the whole sinne is abolished. But in originall sinne the consideration is farre other­wise: The matter of Original sinne pas­seth not a­way. for the matter thereof passeth not away. For euery one of vs hath expe­rience in himselfe, that corruption of nature remayneth in vs: seing that yet also we continually fall into sinnes, and are both in body and minde vntoward to things pertayning to God: which sinne yet vnto the faythfull are not impu­ted. The guilti­nesse of ori­ginall sinne is remitted but the matter is not taken away For the guiltines and offence against God is in baptisme through fayth in Christ forgeuen, although the matter of sinne do still remayne. Which matter, although in holy men it be broken and weakened, yet we shall not be perfectly ridde thereof, till we be deade. And forasmuch as men regenerate beget chil­dren, not by that they are regenerate, but by nature and the fleshe, thereof it commeth, that the children also of the beleuers are borne obnoxious vnto ori­ginall Why the children of the regenerate are borne wyth originall sinne. A simili­tude. sinne. For into them is powred the same vitiate and corrupt nature that is in the parēts: when as yet on the other side forgeuenes or imputation, which are apprehended by fayth, can not be powred into them. For the better expli­cation hereof, Augustine bringeth two similitudes: One is of graynes of corne: which although they are sowen into the ground being purged of theyr leaues, stalkes, chaffe, and eares, yet they spring vp agayne with all these thinges: whiche hereof commeth to passe, for that that cleansyng commeth not to those graines by nature, but by the arte and industry of men. And forasmuch as the corne springeth not of these principles of arte & industry, but of nature, it must nedes be, that when they are sprong vp, they follow the order not of humane in­dustry An other similitude. but of their owne nature. The second similitude is of a man, y ^• is circūcised: who notwithstanding begetteth a sonne with his foreskin. And thys hereof cōmeth, for that circumcision was not in the father by nature, but by a certain force added from without. And seing that childrē are not procreated by that out ward force, but by an inward strength of nature, it is of necessity, that whē they are begotten they follow the order of nature. And therfore we bring forth no o­ther children, but such as we are our selues. Wherefore seing we haue in vs the contagiousnes of originall sinne, they vndoubtedly also can not be without it. But we can not communicate vnto our children the remission and forgeuenes of that sinne. For, that is to be hoped for at Gods handes onely. The selfe same The scien­ces of the parents are not tradu­ced into theyr chil­dren. thing we see to happen in sciences and vertues: which although they be in pa­rentes, yet are they not traduced vnto their children. By these thinges it plainly appeareth, wherin the Pelagians were deceiued. Neither can any man for these things worthely accuse vs, as though we plucke away any thing from the dig­nitie either of faith or of Baptisme. For vnto baptisme we largely graunt, that it sealeth vnto vs the remission of the giltines and of the offence, and also grace What is to be attribu­ted vnto baptisme. and the holy ghost, and our graftyng into Christ, and also our right to eternall lyfe. And yet doth it not therof follow, that by it is abolished the corruption of nature, or continuall nourishment of sinne. Wherfore Paul rightly fayth: That [Page 111] we are by hope saued. But it is much to be meruailed at, how y ^• Pelagians can deny that there is originall sin in infantes, seyng they see that they daily dye. For Sinne and death are knit toge­ther. the scripture manifestly teacheth, that the stipend of sinne is death, and the stinge of death is sinne, Wherfore from whomsoeuer we seclude sinne, from him also must we nedes seclude death. For by the testimony of the scripture, these are compa­red In Christ [...] onely was death with our sinne. together as the cause and the effect. But here we ought to except Christ one­ly: who although he knew not sinne, yet died he for our fakes. But death had not dominion ouer him: for he of his owne accord suffred it for our sakes. But to say that there are some without sinne, although all men dye, were to ioyne Testimo­nies that proue that infantes want not sinne. together thinges repugnant and contrary one to an other. But besides thys place there are a great many other places also, which proue that infantes are not without sinne: for Dauid sayth, Beholde in iniquities was I conceaued and in sinne hath my mother conceaued me. And Paul to the Ephesians calleth vs, the chil­dren of wrath by nature. And in Genesis it is written, the hart of man is euen from his infancy prone to euill. There are also to cōfirme this sentence a great many other places besides, which we will alleadge, whē we entreate of originall sin apart by it selfe. Now seing I haue declared, what the Apostle meaneth by sinne, & by which one mā, it entred into y ^e world, there remaineth to cōsider by what means it was spred abroade. This is a matter obscure, & very hard, & therefore I do not The man­ner of the propagatiō of originall sinne is ob­scure. thinke to stand long about it. But forasmuch as y ^e word of God most plainely techeth that such a sin there is, & that it descēdeth into our posterity, although we vnderstand not y ^e maner & way, how it is powred into thē, yet we ought to geue place vnto y ^e truth & not to be to much careful or to trouble our selues more thē nedes touching the way and maner, which is hard to be knowē, and may with out daunger be vnknowen. Howbeit I thinke it not amisse to declare those waies and meanes, which I haue obserued amōgst y ^• ecclesticall writers: whose opinions touching this matter are fower in number. The first is of those which thought, that we receaue of our parents the souls together with the bodies: that euen as God by humane sede createth the body, so also of the same createth he the soule. This sentence doth Augustine make mencion of in his tenth booke vpon Genesis, ad literam, and in many other places nether hath he at any time, that I can remember of, disalowed the same, yea rather he saith, that by this sentēce may be dissolued this knotte touching originall sinne. Tertullian and many o­thers Tertullian leaneth to traduction. What is brought out of the scrip­tures for the traduc­tion of the soule. of the old writers fauored this sentence. Whose argumentes when I di­ligently peyse, I iudge in dede probable: but yet not of necessitie. For y ^e whiche they bring out of the 46. chapter of Genesis, of the 66. soules which came out of the thigh of Iacob, may nor vnaptly be expounded by the figure Synecdoche, so that by the soule, which is the principallest part of the man, is vnderstand y ^e bo­dy, which is without all controuersie procreated of the seede of the parents. We may also by the soule vnderstand the grosser partes of the soule, as the vegeta­tiue part, and the sensitiue part: which no man doubteth, but that they are pro­created of the sede. And that the holy scriptures sometimes vse this word soule, in that sence, Christe testifieth in the Gosple, where he sayth, He which loseth his soule for my sake, shall finde it. An other of theyr reasons, as Augustine, writeth in his 10. booke vpon Genesis is this: In the creation of the woman it is not written that God breathed into her a liuing soule: whereby they gather that she had of Adam not only her body, but also her soule. But this reason Augustine iudgeth Whether God brea­thed a soule into Eu [...]. to be weake. For a man mought reply vpon it and say: that it had bene once alredy said that God breathed a soule into Adam: and therefore there was no nede to repete the same agayne. For if God had brought in a new manner of procreation of soules, the scripture would not haue passed it ouer in silence. But seing the scripture maketh no mencion at all of any new maner, we ought to vse that which it had before expressed: especially seing that we se that Adam sayd of hys wife: This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my fleshe: but added not, and soule of my soule: which vndoubtedly had bene more sweter, and had more serued to ex­presse [Page] the [...]tion of [...]. But Augustine confesseth that the doubt is not thereby diss [...]. For if [...] aff [...]rm [...], that soules are euery day cre­ated, and so created, that in the bodies the [...] goeth before no [...] alis ratio (as he Whither God ceassed from all woorkes the seuenth day. speaketh) that is, no substance of sede, then God shall not seme to haue perfectly seased frō all workes the seuenth day: when as he still euery day createth soules of nothing. But vnto this argument may [...]aduenture be answered, that in the body traduced of the parentes, it is sufficient if there be found such qualities and conditiōs, whereby it is able to receaue a reasonable soule: and that this is that seminalis ratio before spoken of. But whatsoeuer is to be sayd of these ar­guments and theyr answeres, once Augustine wholy enclineth this way, that at the least he thinketh, that the soule of Christ came not from the blessed virgine The soule of Christ semeth not to be traduced from the blessed virgin. by propagation: of which iudgement he sayth that others, as well as he, were, and that they auouched, that it moughte be proued by the epistle vnto the He­brues: For there it is sayd, that the priesthode of Christ excelled the priesthede of Aaron, for that Christ was a priest according to the order of Melchifedech. And the priesthode of Melchisedech was more excellenter then the priesthode of Aaron, for that Leuy gaue tenthes vnto Melchisedech, for he was in the loynes of Abraham, who payd tithes vnto Melchisedech. But Christ also should haue bene no lesse in the loynes of Abraham, then was Leui, if he had had both his bodye and soule from hym by traduction. And so as touching thys, the dignity of eche priesthode had bene alike, when as eyther of them paid in Abraham tythes to Melchisedech. But here mought they which fauour this opinion, make aunswer, y ^• there was besides an other manner of difference betwene Christ and Leui: for although both of them were, both as touchyng the body, & also as touchyng y ^• soule, in y ^• loynes of Abraham, yet did not both of them after one, and the selfe same man­ner traduce their nature from him. For Christ was borne of the Virgine, the holy ghost commyng ouer her. But Leui was begotten and borne after the com­mon manes, as other men are procreated. Wherfore Augustine leaueth this reason, and bringeth an other out of the booke of wisedome, where it is written as he thinketh vnder the person of Christ, I haue by lot obteyned a good soule. For he thinketh that this phrase of speach can haue no place, if the soule of Christ were by way of propagation by the law of nature traduced from his elders: vnlesse we will affirme that nature worketh by chaunce. And he thinketh y ^• this name of lot, therfore had place in the soule of Christ, to the ende we might vnderstand that those ornaments, whiche we know were most riche and most plentifull in it, were not geuen vnto it for any merites goyng before, but of the mere mercy What lot could haue place in the soule of Christ. Augustine leueth in­different the question of the tra­duction of the soule. Things al­so are sayd to be crea­ted which are done by meanes. of God. And this was a wonderfull great ornament of the soule of Christ, to be ioyned vnto one and the selfe same substaunce and person with the word of God. But this testmony, forasmuch as it is not had out of the holy scriptures that are in the Canon, is but of small force. At the length he leueth indifferent the question of the traduction of the soules, as a thing onech side probable. And be­cause they which are against it vse to cite this place out of the 33. Psalme, which facioned the harts of them apart, this also he saith is weake, because they also which defend traduction of the soule, deny not, but that the soules are created of God: although they contend that the same is done by a meane. For so in the booke of Genesis we reade, that the birdes were not created of nothyng, but at the com­maundement of God did issue forth out of the waters. And euery one of vs is saide to be dissolued into earth, from whence we were taken: when as yet we haue not bodies immediatly out of the earth, but of the bodies of our parents. Wherfore this sentence can not be confuted, and ouerthrowen by the holy scrip­tures. Although I know that this is a receiued opinion in the churche, y ^• the soules This is a receaued o­pinion that the soules are powred in increatiō are in creating infused, and in infusion created. Neither haue I for this cause [...]ehersed these thinges, for that I meane any innouation touching this sentēce, but only that we might vnderstand, what maner of propagation of originall sinne séemed most easiest vnto the ecclesiasticall writers. And in dede the scholemin when they [Page 111] reiect this sentence, leane only to Phis [...]call naturall reasons: For that forasmuch The opiniō of the tra­duction of the soule is reasoned a­gainst onely by physicall reasons. as the reasonable soule is, by nature spirituall & [...], it cannot be sundred, which thing yet is required in traduction: And for y ^t they hold y ^e it is the vnderstā ­ding part, and a thing of more worthines, then that it can be drawen out of the fa­cultie and power of [...]atter, they contend that it can not haue his being by gene­ration, but by creation. Augustine assigneth an other way or meant in his booke 2. de nuptijs & concupiscentia, and in many other places, where he disputeth a­gainst the Pelagians, of this kinde of sinne, and that is this: that this vice or sinne is supposed to passe into the children through the pleasure which the parents take in their mutuall fellowship. But this reason of propagation is grounded vppon a foundation suspected, and in my iudgement vntrue. For that pleasure which is ta­ken of procreation, is not of his owne nature euill, vnles prauitie of the affect be adioyned therunto. For if that action should of necessitie haue sinne ioined with it, the holy ghost would not haue exhorted any man vnto it: which yet he doth, when he perswadeth vs to matrimony, and when by Paul he admonisheth maried folks to render mutuall beneuolence one to another. Howbeit, amitte it were so, let vs graunt, that therin by reason of humaine infirmitie is some fault. Therof shoulde The origi­nall lust which is traduced pertaineth not onely to carnal plea­sure. follow, that only this kind of lust is deriued into the children. But the infection of originall sinne consisteth not onely in these thinges which pertaine to carnal plea­sure, but also in other lustes as of riches, of honours, of vengeaunce, and finally in the whole corruption of our nature. The third way is, that God therfore createth the soule with such a sinne or defect, for that it shall be the soule of a man now damned, and set vnder the curse. Such a soule say they God createth, as is required to 3. such a man. Euen as we sée, that vnto a dogge is geuen such a soule as is mete for a dogge, and vnto the body of an asse, a soule mete for an asse. But this semeth to be a It cannot be thoughte that God created a soule with­finne, very harde opinion: Namely, that God should contaminate with sinne a soule not yet pertaining vnto Adā: especially, seing they cā not say, y ^t this kind of sin, is y ^e pu­nishment of an other sinne which went before. Wherfore this fonde deuise is of e­uery man reiected: lest we should seme to make God absolutely the author of sins. The fourth maner is by the consentes of many men receiued, & semeth very like­ly 4 to be true: namely, that the soule is not created with some, but straight way draweth vnto it sinne, so soone as euer it is adioyned vnto the body deriued from The soule is said to contracte or draw origi­nall sinne, so sone as e­uer it is ioyned to the corrupt body. By two principall thinges the soule is weakened. Adam. For seing the soule wanteth that grace and vertues, wherewith the soule of the first man was endued, and hath also gotten a body obnoxious vnto the curse, and hath Organes or instruments vnapt & very vnmete vnto spirituall workes, therefore whereas it ought to gouerne the body, it is by it oppressed, & kept vnder, and drawen vnto lustes agréeable vnto the body. For it is on [...]ch fi [...]e weakened, both by the vncleanes of the body, and also through his owne imber [...]litye: for that it wāteth strengths whereby to ouercome nature: of which two principall points, the corruption and prauity of whole nature dependeth. I haue now declared, so much as I thought should be sufficient for this present purpose, how the Apostle taketh this word sinne, by whome he sayth it hath sprede ouer all mankinde, and what the ecclesiasticall writers haue left in writing touching the maner how it passeth from one to an other. Now is this thing only to be added, that by the world is to be vnderstand all mankinde. For I like not to playe the Philosopher as doth By the world is vnderstand all man­kinde. Origene, by the world to vnderstand only those men, which liue according to the affections of the fleshe. For so should we séeme to exclude from the meaning of the Apostle, originall sin: which thing the very nature of the woords will not suffer.

And by sinne death: and so death hath gone ouer all men.] Here he decla­reth what sinne hath brought, which was the fourth part of our deuision. Sinne brought death: but what maner of death he meaneth, can not better be vnderstād then by the contrary therof: namely, by life. And this life is of two sortes: the one Life of two sortes. is, wherby we are moued to spirituall, deuine, and celestiall good things, and this taketh place, so long as we are ioyned together with God: for vnlesse we be led by the spirit of God, we can not frame our selues to those thinges which passe our [Page] nature. The other life is, wherby we are moued to follow those good things, which Sinne toke away [...]ther life. serue to preserue nature, & to defend the state of the body. And both these kindes of liues hath death which is inflicted for sin, takē away. For death is nothing els, but priuation of lyfe. For so soone as euer man sinned, he was turned away frō God: & so left destitute of his grace and fauor, y ^• he could not afterward aspire againe vnto eternall felicity. This corporall life also may be said to be taken away by sinne: for straight way so soone as sinne was committed, the force of death and his souldiors Our first parentes died euen straight­way so sone as they had sinned. did set vpon man: Such as are hunger, thirst, diseases, wasting away of moystures and heate, a daily quenching of the lyfe. For all those thinges lead men vnto death▪ And Chrisostome vpon Genesis at large entreatyng of this matter, sayth: That the first parentes so soone as euer they had sinned, streight way died. For the Lord streight way gaue sentence of death vpō thē. And euē as they which are cōdēned vnto death, al­though they are kept for a tyme on lyue in prison, yet are they counted for dead: so our first A simili­tude. parentes, although thorough the goodnes of God they liued longer, yet they were in verye dede straight way dead, after that God began accordyng to his sentence to punish them. Ambrose saith that they were sodenlye oppressed with death, for that they had after­ward no day, or houre, or moment, wherin they were not obnoxious vnto death. Neither We haue not one houre wherin we are not subiecte vnto death. is there any man in the worlde, which can assuredly promise himselfe that he shall liue one houre. Wherfore by these thinges it is manifest, that both kindes of death were brought in by sinne. Wherefore we must beware that we assent not vnto them, which vse to say, that death is vnto a man naturall, and as a certayne rest, where­by the motion of the life is interrupted. Such opinions are to be left vnto the Ethnikes. For all the godly affirme that in death is a féeling of the wrath of God, Death is not natural vnto a man. In death is a feeling of the wrath of God. and therefore of his owne nature it driueth into men a certaine paine and horror Which thing both Christ himselfe when he prayed in the garden, and many other holy men haue declared: And if there chaunce to be any vnto whom it is pleasaunt and delectable to dye, and to be rid of their life, that they haue from els where, and not from the nature of death. And Paul to the Corinthians sayth: That death is the sting of sinne. For death otherwise could be able to do nothing against vs, but that by sinne it destroyeth vs. Wherfore they which affirme that originall sinne is on­ly a certaine weakenes, which can not condemne a man, do neither vnderstande the nature of sinne, nor this sentence of the Apostle, which we are now in hande with. Farther if of sinne commeth death, all sinnes are of their owne nature to be All sinnes are of theyr own nature to be called deadly. called deadly. For in that God imputeth not some sinnes vnto vs, that commeth not of the lightnes of the sinnes, but of his mercy. For there can be no sinne so light which bringeth not destruction, vnles the mercy of God helpe. And yet doo we not say with the Stoikes, that all sinnes are alike. For we know that Paul describeth vnto vs certaine sinnes, which are so greuous, that they exclude men frō the king­dome Sinnes are not a like. of heauen.

For that all men haue sinned.] This mought haue seemed very sharpe and harde, that for the sinne only of the first man all men should dye. But Paul shew­eth, that this is iustly done, bicause all men haue sinned. About this particle, [...], which properly signifieth in quo, that is, in which, and is englished, For that, is no small controuersie how it ought to be takē. Some will haue it to be referred vnto sin. But y ^e Greke word [...] which wēt before it, semeth to be against that. For it is the Feminine gender. Howbeit, it may be, that Paul had a respect vnto y ^• other worde [...], which is the newter gēder, which word he afterward oftētimes vseth, although it be counted a fault in speache to referre the relatiue to things cō ­ming after. Others thinke that [...], ought to be referred vnto Adam. But against these men is the signification of this preposition [...], which when it is ioyned with a datiue case, as Erasmus sayth: is not amongst any good authors, founde to signifie all one with [...], that is, in. Wherfore it semeth that the Latine interpreter was deceiued, which turned this sence thus. In whome all men haue sinned. Howbeit the A simili­tude. Gréeke scholies vnder the person of Phocius vary not from the Latine interpreta­tion. For they expounde thys sentence [...], by [...], that is, in whiche [Page 113] Adam, by, by which Adam. But touching this matter. I wil not much cōtend. For I thinke that [...] is a particle causall, so that the sence is, Therefore hathe death gone ouer all men, because all men haue sinned. For Chrisostome sayth: That when Adam fell, all other men also, which did not eate of the fruite were touched. And he thinketh A similitude that Paul, as a wise Phisition, hauing the disease set before him, abideth not in those thinges which be circumstances about it, or do follow it, but cunneth to y ^e principall ground and first cause therof. Therefore do all men die, bicause all men haue sinned. Neither ought we to thinke, that here is ment, that all men do sinne, by some certaine action: for, that can haue no place in children. But it is all one as if he had said. Now they are bondslaues vnto sinne, and are counted guilty therof. And when we read these thinges, we ought alwayes with the eye of our minde to consider wherunto they tend: namely, that we should receiue consolation, and be made assured of our saluation, knowing that the death of Christ hath preuayled a­gainst all these thinges. By those things also which are written vnto the Hebrues may be declared, how we haue sinned in the fall of Adam. For there we read that Leui paid tenthes in the loynes of Abraham. After the selfe same maner also may here be vnderstand, that we were polluted in the loynes, and in the masse of Adā. The Scholies which are ascribed vnto Ierome interpretate, that sinne is commit­ted by the imitation of Adam, which is commonly called actuall sinne. And they say moreouer, that this sinne of Adam went not ouer Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, which liued a holy life. But bicause they sée that this is against them, y ^• Paul saith: That all haue sinned, this vniuersalitie say they is to be vnderstand with an excep­tion. Which thing they also affirme of other such kinde of sentences: as Euery man is a lier. Also, There is none which doth good, no not one: when as yet there were in the world many true and holy men, when those thinges were written. But whosoe­uer was the writer of that boke, his authority ought not to cause vs to departe frō y ^• truth. For, that which Paul spake vniuersally, that all haue sinned, hereby is proued, Paul with our excep­tion affir­meth that all haue sinned. Here is not spoken of sinne, spred abrode by imitation. for that all men without exception dye. For experience teacheth that to be vniuersally most true. Wherfore here is to be set no exceptiō. Neither ought those such like kinde of speaches which they bring to moue vs: for that those sentences also are true, if we speake of men not regenerate: they are true also euen in the regenerate, if we will speake according to their corrupt and vitiate nature. Farther that here is not ment only imitation, it is manifest by the Antithesis: for Christe hath not only set forth vnto vs his righteousnes to imitate, but also by the power of the holy ghost spredeth it abrode, & poureth it into the hartes of the beleuers. Origene semeth to expound this place very warely. For he at y ^• beginning setteth forth certain things, which euen Erasmus confesseth to signifie Originall sinne. For he affirmeth, that in Adam we were all corrupted, as it were in a common ground: and that we were all in his loynes: as in the Epistle vnto the Hebrues, Leui is sayd to haue bene in the loynes of Abraham. Then addeth he certayne thinges, which pertayne vnto the sinnes of perticular men, which are called personall, and exhorteth vs to cary about with vs the image of the celestiall man. These thinges are so ta­ken of Erasmus, as though they were an interpretacion of that which went be­fore: when as in very deede they wholy confirme our sentence: wherein we say, Paul here taketh the name of sin in most am­ple sort. Difinition of actuall sinne. An vniuer­sall difiniti­on of sinne. that Paule in this place taketh sinne most amply, so that it comprehendeth both the roote, and all the fruites thereof. But I meruayle how these men go aboute to plucke away originall vice from the nature of sinne. For sinne according to the common definition, they say is whatsoeuer is spoken, done or thought a­gaynst the lawe of God, and this can haue no place in children. But they con­sider not that in this definition is not all sinne vniuersally contayned. And ther­fore we before signified, that sinne is otherwise to be defined: so that that is sayd to be sinne, which any maner of way is agaynst the law and will of God. These men go farther and say, if this were the definition of originall sinne, namely, the withdrawing of grace, or pronesse to sinne, these thinges ought rather to be counted paynes of sinnes, then simles. But they should haue remembred, that [Page] God doth not alwayes punishe sinnes by outward scourges and aduersities, God some­times puni­sheth sins by sinnes. but sometymes also by other sinnes. Wherefore although the corruption of na­ture, and that lust and pronesse to sinne grafted in vs all, may after a sort be cal­led paynes of sinnes, yet do we affirme, that they are also in very dede sinnes. But they say that these thinges remayne in vs after baptisme, and therefore can not be sinnes: vnles we will say, that sinnes are not remitted through bap­tisme and fayth in Christ. But to this we answered before: that the guiltynes The guilti­nes is for­geuen through fayth, but the corrupt substance abideth. Agaynst Erasmus. indede is forgeuen vnto the beleuers, howbeit the corrupt substance remaineth: which, if Christ were not a helper vnto vs, should of his owne nature condemne vs. For seing it turneth vs away from the rule of the law of God, it ought to be taken to be in very dede sinne. Nether is it true which Erasmus sayth, that the discourse of Paul will not suffer these thinges to be expounded of originall sinne: for the thing it selfe teacheth otherwise. For the entent of the Apostle is to shew, from what euils the death of Christ hath deliuered vs. But that can he not do, vnles he take sinne so largely, that it also comprehend originall sinne. But whereas Paul addeth, that euen vnto the law sinne was in the world, it maketh no­thing agaynst this sentence. For we say with Erasmus, that sinne is in this place taken in the selfe same sense, that it was in the sentences going before, by rea­son of this coniunction causall, For. Howbeit it is playne, that those thinges which are spoken pertayne as well to originall sinne, as to actuall sinnes. For Nothing is counted to be sinne but in conside­ration of the lawe. nether of both these kindes, if the law were away, is ether imputed or acknow­ledged: although otherwise they both are sinnes in very dede, and also wrappe vs in death: wherfore let vs not suffer this place to be wrested out of our hands, as well for that it is a good sure defence for vs, as also for that it very well a­gréeth with Pauls purpose, and notably setteth forth the benefite of Christ.

For euen vnto the law was sinne in the world. But sinne is not imputed when there is no lawe.] Now declareth he that which was set forth in the third place: Wherdof commeth knowledge of sinne. namely, wherehence commeth the knowledge of sinne. And this knowledge he sayth is had by the lawe: and that sinne was both before the lawe and after the law: but it gréeued not all men after one and the selfe same maner: for before the lawe was geuen, sinne was not knowen, but after it was geuen, it began to be knowen. By these wordes is most manifestly gathered, that the lawe had not this force to take away sinne out of the world, but was for this cause ge­uen, to shew sinne. The Apostle semeth to speake these thinges by preuention: for a little before he had sayd, for that all men haue sinned. which mought haue bene iudged vntrue, especially seing the same Paul sayd, Where no lawe is, there is no transgression. For sinne is, whatsoeuer disagréeth from the rule of the law. Wherefore he answereth, that sinne was indéede before the lawe: but it was not then imputed. And by the lawe, he vnderstandeth the lawe of Moses. For They which liued before Mo­ses time were not vtterly with­out a law. The institution of man was a cer­taine law. The law geuen of God by Moses re­proueth all kindes of sinnes. nether were they which liued before Moses tyme vtterly without a lawe: for they had the light of nature, and reasons in their conscience accusing and de­fending one an other, as we haue before red in the second chapter. Also the very institution of man, whereby he was bound to resemble the image of God, was a certayne lawe. For when he departed from that Image, vndoubtedly he sin­ned, and this lawe extended so farre, that it also included the very infantes. But when by reason that our corruption grew of more force, these things were obfuscated, God of his wonderfull great mercy, gaue a lawe whereby mought be reproued all kinds of sinnes. Wherefore we ought with all dilligence to looke vpon it, vnles we will be ignorant of our selues. Which euen the Philosophers abhorred as a thing most euill. For otherwise we are of our owne nature so framed, that when our sinnes are layd before vs, we laboure not so much to a­mende them, as to excuse, to extenuate, and to lenefie them: and because we would sinne the more fréely, we set before vs the examples of other men. For we commonly regard not, what we ought to do, but what other men do. But if we would looke vpon the lawe, straight way would come before our eyes our [Page 114] condemnation. For in it is written, Cursed be euery one which abideth not in all the We must most dili­gētly looke vpon the lawe. thinges that are writtēin the booke of the lawe. And therefore God by a singular be­nefite gaue vnto the people prophetes, which should not onely inculcate and beat into their heades the lawe, but also expounde the same by most vehement and feruent preachinges. Wherefore it is much to be lamented now a dayes, that sermones are ether so rare, or els that those fewe that are, are so negligently hard. Wherefore it is not to be meruayled at, that euery where is founde so great blindnes and that pernicious errors do so farre range abroade.

VVhere no lawe is, sinne is not imputed.] The lattine booke hath, non im­putabatur, that is, was not imputed. Peraduenture they reade, [...], of the Men knew not sinnes so far was it of that they coulde beware of them. God in that blindnes imputed sinnes and that iustly. And yet were they not before the law vtterly igno­rant of time verbe, [...]. This imputacion or reputacion is to be referred vnto men, which were so miserable and blinde, that of themselues they could not so much as know sinnes, so farre were they of that they could beware of sins, so vtterly obscure was at that time the light of nature: but God imputed those sinnes vn­to them, & that not vnworthely: for that blindnes happened through their owne default. And that God imputed those sinnes vnto thē, he himselfe many wayes declared. For he both by the floud destroyed the whole world, and complayned vnto Noe, that all flesh had corrupted theyr way, and that the hart of man was prone vnto sinne euen from hys childehode. He reproued Cayn of murther: and tooke vengeance vpon the Sodomites. And Cayn himselfe answered, that his sinne was greater then that it could be forgeuen. By which wordes we se that Cayn was not vtterly ignorant of sinne, yea nether were the Egiptiās vndoubtedly ignorant of sinne. For they cast Ioseph into prison for that he was suspcted of adultery and so serued they the baker and the butler, for that they had sinned. Nether is it credible, that godly men as Abraham, Iob, and Iacob vnderstood not sinne, especially seing we rede, that Iacob desired, that he might be put to death, with whome soeuer the theft which Laban sought shoulde be found. But thys knoweldge which the godly had, was not in them all. It was geuen only vnto them by reason of theyr singular piety. For the common sort of people counted nothing for sinne, but only grosse sinnes, and such sinnes as were most eui­denly hurtefull vnto the societie of men, neyther may we easely ascribe vnto Ambrose who vpon this place sayth: that men after a sort knewe sinnes but The Eth­nikes were not ignorāt that God would a­ming sinns yet they did not therefore thinke that God would auenge them: for they supposed that God would not take vengeaunce of sinnes. For Pharao, & Abimelech being kinges re­proued Abraham, for that he sayd, that Sara was his sister, & so by that meanes had put them in greate danger, that God should haue taken vengeance vpon thē for cōmitting adultery with an other mans wife. There mought also be brought testimonies of the Ethnikes, which fayned many thinges touching the gre­uous paynes of them that are in hell. But as touching this sentence of Paul we must know, that forasmuch as before the law was geuen by Moses there flori­shed Before the law of Mo­ses there were some laws. Others lawes for­bad all kin­des of sins. many cities and Publike welths, it followeth of necessity, that there were some publique lawes receaued amongst thē: for otherwise men could not haue liued together, and haue mainteined fellowship & peace one with an other. How­beit such lawes were neuer of that nature, that they forbad vnto men al kindes of sinne: which thing yet the Law geuen by Moses hath done: For amongst some nations, theftes, and amongst other nations, adulteries, were counted for no sinnes, nether were there by any lawes punished. Amongst the Grekes were permitted many vile & filthy thinges: Nether did the Romanes lawes (which yet were much more seuere and purer) punishe all maner of sinnes. But that Law which Moses gaue, was perfect and absolute, especially if we doo consider it as Christ hath expounded it. Wherefore the meaning of the Apostle in these words is that sinnes, although they were in very dede sins, yet were they not knowen amongst men, but by the prescript of the Law. By those thinges also we may sée that there is something, which is of his owne nature sinne, which yet is not im­puted of God, as we sayd commeth to passe in the beleuers, as touching the cor­ruption of nature and pronesse vnto sinnes. These thinges are of them selues [Page] sinnes, although for Christes sake they are not imputed: as the Apostle in this The impu­tation of sinnes of two sortes: ether as touching God or as touching. men. The tyme of the lawe is not excluded from sinne. place sayth, that before the Law there were many sinnes, which yet were not so imputed or counted of men. Although herein is some difference: for there the imputation is by the mercy of God remoued way, but here it is remoued away thorough the ignorance of man. Farther although it be said, Euen vnto the law, yet is not thereby the time of the law acquitted free from sinne. For the Law is not of that strength to abolish sinnes. And this was of no smal force to abate the hautines and pride of the Iewes. For they counted themselues more holye all thē other nations, for that they had receaued a law from God. The like kinde of speach is vsed of the Ethnikes, when they write that euen vnto the tenth yere did the Greacians fight agaynst Troy: for in so saying they doubtles excluded not the tenth yeare. So when Paul sayth, Sinne was in the world Euen vnto the law, he excludeth not that time which was vnder the law. And this wōderfully Only grace ouercom­meth sinne. setteth forth the grace of Christ, which alone was able to vāquishe and to driue away sinne: when as sinne was of so greate force to destroye, and had so farre and so long ranged abrode, that it could not be restrayned, no not by the Law. Paul when he sayth,

That death raigned.] vseth the figure Prosopopaeia: nether ought we therfore to thinke y ^• by this word Kingdome, is ment any healthfull gouermēt: Howbeit Why the power of of death is called a kingdome. therefore he calleth y ^e power of death a kingdome, to show that the power there­of was exceding great, wherunto all thinges gaue place, & that it was of a won­derfull mighty force, which had brought all tlhinges vnder his subiectiō. The selfe same forme of speaking he vseth agayne in this epistle, saying: Let not sinne raigne in your mortall body: as if he should haue sayd, Although ye cannot prohibit sinne to be in you, yet permite not vnto it the kingdome, and chiefe dominion, it all your endeuors and counselles should geue place and be obedient vnto that. And he therefore added, that death raygned from Adam euen to Moses, to declare, that there was sinne in the world. For death and sinne follow one the o­ther Agaynst them that deny origi­nall sinne in children. inseperably: and Sinne and death inferre and bring in one the other. Here­by are confuted those which contend, that infantes are without sinne: and say, that for that cause they dye, for that by reason of the sinne of Adam they are vnder the condition of mortality, being otherwise themselues innocent, and cleane from sinne. For if this were true, the Apostle should then in this place conclude nothing. For it mought easely be answered, that althoughe men died before the law, yet sinne at that time had not his being. Wherfore let vs say with Paul, Sinne and death are so ioyned to­gether that they cannot be parted a sonder. Ambrose suspected the Greke. bookes. that these two things are so ioyned together, that they cā not be parted asonder.

Ouer them also, that sinned not after the like maner of the transgression of A­dam.] These wordes were in some copies set forth affirmatiuely, by taking a­way this word, not. And of this reading doth Origen make mencion: and so farre is Ambrose of from dissalowing it, that he thinkethn one but it to be natiue. And he hath a large discourse of the variety of the Greke bookes: and semeth for that cause to haue them in suspicion, as corrupted in many places, after that the contencions of the heretikes grew strōg. But in the expositiō of that reading which he followeth, he semeth to speake but slenderly to the matter: for he will haue death to haue rayned ouer those onely, which in sinning were like vnto Adam: and this he saith happened in idolatry. For he affirmeth, that the sinne wherein Adam fell, was in a maner of this sorte, that he beleued himselfe to be God, and preferred Sathā before God, more esteming his coūsell, then the cōmaūdemēt of God. But as for others, which keping still their faith in the only Creator, did notwithstāding sometimes fall, he thinketh not, that they fell after y ^• like maner that Adam fell: and therefore he writeth, that they died the death of the bodye, & Ambrose held that some had in hell a free custody, but not eternall death. were kept in hell in a free custody euē to y ^e cōming of Christ: but in those which had imitated the sinne of Adam, ternal death wholy raigned. These things, as euery mā may easely se, are both farre fetched, & also do much weakē y ^e argumēt of y ^e Apostle. wherefore if this text should be red affirmatiuely, peraduēture we [Page 115] mought picke therout this sentēce, to vnderstād, y ^• death raigned ouer al mē, which sinned after the like māner of the transgressiō of Adam: for that he hauing sinned, it was all one, as if all men had bene present, and sinned together with him. But let vs leaue this readinge and follow the common readinge: and especially seinge Chrisostome, Theophilactus, and the Greeke Scholies pronounce these woordes ne­gatiuely: And so this is the sence, that those menne which were before the lawe, al­though they sinned not after that manner, that Adam fell, who besides the lawe of nature, had also a certain commaundement prescribed him, yet they also were ob­noxious vnto death. But Augustine applieth these wordes vnto infantes, which die and haue sinne: although they sinne not after the selfe same manner, that Adam sinned. And so, Not to sinne after the like manner of the transgression of Adam, is no­thing els, but not to haue sinne actuall and personall, as they call it. But I woulde thinke that in these woordes may be comprehended both infantes and others that are of age, both those before the law, and those after the law, and those vnder grace, Rude and blockish [...] and [...] sinne not after the same man­ner that A­dam did. as many as are so rude and blockishe, that they are vtterlye ignorante of the com­maundementes of God: of whiche kinde of men it is not incredible, but that there maye some be founde in the worlde. And in this case vndoubtedlye all men dye, al­though they know not the commaundement prescribed them of God, as Adam did.

Which was the figure of that which was to come.] By y ^• which was to come, we may vnderstand all that which afterward happened in all men, which procée­ded from Adam: which were aswel as he, obnoxious vnto the curse and vnto death. So the first father was a figure and forme of all his posteritye. Howbeit we maye more simply and more aptly referre this vnto Christ. For in that comparison Paul Adam a fi­gure of Christ. wonderfully much delighted. Chrisostome also leaneth thys way, and sayth, that the Apostle, with great conninge, and manifold and sondry wayes handleth these woordes, Of one, and one: to make vs to vnderstande, that those thinges are to be compared to­gether, which haue come vnto vs by one Adam, and by one Christ. And this is very worthy An analogy betwene A­dam and Christ. An excellēt co [...]parison of Chriso­stome. A strong argumente a­gainst the Iewes. of nothing in Chrisostome that he sayth, Euen as Adam was the cause of death vnto al men, although they did not eate of the tree, so Christ was made vnto his a conciliator of righteousnes, although they themselues had wrought no righteousnes. In which place he moste manifestly declareth, that we are not iustified by our woorkes. He sayth moreouer, That by this discourse of the Apostle we are throughlye fensed againste the Iewes, if they chaunce to deride vs, for that we beleue, that by one Christe was redeemed the whole world. For we wyll obiect agayne vnto them, that they also confesse, that by one Adam was all thinges corrupted: which semeth to be a great deale more absurde, if we looke vpon humane reason, then to say, that by one Christ all men haue bene holpen. In this place the Apostle beginneth to entreate of that, whiche was the fourth parte, of this diuision: namely, by whome sinne was excluded. And this he declareth was brought to passe by Christ, whome he maketh like vnto Adam. This similitude is The simili­tude be­twene Adā and Christe is to be ta­ken gene­rally. to be taken generally that euen as all men depend of Adam, so all also in theyr or­der depende of Christe: and as the one merited for all his, so also did the other. But perticulerly and speciallye there is greate difference. For Adam broughte in sinne, death, and damnation: but Christe broughte in righteousnes, life, and grace. There is difference also in y ^• propagation. For Adam by the generation of the flesh powreth his euels into men: but Christ by fayth. And therefore Paul when he had sayd, that Adam was a tipe of that whiche was to come, as it were by way of cor­rection added,

But yet the gifte is not so, as is the sinne.] Wherefore betweene Adam Betwene Christ and Adam is not a true similitude but an ana­logy or pro­portion. and Christe is to be put rather a certaine analogye and proportion: then a true si­militude. But to make those thinges which follow more playne we will deuide in to thrée partes, al this whole comparison, which consisteth of similitudes, of contra­ries, and of thinges compared together. Firste the Apostle plainelye teacheth, that the sinne of Adam is not so as is the gifte: for the gifte many wayes excelleth and passeth the sinne. Secondly he expresseth wherin consisteth this victory: namely, in this, that whereas Adam had by one sinne corrupted all mankinde, Christe hath [Page] not onely abolished that one sinne, but also a greate many other sinnes, whiche we haue since committed. Last of all he declareth, what that aboundāce of good things is, which Christ hath brought vnto his elect. As touching the firste, this we muste know, that Christ is so compared with Adam, that he is alwayes made the superi­our. Neither is this to be passed ouer, that Paul expresseth sinne by two names, Christ is so compared with Adā, that he is alwayes made the superior. They which sinne do first [...]re and after­ward fall. [...], & [...]. By which names this we learne, that they which sinne, doo first erre, and afterward fall. For these two are thorowly knitte together. Where­fore the cōmon saying is, he that followeth a blind man must néedes fall. This al­so let vs obserue, that Paul in this comparison continually in a maner vseth these woordes [...], & [...], That is grace: [...], & [...]: that is, gift, to declare, that our saluation commeth not vnto vs of any of our owne dignity, or of works, but onely of the meere mercy of God. The wordes are thus:

For if thorow the offence of one, many be dead, muche more the grace of God, and the gifte by Grace, whiche is by one man Iesus Christ, hath abounded vnto many.

For if through the offence of one,] When he sayth that thorow the sinne of one man many haue died, he taketh not away or altereth that whiche he before wrote, namely, that death had gone ouer all. For this worde Many, oughte in thys place to be of asmuch force, as if he had sayd All, euen by the testimony of Origene also. Wherfore that abideth firme, which was before auouched, That all men haue sinned: & that all are therefore subiecte vnto death. By Grace he vnderstandeth the fauour of God, whereby sinnes are forgeuen. This woord Gift peraduenture What grace is with the scholemen. signifieth the holy Ghost, and other good thinges, which men by the holy Ghost ob­teyne. But the schoole men say that Grace is a quality powred into our hartes by God, whereby we lead an holy & godly life: and by this grace saye they is a man iu­stified. But that kind of iustification shoulde pertaine vnto the law. For it shoulde consist of those thinges which are in vs. Wherefore the true iustification, whereof is now intreated, commeth from Christe, of whome thorough fayth, and the grace or fauour of God we take holde: not that we deny the other kinde of grace. For we put both kinds: namely both the instauration of the beleuers to liue vprightly, and also the imputation of righteousnes by Christ: whereunto whole and perfect iusti­fication cleaueth: that that might be true which we reade in Iohn, that we haue re­ceaued grace for grace: and by that grace, wherby Christ was of valew before the father, we are receaued into his grace. The nature of y ^• Antithesis required, y ^• euen as he had sayd, that thorow the offence of one mā, many haue died, so he should on the other side haue sayd, that through the righteousnes of one, the fauor of God hath abounded vpon many. But he would rather put Grace and gifte: for that these two thinges are the fountaines and rootes of righteousnes, and of euery good thinge, whiche we by righteousnes obteyne. And he therefore saith, that it a­bounded (whiche in the Greeke is [...]) to geue vs to vnderstand, that there We haue more grace then is suf­ficient to extinguishe sinne. was more grace bestowed vpon men, then should be sufficient to extinguish sinne. For, for that we haue obteyned forgeuenes of sinnes, wee are also borne againe, and we rise againe wyth Christe, and are sanctified, and adopted into the children of God, and are made the bretherne of Christe, and fellow heyres wyth hym, & are grafted into his members, & are ioyned w ^t hym as the body with the head: no otherwise, then if vnto a man hauing a sore wound, should be geuē such a plaister A similitude or medicine, as should not onely heale the wounde, but also make the whole body An other si­mi [...]itude. more stronger, and much fayrer then it was before. Chrisostome addeth an other similitude of a man far indebted, which hauing not wherwithal to pay, is cast into prison with his wife, children, & all his familie: vnto whom commeth some mighty monarch or emperour, and dispatcheth not onely the money which he aught to other men, but also taketh him out of prison, leadeth him vnto his courte, exalteth him to dignitie, placeth him in a kingdom, and heapeth him vp with all maner of riches: so hath Christ dealt with vs miserable mortall men. Farther he compa­reth [Page 116] these two thinges together, to merite vnto others condemnation, and to me­rite vnto others saluation. And he saith: that it semeth far more strange from rea­son, It is mere strange s [...]ō reason to merite vnto an other cō ­demnation▪ then salua­tion. to merite vnto an other condemnation, then to merite saluation. Wherefore, the conning handling of Paul is much to be commended, which declareth that that is done, which semed to be more absurde, that we mighte the easelier vnderstande that Christ hath merited vnto vs remission of sinnes. For we sée this oftentymes to happen, that a man is deliuered out of misery, at the request or for fauor of some excellent and noble man.

Neither is the gift so, as is that which entred by one that sinned. For the iudgement came of one offence vnto condemnatiō: but the gift is of many offences to iustification.

Neither is the gift so, &c.] Here teacheth he that whiche was the seconde parte of our deuision: namely, that herein consisteth that excellēcy of Christ, wherby he farre passed Adam, for that he hath not onely abolished one sinne which was brought in by Adam, but also hath taken away infinite other sinnes. [...], that is iudgement, signifieth in this place giltines. But that which is added, [...], that is of one, it is doubtfull whither it ought to be referred vnto the sinne, or vnto man. But bicause to which of either it be referred, it commeth all to one effect, it skilleth not much whether way it be expounded. Paul vnto iudgement semeth to oppose y ^• gift: and vnto condemnation, iustification. Neither let vs meruail, that he so long tarieth in this place, and doth with so great diligence handle, and as it were polish Why Paul tarieth so long in this place. one and the selfe same thing. For it is an excellent foundatiō of our saluation. And therfore to the end it should not slippe from vs, it was requisite, that it shoulde be plainly and exactly set forth. Howbeit, here ariseth vnto vs a doubt not to be neg­lected. For seing that the sinne of Adam hath so corrupted man, y ^• our whole kind of his owne nature can now do nothyng els but sinne, and whatsoeuer sinnes haue afterward followed, are the fruites of that transgression: the sinne of Adam may seme to haue bene of no lesse force to destroy, then the grace of Christe to restore. To dissolue this doubt, we confesse that of the offence of the first parent, and of ori­ginall sinne dispersed abrode into euery one of vs, do spring other sinnes. Howbeit, All other sinnes are not of necessitie knit with origi­nall sinne. this is to be noted, that all wicked actes are not so of necessitie knit with originall sinne, that they streightway procede therof. For otherwise we should all commit so many and the selfe same sinnes. And that this is not true, both the thing it selfe, & also experience teacheth. Wherfore Paul considered, that thorough our counsels & deliberations, are after a sort infinite sinnes added vnto that first fault, but y ^• grace of God through Iesus Christ hath not onely remoued away that one sinne, which is in vs by nature, but also hath from (in a maner) infinite other sinnes brought vs vnto righteousnes, & hath after a sorte for one ill turne, rendred vnto vs thrée good. For he hath both abolished that one sinne which is in vs by nature, and hath remoued The sinne of Adam recheth to more then the righte­ousnes of Christ. This cōpa­rison is not as touching the nūber, but as tou­ching the effectes. away infinite other sinnes, which we haue committed since, and hath restored vs to a righteous life. Howbeit there is again obiected, that the sinne of Adam is deriued into more, then the righteousnes of Christ. For we are all infected in Adam, but we are not all deliuered in Christ. For many shall be condemned vnto euerla­sting destruction. Here is to be aunswered, that Paul referred not his power to the number of them which shal either be damned, or be saued: but only vnto the effects which haue come both from Adam and from Christ. Vnles we will say, that there are more saued by the grace of Christ, then haue perished by originall sinne drawn from Adam. For only certaine infants perish by meanes of it, but they which are of ful age, and condēned, perish not by meanes of it only, but also by reason of actu­all sinnes, which they haue moreouer committed, neither haue they much wherof The grace of Christ of his own nature is suffecient for all men. to complaine of Adam: but they which are saued, are saued only by the benefit and grace of Christ. Wherfore Christ saueth more, then Adam destroyeth. Farther, though all men are not brought to saluation, yet the merite and grace of Christe, was of it selfe sufficient for all men. But why all men are not predestinate vnto saluation, can not be rendred a reason perticularly. But we ought to iudge of that [Page] power which Christ hath to saue, not by the hidden counsell of God, which we can not vnderstand, but by the forme of the promise whiche is had in the Scriptures. And that promise is generall, neither is it by y ^• kinde of speache drawen vnto one man more then vnto an other. Moreouer the Apostle for this cause with so many The bene­fit of Christ is of more might to saue thē the sinne of Adā to destroy. wordes teacheth, that the benefite of Christ was of more might to saue, then the sinne of Adam was to destroy, for that this doctrine is exceding necessary. And therfore let vs beware, that we neuer suffer it to slip away from vs: for this is conti­nually to be opposed vnto the greuousnes of our sinnes, and vnto the infirmitie, wherby, as experience teacheth vs, we continually fall. For there is none, whiche if he cast his eyes vpon his sinnes, and vpon the infirmitie wherewith he is infec­ted, is not straight way discouraged and vtterly in dispaire, vnles he looke vppon the might and victory of Christ: for therein only he comforteth himselfe, and con­ceiueth an assured hope of his saluation. And by two things chiefly is made mani­fest the power and efficacy of Christ against sinne: First, for that he bringeth to passe, that the haynous wicked actes which we haue committed are not imputed: Secondly, for that through the holy ghost he geueth vnto vs strengths, wherby we are restored, and the rages of our naturall lust are broken. Christ fought againste sinne, wherfore we must nedes make him either superior vnto sinne, or equall, or els lesse. To say that he was lesse, is both false and impious: for then it should fol­low that he was ouercome of sinne. If we make him equall, then will it follow, Proues that Christ is of more might then sinne. Two king­domes to be considered. that sinne is not yet vanquished: for then should they haue left, leuing the victory vncertaine. But seyng it is said, that sinne is ouercome, then followeth that which Paul saith: namely, that Christ was mightier then it. Two kingdomes are to be set before our eyes, y ^• kingdom of Christ, & the kingdom of Sathan. That Christes kingdome got the victory, Christ himself declareth in the Gospel, where he sayth: That the strōg armed mā so long time liued quietly and peaceably, til such time as a stronger then he came vpō him. For then was he ouercome, and the other which was mightier thē he, caried away his spoiles & armor. Wherfore we must warely take hede lest being to much intentiue to those sins which we haue cōmitted, we desperatly say w ^t C [...]in. Our sinne is greater thē that it can be forgeuen. For this were contumelious blasphemy against Christ to say, that there is some sinne to be found, which can The despe­ration of Cayn is cō tumelious blasphemy against Christ. Here is not spoken of sin against the ho­ly ghost. The sinne which re­maineth in the regene­rate decla­reth the might of Christ. not be ouercome of him But here is no mete place to declare, why sinne against the holy ghost is not forgeuē, nether also maketh it any thing to the purpose: for we speake of them which are conuerted vnto Christ, which can haue no place in those which sinne against the holy ghost. Nether doth this a litle helpe to the ac­knowledging of the victory of Christ, that sinne still after a sort abideth in the regenerate. For although there be sinne in them, yet Christ by his power ouer whelmeth it, so that it can not hurt. For sinne is now taken prisoner and brokē: as somtimes enemies are takē on liue of emperors or Captaines, & reserued on liue against a triūph y ^• one & the selfe same day may be both vnto y ^• Emperour for a triūph & vnto the enemies cōquered, vtter destructiō. Christ shall come to iudge, & shal in y ^• sight of y ^• whole world triumph. And as it is writtē vnto y ^• Cor. The last enemy death shall be destroyed, and together with him, sinne his continuall companion. But that in the meane time we haue sinne in vs it is nothing preiu­diciall vnto our saluation. And it is the Gosple to beleue, that sinne is remitted and forgeuen vs, although it still abide in vs. Howbeit nether the wisedome of The philo­sophers vn­derstand not that there is sin in vs, and yet we are iust. the fleshe nor philosophy can attayne to the knowledge of this. For philosophy pronounceth none to be iust, strong, wise, and temperate, but he which hath got­ten these vertues by often actions, and vpright workes. But we contrariwise in the kingdome of Christ affirme, that a sinfull man, though he be neuer so wicked, so sone an he is conuerted vnto Christ, and with a true faith taketh hold of him, is streaight way before God iust. By [...], the Apostle in this place vnderstandeth, iustification, of this verbe [...], which signifieth, to be pro­nounced iust, & to be acquited. Although in this selfe same epistle in the 1. chap­ter we rede, which when they knew the righteousnes of God, how that they which committe such thinges are worthy of death yet doo not only the same, but also consent vnto [Page 117] them that do them. That which is there turned in latine, Iusticiam, and in englishe Righteousnes, is in the Greke [...], and signifieth in that place a law pre­scribed of God. Nether is it to be meruayled at, that these significatious are so changed: for they are not vtterly differing one from the other. For some times they are compared together as the cause and the effect. For therefore amongst men is a man acquited of the iudge, for that he hath done thinges iust, and hath bene obediēt vnto the lawes. But thus can not we be before God. For we are not absolued from him, for that we haue fulfilled his commaundements. Only Christ hath fulfilled them. Wherfore not only he himselfe is iustified, but also his righteousnes, & performance of the law is adiudged vnto vs, forasmuch as we are counted amongst his members. Here he beginneth to expresse y ^• which was the third part of our diuision by what meanes Christ hath placed in his e­lect those good thinges, which he hath brought vnto vs: and these good thinges are in them most plentifull, and also most firme and stable. This he gathereth of the Antithesis: for euen as Adam brought in sinne and death, and so brought them in, that they haue raigned: so Christ hath geuē vnto his, life, grace, and righteousnes, not after any common sort, but most liberally and aboundantly.

For if thorough the offence of one, death raigned thorough one, much more shall they, which receaue the aboundance of grace, & of the gifte of righteousnes, raigne in life thorough one Iesus Christ.

For if thorough the offence &c.] This reasō is thus to be declared: If Adam could so poure in sin & death into men, that they raigned in them: much more is This am­plification is to be no­ted. the same to be graunted vnto Christ. And the amplification of the woordes is in this sort. It is a greater matter, & of more efficacy to say plēty & aboundance of grace, thē simply to say, grace. And this hath a greater emphasis, to say, y ^• gift of righteousnes, thē if he had sayd, righteousnes simply. For whē it is called y ^• gift of righteousnes, there is signified, that it cōmeth freely. Farther it is of more ef­ficacy to raigne in life, then after a sort to obteyne life. But what force this word of raigning hath one eche side, may thus be vnderstand. Let vs set before our eyes a man that is a strāger from Christ. In him doth sinne not only abide, Sinne to raigne, what it sig­nifieth. but also mightely raigne: that although he sometimes haue excellent endeuors, and now and then doth some morall workes in shew most goodly, yet he can by no meanes shake of that tirrany: but whatsoeuer he doth, it worketh vnto him vnto death and condemnation. This is, sinne and death to raigne in a mā. On the other side let vs set before vs a godly man and one grafted into Christ. This Righteous­nes to raigne what it sig­nifieth. Life a com­panion of righteous­nes. man hath life and righteousnes, and so hath them, that they raigne in him: wherfore although his nature be vncleane, and his affections corrupted, and he some times falleth, yet notwithstanding standeth he agaynst all these thinges, and is brought to saluation. Moreouer by this place we are tought, that life followeth righteousnes: as before we learned, that death followeth sinne. And thereof it cō meth, that the scriptures very oftentimes ioyne life with faith: for by faith we take hold of righteousnes. And this order of the scripture Paul confirmeth; whē he so often reherseth this sentence of Abacuck the Prophet. The iust man liueth by fayth. Christ also sayth, He that beleueth in the sonne of God, hath eternall life. And this is eternall life to acknowledge thee to be the true God, & Iesus Christ whom thou hast sent. The Apostle hath now in a maner in these wordes finished the comparison which he set forth betweene Adam and Christ. In which place this is not to be passed ouer, to put you in minde of a certaine reason, which the Greke Scholies vse, to proue that Christ was of more might to helpe men, then Adam was to destroy men. Bycause death, say they, taking his begininng at Adam, had as a fellow worker with it the sinne of vs all, to preuaile against vs all, for otherwise it could not haue preuayled, if men had kept themselues pure from all vncleanes. But the grace of Christ hath come vnto vs all, euen without our helpe of wor­king. And they say, that this thing is made playne by the grace of the Resurrec­tion: [Page] which shall extend his effect, not only vpon the faithfull, which may ind [...]d [...] seme to haue brought fayth, but also vpon the vnbeleuers: namely, vpon Iewes and Grecians, which had no fayth. But that is of greater force, which requireth no helpe at our handes, then that which nedeth vs to worke therewithall, to make it of efficacy. These thinges are set forth vnder the name of Oecomenius, but they are in any wise to be auoyded. For it is false, that y ^• sinne of Adā should The sinne of Adam hurteth e­uen with­out our working together with it. not hurte mākinde, vnles men had wrought together by reason of theyr sinnes. For an infant when he is borne, by what meanes can he helpe that original sinne which cleaueth vnto him? But if he dy in y ^• sinne he incurreth dānatiō, and peri­sheth euerlastingly. Farther whereas they say, that y ^• grace of Christ pertay­neth vnto mē, although they worke not together w ^t it, this may after a sort haue place in y ^• cōuersiō of a sinner. For a sinner calleth not vnto himselfe y ^• grace of god, but rather by his impiety resisteth it. But whē grace is once come, he is not moued of it agaynst his wil. For of an vnwilling persō, he is made willing. But the Greke Scholies wrest not this sentence this way, but apply it to the last re­surrectiō, wherein y ^• vngodly shall without any their merite or working together be raysed vp from the dead. But this if it be rightly waighed of vs, pertayneth vnto the most gréeuous punishment of them, and not to a benefite or grace. For seing Christ sayd truly of Iudas, It had ben good for him, that he had neuer ben borne, It should be good for the wicked that they neuer rise agayne. we also of them may say most truely, that it should be good for them, that they neuer rise agayne from the dead. Wherefore let vs leaue this reason, and fol­low that which Paul bringeth as a reason most firme, and most true.

Wherefore euen as by the offence of one man, euill came on all men to condemnation. So by the righteousnes of one, good was spred abroade on all men to the iustification of life. For as by one mans disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many also be made righteous.

Here he bringeth a conclusion of those thinges which he before spake. Ne­ther doth he only cōclude, and repete the thinges which he had before spokē, but also expressedly declareth, what that one sinne is, which was brought in by one man: and one the other side what that righteousnes is, by which Christ hath made vs iust. And hereunto tend all these thinges, to make vs to vnderstād that we are iustified, not by workes, but by faith, and by that meanes are we made more certaine and assured of our saluation. And in this sētence there is a want, which must be supplied. For thus he speaketh. Euē as by the offence of one man, on all men to condemnatiō, here is to be vnderstād, euill or hurt was spred abroade. And when he addeth, So by the righteousnes of one, on all men to the iustificati­on of life, here also is to be vnderstand, Good was spread abroade, or saluation. Here againe we haue these cōtraries [...] & [...], that is, offence, & righte­ousnes. Of which the one pertaineth vnto Adam, and the other vnto Christ. Ne­ther wāteth this an emphasis, that he sayth, Iustification of life. For it is as much as if he had sayde, The vitall or liuely iustification. For the Hebrues vse often­times to pronounce nownes adiectiues by the genitiue case of the substantiue. This thing also is to be noted in this sentence, that Paul expressedlye sayth, that sinne hathreddunded vpon all men vnto condemnation. Wherebye it is ma­nifest, that when he before sayd, That thorough the sinne of one man, many haue died, by this word many, he vnderstoode, All men: Which word also he did expressedly put in the beginninge of this comparison. Whiche I therefore speake, because Ambrose and Origene, seme to affirme, that death and sin haue not raigned ouer all those that haue come of Adam: for that many of them acknowledged God, and were deliuered from the tiranny of sinne. But this is to confound the be­nefite of Christ with the hurt of Adam. For in that some were deliuered from death, that could not haue happened vnto thē, but by the death of Christ which [Page 118] they beleued should come: which benefite although they obtayned, yet doth it not thereof follow, that they before they were deliuered by Christ, had not as touching their nature and themselues, perished in Adam. But these fathers séeme therefore to haue inclined this way, for that they weighed the matter ac­cording to the number of men. For when they saw, that all men are not saued by Christ, least he should séeme inferior vnto Adam, they denyed that in Adam all had perished. Therfore they held, that on ech side are some to be exempted, that both Christ may haue his number apart by himselfe, and also Adam his by himselfe. And it is possible, that this also moued them, that Paul hath before and also in this place sayd not, All, but many, But this maner of exposition is vtter­ly agaynst Paules sentence: for he, euen as he putteth death common vnto all men that are borne of Adam, so also maketh he sinne common vnto them. Ne­ther doth Paul to proue the might or power of Christ lene vnto the number of those men which shalbe saued, but to the weight of the effect. For he sayth, that it is a greater matter to blot out infinite sinnes, then it is to bring in one sinne. Oftentymes also he expressedly vseth that particle of vniuersality. And as tou­ching that which moued them, we answere with Augustine, that the meaning of the Apostle is, that all that are borne of Adam do perishe: and contrariwise that all that are regenerate by Christ are saued. And euē as no man is brought forth as touching the fleshe, but by Adam: so is no man borne agayne but by Christ. If after this maner these wordes of vniuersality be applied, the analogy How this analogy may be made plaine betwene Christ and Adam shalbe clere and playne.

Euen as by the disobedience of one man.] Here the Apostle expressedly de­clareth what that one sin was, which he said entred into the world by one man, and by meanes whereof death went ouer all men, and this, sayth he, was the The diso­bedience of Adam is communi­cated vnto all his po­sterity▪ The obedi­ence of Christ is communi­cated vnto the elect. A compari­son betwene the obedi­ence of A­dam & the obedience of Christ. disobedience of the first man, which he signifieth to haue bene communicated vnto all in, whē he sayth, that by it many are made sinners. And contrariwyse he teacheth, what that good thing was, which through one Iesus Christ recouered health vnto men. And this he sayth was the obedience of Christ. Of which wri­ting vnto the Phillippians, he sayth, that Christ humbled himselfe, and became obe­dient vnto the father to the death, euen to the death of the crosse. How obedient also he was vnto the eternall father, those thinges likewise declare, which he spake when he finished vp his prayers in the garden, being now at the very poynt to be taken of the Iewes, saying, Not my will be done, but thine. But Adam did far otherwise: for he would not geue credite vnto the words of God, nether cōtēted he himselfe with his prouidence, as his duty was: for he desired to know good and euill, as though he ment to prescribe those thinges vnto himselfe, and to follow those thinges which he knew to be ether good or euill. But he ought to haue done farre otherwise, to haue counted those thinges only for good or e­uill, which God by his word had prescribed vnto him. Of which thing Christ hath left vnto vs an example to looke vpon, when as he wholy submitted hym­selfe vnto the will and prouidence of God. For when he should suffer death, and that a most greeuous and most cruell and most shamefull death, he had fixed before his hys eyes only the worde of God, which pronounced, that that death should be gratefull and acceptable vnto God, and also healthfull vnto man­kynde. Obedience is (as we now speake of) a faculty or power whereby god­ly What obe­dience is. men doo wyth a wylling mynde execute the commaundements of God, al­though as touching the cōsideratiō of this world they iudge, that the same will not be profitable vnto thē, nether do they throughly vnderstād the reason of thē. But contrariwise disobedience is a vice, which causeth vs not to execute the com­maundementes of God, either because they are troublesome, or els because we can not attaine vnto the reason of them. And that which is in this place said: What diso­bedience is.

That by the obediēce of one man, many are made iust] very wel agréeth with y ^• which is had vnto the Ephe. That we are acceptable vnto God in the beloued. And y ^• beloued is Christ. After the selfe same maner Esay saith in his 53. chapiter, when [Page] he prophecieth of Christ: And if he geue his soule for sinne, he shall see his seede a farre of, that is, his posteritie for a long tyme. Which wordes teach euen the self same thing that the Apostle here saith, that through the obedience of Christ, whereby he hath The faith­full are cal­led the po­steritie of Christ. for our sakes suffred death, is spred abrode the multitude of the faithful, which are called Christes séede and posteritie long to continue. And the Prophete addeth, My righteous seruaunt shall instifie many, for he shall beare their iniquitie. Wherfore this obedience of Christ hath merited vnto him, to be made the captayne of the e­lect of God vnto eternall life. As on the contrary side, Adam by reason of his disobe­dience leadeth to destruction all those that are borne of him according to the flesh. Here let vs note, that forasmuch as the Apostle saith: that by y ^e disobedience of one Originall sinne pro­per vnto euery man. man, many are made sinners, by these wordes is gathered an argument agaynste those, which thinke that originall sinne is not proper vnto euery man: but that it was but one onely sinne, and that the same was in Adam, wherby we are obnoxi­ous and bound vnto death and damnation. For seyng it is said, that they are made sinners, it must nedes be, that they themselues either haue sinne, or els at the lest wayes had sinne. For no man is called a sinner for an other mans fault. Although Chrisostome vpon this place interpretateth these wordes more hardly, thē can wel and aptly be vnderstanded. For thus he writeth: But that by his disobedience an o­ther man should be made a sinner, what consequence can it haue? For there canne be no paynes due vnto him, as one which is not guiltye, vnles he become a sinner of himselfe. What meaneth it then, that he sayth in this place, many are made sinners? I thinke it sig­nifieth, that they are obnoxious to punishment, and condemned to death. In this sentēce this I lyke not, that he interpreteth this worde sinners, for obnoxious to punish­ment and condemned to death; as though he should by the way signifie, that they haue in themselues nothing that is vile or vncleane, which can either offend God, or be called sinne. And a litle afterward, We will not thinke it muche (saith he) to de­clare, that of this death and condemnation, we haue not onely not receiued any losse, if we liue soberly and chastly, but also we haue therby gotten much gayne. That also is harde, to say that we haue gotten no hurt of originall death and condemnation. For lust It is an ex­cellent gift to liue chastly and holi­ly in this mortall body. and the great corruption of nature, hath thorow the transgression of Adam brokē into all mankinde. I graunt in dede, that which he addeth: namely, that it is an excellent gift, in this mortall body, to liue holily and chastly: and farther also, that by the discommodities of our mortalitie, we haue occasions of martirdome, and of o­ther vertues. But this I consider, that these thinges are the benefites of the good­nes of God. Of which benefites, although Adam thorow his fall sometymes gaue occasion, yet it doth not therof follow, that he hath not hurt vs, or that we being by him made sinners, haue not felt great losse. Now forasmuch as those things which follow, pertayne vnto the law, before we come vnto them, it shall not be amisse frō our purpose, to declare what is to be thought touching originall sinne.

First, we will consider whether there be any originall sinne or no: for there are What are the chiefe matters that shalbe intreated of. some which vtterly deny that there is any such thinge. Then wil we declare, what it is. Lastly what proprieties it hath, and howe it is by succession traduced to our posterity: and also by what meanes it is forgeuen. As touching the firste, we muste remember, that both in the holy scriptures, and also among the fathers, it is called by sondry names. For in this epistle the 7. chap. it is called sinne, and the law of the Names of originall sinne. mēbers, and lust. Of others it is called, The want of originall righteousnes, a cor­ruption of nature, an euell inclination, a nourisher of euell, a weaknes of nature, the lawe of the fleshe, and other suche like. The Pelagians long since denied this sinne: and so do the Anabaptistes euen nowe in our dayes. These in a manner are the argumentes, which they alleadge against it: First, they say, that the fall of A­dam The Pela­gians and Anabap­tistes denye originall sinne. Argumēts against ori­ginal sinne was sufficientlye punished in himselfe: and that there is no cause, why God shoulde reuenge it in his posterity: specially seing it is written in Naum the Pro­phet, That God doth not punish one and the selfe same thing twise. For it suffiseth him that he hath once punished. Againe it is also written, That the sonne shall not beare the iniquitye of the father: but the soule, which sinneth, the same shall dye. Moreouer, [Page 119] the bodye, when it is formed in the wombe, is the woorkemanshippe of God, and hath nothing which ought to be reproued: yea rather which is not woorthy of high admiracion: and the soule also is either created or powred in of God. And the man­ner of propagation cannot be counted euell, because matrimony is commended in the holy scriptures, and from the beginninge God cōmaunded mā to procreat chil­dren. Wherefore among so many aides of innocency, they demaund thorow what chinckes or hoales sinne could creepe in. They alleadge moreouer, that Paul in his firste epistle to the Cor: when he exhorteth the faithfull wife, to abide with the vn­faithfull husband, if he will abide with her, among other thinges saith, your childrē are holy. But they could not be holy, if they wer born in sinne. Wherfore (say they) they which are borne of faithfull parentes cannot contract vnto themselues origi­nall sinne. Farther they affirme that it is a common sayinge, that sinne is a thinge spoken, done, or lusted contrarye to the lawe of God, and that there is no sinne ex­cept it be voluntary. And as Iohn saith in his 1. epistle the 4. chapt: Sinne is iniquity: vnto which is opposite, equity, or right, and there can be no other equity or right as­signed, then that which is contained in the law: and so is finne a trāsgression of the law: all which thinges cannot happen in infantes when they are borne. And they say moreouer that it semeth not agreable, whiche some say, namely, that this sinne is powred in through the flesh or body. For the flesh and the body are of theyr owne nature thinges insensible, nether can they be counted a subiect mete for sinne. And to establish theyr fained inuencion, they adde, that those thinges whiche Paul spea­keth in this place, are to be drawen to those sinnes whiche are called actuall. And where it is said that by one man sinne entred into the world, it is to be vnderstand (say they) because of imitacion and example, whiche the posterity followed. With these and like argumentes were they led to deny that there is any originall sinne. But as for death and afflictions of this life, whiche are commonly alleadged for to­kens to confirme originall sinne, they say that they consist of natural causes: as are the temperatures of the elementes and humors. And that therfore it is a vaine in­uention to draw them to the fall of Adam. And they thinke it to be a thinge moste absurde, to counte that for sinne, whiche can by no meanes be auoyded. Lastly they say, if by that meanes it should be saide, that we haue sinned in Adam, because we were in his loynes, euen as in the Epistle to the Hebrues it is sayde of Leui, that he paide tenthes in the loynes of Abraham: after the like and selfe same mannec we may say that we were in the loynes of other our elders, from whome we haue by procreation discended: wherefore there is no cause why the sinne of Adam shoulde more flow abroade into vs, then the sinne of our graundfathers, greate graundfa­thers, and of all our elders. And by that meanes theyr estate should séeme most vn­happy, which should be borne in the latter times. For they should beare the iniqui­ties of all their elders. These thinges alleadge they to proue, that there is no origi­nall It is pro­ued by testi­montes of the scrip­ture that there is ori­ginal sinne. sinne. But we on the contrarye parte will by manye testimonies of the scrip­tures proue that there is such a sinne. In the boke of Gen: the vi. chap: God speaketh thus: My spirite shall not alwaies striue in mā, because he is but flesh. Againe, The imagination of the thoughtes of theyr hartes is onely euell alwayes. And in the viii. chapter, The imagination of theyr hart is euell, euen frō their childhode. These words declare, that there sticketh some vice in our nature, whē we are brought forth. Dauid also saith, Beholde in iniquities was I conceaued, and in sins hath my mother conceaued me: then which testemony there can be nothing more euident. Ieremy also in his 17. chap: saith, that the hart of man is wicked, peruerse, and stubburne. And the same Iere­my. and also Iob doo curse that day, wherein they were borne into the world: by­cause they saw that together with them was brought forth the originall and fountaine of all vices. And Iob hath a most manifest testimony of the vncleanes of our natiuity: For this he sayth: Who can make that clene, which is cōceaued of vn­cleane seede? And our sauiour sayth Except a man be borne againe of water, and the holyghost, he shall not enter into the kingdome of heauen. And euen as a potter doth not make new agayne any vessel, vnles he se that the same was ill made before: [Page] So Christ would not haue vs generated agayne, except he saw that we were before vnhappely generated. Which thing he testifieth also in an other place say­ing: That which is borne of flesh, is fleshe: and that which is borne of spirite, is spirite. By which words he would haue vs to vnderstand that therefore the regenera­tion of the spirite was necessary, bycause we had before but only a carnall generation. Paul in the 6. chap to y ^e Rom. sayth: That therefore we must not abide in sinne, bicause we are now dead vnto it. And that thing he proueth by Baptisme. For whatsoeuer we be (sayth he) that are baptised in Christ Iesu, we are baptised in his death, to this end that we should dye vnto sinne: and that our old man should be crucified, and the body of sinne abolished. And for as much as children are baptised, euen thereby we haue a testemony that there is sinne in them. For otherwise the nature of Bap­tisme, as it is there described of Paul, should not consist. The same reason hath he also in his epistle to the Colossians, where he sayth, that we are Circumcised with circumcision not made with handes, in making cleane the sinfull body of the flesh, beinge buried together with Christ in Baptisme. He compareth Baptisme with Circumci­siō: & saith, that they which are baptised, are made cleane frō y ^e body of sinne. Ne­ther is it to be doubted, but y ^• they which are baptised, are baptised into y ^e remis­sion of sinnes. And assuredly the circumcision, which in the old law was geuen vnto Children, was correspondent vnto our Baptisme. And as touching circū ­cision, it is written, The soule whose flesh of the foreskinne is not circumcised the eight day, let it dye the death. Wherefore seing children haue nede of the sacrament of regeneration, it followeth of necessitye, that they are borne subiect vnto sinne. Paul to the Ephesians sayth, That we are by nature the children of wrath. But our nature could not be odious vnto God, vnles it were contaminated with sinne. And in the same place Paul doth with most greuous wordes describe the sharp­nes of this wrath: how that we walke after the prince of this world, who is of efficacy in our harts bycause of stubbernes, and for that cause we do the will of the flesh, and of our mynde. Augustine, also citeth a place out of the first epistle to the Corrinthi. that Christ died for all men. Wherefore it followeth that all men were dead, and had nede of his death. But it is a wicked thing, to exclude childrē out of the nomber of them, for whome Christ dyed. If thou demaund what maner ones they were for whome Christ died, the Apostle hath sufficiently declared that in this epistle, when he sayd, that they were weake, enemies of god, vngodly, and sinners. Amongest whome also we ought to reken young children, if we will say that Christ died for them. Farther it semeth, that Originall sinne is most manifestly taught by the 7. chap. of this epistle. For there it is thus written: The law is spirituall, but I am carnall, sold vnder sinne. And it is added: The good thing which I would, I doo not, but the euill which I would not, that I doo. Neither doo I worke that, but sinne which dwelleth in me. He maketh mencion also of the law of members, wherewith he complayneth that he was drawen captiue and agaynst his will. And in the 8. chap. he sayth, that the wisdome of the fleshe is enmity against God: neither is it sub­iect vnto the law of God: yea neither can it be. The death also which young children dye, doth sufficientlye testefye, that there sticketh sinne in them, except we will say that God punisheth them without desert. Farther this selfe place, which we are now in hand with, conteyneth a most manifest testemony of Originall sin. For thus it is written, that by one man sinne entred into the world, & that all mē haue sinned, none excepted, and that the sinne of one man is spred abrode amongst all men: and that for the disobedience of one man, many are made sinners. Farther, they which are grafted in Christ, are toward the latter end of this epistle, called wild oliue trees: by which metaphore is signified, that man had degenerated from y ^• good institution of nature. And if so be that we haue departed from our nature, vn­doubtedly we are spotted with originall sinne. And before, Paul so accused all mankind, that he sayd: There is none iust, there is none that vnderstandeth, or seketh after God: All haue declined, and ther with all are become vnprofitable, there is none that doth good, no not one. &c. All which thinges sufficiently declare the corruptiō of [Page 120] mans nature. By these testimonies of scriptures it is manifest inough, as I thinke, that there is Originall sinne.

Now in order I should confute the argumentes of the aduersaries. But first I thought it good to declare the definition of originall sinne. For it be­ing diligently marked and knowen, many thinges shall by the way be vnder­standed, which serue much to confute their reasons. First we will recite the o­pinions of other men: then will we declare, what we thinke thereof. The Pela­gians The Pela­gians say that the s [...]n of Adam was spred abroade on­ly by imi­tation. Adam brought not forth the first ex­ample of sinning but the deuill. affirmed, that the sinne of Adam hath not spred abroade into his posterity, but only by imitation. Augustine striued vehemently agaynst these men, and proueth by many argumentes, that originall sinne is not only the imitation of the sinne of Adam. For if Paul would haue sayd, that the first sinne was af­ter that maner spred abroade, he would not haue sayde, that it came frō Adam, but rather from the deuill. For he was the first, that gaue a forme and exam­ple to sinne. Wherefore Christ in Iohn sayth, that the Iewes, which boasted that they came of their father Abraham, were rather the children of the deuill, because they did his workes. For the deuill was a manqueller euen frō the beginning: and they sought to kill hym which had not euill deserued at their handes. And to this Augustine citeth that which is written in the 2. chapter of the booke of wisedome, that through enuy of the deuill, death entred into the world: and that they do imitate him, which are on his side. Vnto which sentence neuertheles I do not much attribute: partly because that booke is not Canonicall: and partly because in the Greke text there is some ambiguity. For this verbe, do imitate, is not there written, but [...], that is, haue experience of that death. Howbeit the reason is firme, that of the deuill came the fyrst example of sinning. Farther this opinion is hereby cōfuted, because Paul maketh an Antithesis, betwene Christ and Adam. But the righteousnes of Christ is not only set forth vnto be to be imitated: but The righ­ous [...]es of Christ is not only set forth to be imitated. also that they which beleue in hym, should be changed in mynde, corrected in spirite, and amended in all their strengthes. Wherefore it is agayne required on the other side by the nature of the Antithesis, that besides the euill example, which Adam gaue vnto his posterity, he hath also corrupted their nature, and as Augustine writeth in his booke of the merites and remission of sinnes, tabe quadam tabificauerit, that is, hath with a certayne corruption corrupted it. Thirdly this also maketh agaynst the Pelagians, namely, that euen the very in­fantes do dye. For as Paule sayth vnto the Romanes in the 6. chapter: The re­ward of sinne is death: but the gift of God is eternall life, through Iesus Christ our Lord. And in the 15. chapter of the first epistle to the Corrinthyans. The weapon (saith he) of death is sinne. Lastly the baptisme which is geuen to little ones, can not blot The sinne of imitatiō can not be blotted out of young children. out of them the sinne of imitation. Wherefore of necessity, we ought to af­firme that there is some other kinde of sinne in them, except we will haue them to be baptised in vayne.

There is also an other opinion (which the Master of the Sentences reci­teth in the 2. dist: the 30.) which was of such which thought that originall sinne is only a guiltines, or blame for an offence, or obligation whereunto we are bound by reason of the sinne of Adam. So these men do not acknowledge, that there is truly and in very dede any fault or sinne in those which are borne: but only a certayne guiltines and obligation, that they should dye and be condem­ned for the sinne of Adam. This opinion semeth Pigghius in a maner to haue re­niued. Pigghius maketh o­riginall sin rather an obligation then a fault. He maketh death to come of the principles of nature. For he denieth that originall sinne is in very dede sinne, because it is ne­ther transgression of the law, nor yet voluntary. Wherefore he affirmeth it to be nothing els, then the sinne of Adam: for which we that are his posterity are made guilty of damnation, and death, and are become exiles from the king­dome of heauē. But as for death and affictions of this life, and lustes of the flesh, and other such like affections, he saith that they come of y ^e principles of nature: so that he is so farre of from saying, that all these thinges are sinnes, that he doth affirme them to be the workes of God. For he sayth, that God is the au­thor [Page] of nature: and that these thinges follow the humors & temperature of y ^• bo­dy: and that thing which we sée happeneth in brute beastes, happeneth also in men as touching the fleshe and grosser powers of the mynde: as to desire those thinges which are preseruatiue, pleasant, and profitable, whether they be a­gréeable to reason, or agaynst it: and to auoyde thinges contrary. Wherefore He maketh originall sinne to be only the trsāgressiō of Adam. He bele­ueth that this sinne is punished without sensible payne. he maketh original sinne to be only y ^e trāsgressiō of Adam. Vnto which one trās­gression he will haue all vs to be borne obnoxious, not for any sinne, or fault, or corruptiō which we haue in our selues. And he saith moreouer that those which dye, being obnoxious only to this sinne of Adam, shall not be afflicted in an o­ther life with sensible payne. For he imagineth (although he dare not openly af­firme it) that they shall ether in this world, or els in some other very delicious place, be happy through a certayne naturall blessednes, wherein they shall lyue praysing God, and geuing thankes, although they be banished from the kingdome of heauen: of whiche discommodity neuertheles (as he dreameth) they shal nothing complaine, or be sad therefore. For this were to striue against the will of God, which a man can not doo without sinne. But forasmuch as whilest they liued here, they had no wicked will, it is not to be thought that they Note two reasons of Pigghius. He will haue sinne to be taken, but after one onely maner. shall haue such a wicked will in the lyfe to come. And that they shall not suffer any sensible paine, he thinketh he proueth very well, and that by two reasons. First, because they haue committed no euill, neither haue they cōtaminated themselues with any frowardnes. Secondly, bicause in this life is required no repentance or contritiō for originall sinne. And of this fained deuise, this pretence hath he, bicause sinne ought not to be taken, but after the true and proper maner: that is, that it be a thing spoken, done or lusted against the law of GOD: and that it be voluntary, and not obtruded to any against their will, but suche whiche may be eschued. But forasmuch as these thinges haue not place in little infantes, there can therfore be no sinne in them. Howbeit, he saith, that he denieth not, but that there is original sinne: for he saith, that it is the sinne of Adam, for which all we are condemned, & must die. But therfore I said y ^• he sought pretēses, bicause in very dede I sée, that he Pigghius thinketh thus, wher­by to defend free will. was moued to speake these thinges for an other cause. For he, attributing so much vnto frée will, and hauing of that matter written so many things against vs, and considering also that the same could not consist, if he should apertly graunt Origi­nall sinne, as it is set forth of all the godly, hath for that cause founde out this new deuised sentence: which yet (as I haue said) is not vtterly so new, for it is both tou­ched and also reiected by the maister of the sentences. But to colour his fond deuise A similitude of Pig­ghius. more beautifully, he bringeth a similitude of a noble and liberal prince, which doth not onely set at liberty some one of his seruantes, but also geueth vnto him great authority, and enricheth him with possessions, which also shall come vnto his po­steritie: and the Prince geueth him in charge this thyng onely, that he faithfully obserue some certaine commaundementes: which if he transgresse, then he to be assured, that all his riches and possessions shall be taken from him: and himselfe to returne to his olde bondage. This seruant being vnwise and vngrate, violateth y ^• commaundements of his prince: and by that meanes is not onely himselfe made a seruant as he was before, but also bringeth forth children to bondage. But those children haue nothing wherof to complain of the seuerity of the prince: but rather to geue thankes, bicause he delt so liberally with their father. But for their father they may be excedingly sory, bicause he lost those ornamentes both from himselfe, and also from his posteritie. Yea, what if this also be added, that the liberalitie of y ^• prince was so great, that he also allured the posteritie of the vngrate seruaunt to those selfe same benefites, and also to farre greater, and so allured them, that of his owne accorde, he sent his sonne to prouoke them? So (saith he) is it with vs. Adam was so created of GOD, that he shoulde be pertaker of that supernaturall feli­citie. Who yet when he contemned the commaundementes of GOD, was spoi­led of all those supernaturall giftes, and left to the olde estate of his nature. And in that estate also are we procreated, and so bicause of his sinne we are condemned [Page 121] and do die, and are made exiles from the kingdome of heauen, suffring many dis­commodities, which are deriued from the groundes of our nature. Wherefore we may cōplaine of our first parent, but not of God. For he was most liberal towards him: especially, seyng he called vs againe vnto himselfe (which is the chiefe felici­tie) by hys onely sonne, and would haue hym to suffer death for our saluation.

But against this opinion maketh that chiefly which we haue already twise be­fore Death h [...]th no right where no sinne is. rehersed: namely, that infantes do die. For death hath no right where as is no sinne: vnles we will say, that God punisheth the innocent. And this reason is confirmed by that argument of Paul, wherby he proued, that sinne was before the law. Because death (saith he) raigned from Adam euen to Moses. But by Pigghius opinion this might be counted a very weke reason. For a mā might say, although they died, yet therby it followeth not, that they had sinne. For death happened vn­to The Apo­stle confes­seth that sin dwelleth in himselfe. We haue not the principles of natu [...]e per­fect but vi­tiated. The consi­deration of man and of brute bests is not alike them thorough Adam, for whose sinne they became mortall. Farther doth not Paul confesse, that there is sinne in nature, when he affirmeth, that sinne dwelleth in himself, and confesseth, that the law of the members draweth him captiue, and such other like? And that is nothing which Pigghius obiecteth: namely, that those thinges come of the principles of nature: for these principles are not of nature being perfect, but of nature corrupte and vitiated. Neither ought he in this thyng to bring a similitude from brute beastes. For man is created, to be farre excellenter then brute beastes, & to beare rule ouer thē. Man had in dede in himselfe principles to desire things pleasāt & profitable: but not against reason & the worde of God. For to haue those affections outragious and violent, belongeth not to men, but to brute beasts. Farther our soule being immortal & geuen by y ^e inspiratiō of God, required a body méete for it, namely, such which mighte be preserued for euer: that the soule should not any time be compelled to be without it. Wherfore we ought not to flye The bodye ought to be agreable vnto the soule. It is blas­phemy to make God the author of wicked affections. vnto the principles of nature: for it was not framed such as now we haue it. Now if Pigghius do fayne that God created in vs these lustes and wicked affections, thē is he blasphemous and contumelious againste him: whiche faultes he vnworthely goeth about to lay to our charge. For forasmuche as God is good, and moste wise, and moste iuste, and hath also created man vnto the highest felicity, he woulde not haue geuen him those thinges, whereby he should be withdrawen from that felici­tie: which should entise him to do against his commaundementes: whiche of theyr owne accord are filthy, and should lead vs captiues into the law of sinne & of death. For these thinges if they ought to be mortified and crucified, as vndoubtedly they ought, we must néedes graunt, that they are vices and hatefull vnto God. Neither E [...]l affec­tions foras­much as they ought to be mortified, at sins. is that of so great force, that he fayth, that they are not properly sinnes: vnles euen as colde is called slouthfull, because it maketh menne slouthfull: so these thinges be­cause they allure men to sinne, may therefore after a sort be called sinnes. Or euen as the scripture calleth that a hand, which is made with the hand: or speach is called the tonge, because it is pronounced by the ministery of the tounge: so these thinges may be called sinnes, because they proceede from sinne. These similitudes do no­thinge helpe Pigghius cause: for althoughe Augustine vsed sometimes so to speake, yet he would haue it to be vnderstand of those defaultes and vices, which are in mā after Baptisme. In which thing how farre we agrée with him, we haue els where declared: and peraduenture afterward will farther declare.

But Augustine plainely affirmeth, that before baptisme they are sinnes: Yea the holy Ghoste also in Paul calleth thē sinnes: and the nature of sinne agreeth wyth The na­ture of sinne is extended to al things that are a­gainst the law of God▪ Wherein iniquity cō [...] sisteth. them. For so we haue defined sinne, that it pertayneth to all those things, whatso­euer they be, that are againste the lawe of God. For as Iohn sayth, sinne is iniquitie. And who seeth not, that it is a thing vniuste, that the fleshe should haue the spirite subiect vnto it: and that our soule should not be obediente vnto the woorde of God. Wherefore forasmuch as all these thinges do stirre vs vp to transgresse, and to re­bell against the woord of God, they are both vniust, & also ought to be called sinnes: Farther the wordes of Dauid are most plainely against Pigghius, when he sayth: Beholde I was conceaued in iniquityes, and in sinnes hath my mother conceaued me If [Page] wicked lust, and these vices were the woorkes of nature, vndoubtedly that holy mā woulde not haue complained of them. And what other thinge mente the Apostle Paul, when he wrote vnto the Ephesians, That we are by nature the childrē of wrath. but that there is sinne in euery one of vs Howbeit Pigghius doth by a peruerse in­terpretacion go about to wrest this testimonye from vs. For he saith, that, to be by nature the children of wrath, is nothinge els but to be the children of wrath by a certayne course of birth: because we are so borne into the worlde. And he bringeth this similitude that some are called bondmen by nature: which is nothing els, then that they were borne in that state to be bond. But we neither can nor oughte to be contente with this fained deuise: for the anger of God is not prouoked, but iustly. For it is not such, that it can be incensed either rashely or by chaunce. Wherefore The anger of God is not prouo­ked but iustly. there must nedes be some wicked thinge in our nature, to the auengement wher­of the anger of God is stirred vp. And that similitude of his, serueth not to hys pur­pose: for they which are sayd to be borne bondmen by nature, haue also by nature some thing in them, which is apt for bondage. For if we geue credite vnto Aristotle Seruantes by nature haue some­thing in thē that is apte for serui­tude. writing in his politiques, bondmen by nature are they, which excell in strength of body, but are dull and slow in reason, and thereof it commeth, that they are more meete to serue, then to beare rule ouer others, or to liue at liberty. The Apostle al­so sufficiently declareth, why he calleth vs by nature the children of wrath: namely because by nature we séeme prone and readye to stirre vp the anger of God, and walke according to the prince of this world, and because the Deuell is of efficacy in our hartes by reason of incredulitie, and also because we do the will of the fleshe and of our minde. These are the thinges, which make vs by nature the children of wrath. And how can it be denied that there is sinne in our nature, when as Christ will haue vs to be regenerated? For vnles we were broughte foorth wicked, what should we nede to be made new again? Farther in the 8. chap: of the booke of Genesis it is manifestly said, That the imagination of mans harte is euell, euen from hys verye childehoode. And how dare Pigghius say, that that is the woorke of God, and a good That which the holy Ghost calleth euell is not the worke of God. thynge, whyche the holy Ghoste expressedly calleth euell? But least he shoulde seme to say nothing, he fayneth that God spake that of mercy: as thoughe he would by that meanes excuse men, and testefye that he would no more destroy the earth with water, bycause men were so brought forth and theyr cogitations tended to euill, and that euen from theyr very childhode. But in taking this for an excuse, he is much deceaued. For the better and more natiue sence of thys A declaration of a place of Genesis. place is thought to be this, that God would make a couenant with Noah, that he would neuer destroy the world agayne with water, although otherwise men were such, that they deserued it, and the imagination of theyr hartes is euill e­uen from theyr childhode. These wordes excuse not mans nature from sinne, but rather note it to be vicious and corrupt: which yet God of his mercy would spare. Lastly we learne of Paul, that by the disobedience of one man, many are made sinners: which declareth, that in those which are borne of Adam there is sinne, by reason of which they ought to be caled sinners. But Pigghius thinketh to auoyde this, bycause they are sometimes called sinners by reason of the guiltines, although the acte of the sinne be past, and be no more extant. Although it He that is called a sin­ner either hath sinne actually in him or els he hath be­fore com­mitted sin. Pigghius maketh a middle e­state be­twene the damned & the blessed. be so, yet he can neuer shew out of the scriptures, that any is caled a sinner, but ether he hath sinne in himselfe, or ells vndoubtedlye he hath before committed sin: vnles he will say, that God maketh men guilty without any sin committed of them. Farther Pigghius considereth not, that by this his fayned inuencion is brought in a middle sentence touching the state of them, which dye only in the guiltines of dAam: when as the scriptures doo manifestly teach vs, that in the last iudgement there shalbe no meane: But men shalbe ether committed to e­ternall fire, or ells haue the fruition of eternall felicity. And it is rashenes to procede farther in those thinges, then is reueled in the holy scriptures. Wherefore they deale more moderately, and worke more wisely which leaue all this matter to the deuine prouidence. But it is a sporte to se, what solemne reasons they [Page 122] are which moue Pigghius. They shall not be punished (sayth he) with any sensible payne: bycause they haue not contaminated themselues with any wicked will in this life. What is this to the purpose? For it is sufficient that they haue a wicked nature: for they were prone to sinne, although by reason of age they could in acte not sinne. The young wolfe is killed of euery man: who yet might ex­cuse To condemnation it is mough to haue a cor­rupt nature if a man be without Christ. it self, for that it hath not yet killed any shepe, or done any harme vnto the flock. Yet is it iust that it should be killed, bycause it hath the nature of a wolfe, and would doo these thinges, if it were permitted to liue. To this, Pigghius ad­deth an other argumēt: for y ^•, for original sin, grief, or contritiō is not required. But how can he proue this? For all holy men haue greuously mourned, for that they were oppressed with this vice. Dauid the selfe same time when he was most The saints do greuesly sigh and morne for that they a [...] oppressed with this sinne. Examples. repentant, did burst forth into these wordes: Behold I was conceaued in iniquities. Paul so bewailed this vice, that he cried out: O vnhappye man that I am: who shall deliuer me frō this body subiect vnto death? & whē Pigghius saith, y ^• these shalbe cōtent with theyr estate, he bringeth none other reason, then that if they should striue a­gainst the will of God, and be sory for the sentence denounced vpon them: they should sinne, which thing we ought not to deme of them, forasmuch as in thys life they committed no sinne. But here ought to be demaunded of Pigghius, whether infantes haue an vpright will in this life. This must he of necessity deny, forasmuche as by reason of age they coulde not haue it. Which if it be so, how dare he ascribe it vnto them in the life to come? It is much more probable that they shall there haue an euell will, wherof there was here in them a beginning: thē that they shall haue there a good will of whiche there was here in them no sparcke at all. But that similitude which he bringeth of the liberal prince, which did not only make his seruant free, but also exalted him to great honours, is not of his owne inuention. For Egidius of Rome a schole deuine hath the same: who yet together with vs acknowledgeth the vice of nature, & the wickednes that is Egidius a schole de­uine. planted in vs from the beginning. Howbeit this thing we ought to examine and try out, lest like as costly hangings couer the faultes of a wal, so this argument by his shew and outward payneture doo hide some error, & dangerously deceaue vs. He setteth forth vnto vs Adam as a bondeman, who from the beginning was made free by God, and enriched with most excellent giftes, and so enriched, that they should come also to his posterity if he had obeyed the commaundement of God and the law: but if he neglected to doo that, he himselfe with all his posterity should returne to his old estate of seruitude. In this lieth hid the error of Pigghi­us: for he faineth vnto himselfe a man, which from the beginning had a nature Man had not at the beginning a corrupt and vicious na­ture. subiect to corruptions, and bound to the seruitude of vnreasonable affections which thing is not true. For God made man perfect: not that he should be like a brute beast. He had in dede lusts to thinges pleasant and preseruatiue: but yet not such as should allure him agaynst the worde of God, and right reason. And he had a body geuen him, which mought haue endured for euer. Wherefore when he sinned, he fell not into his olde estate but broughte vnto himselfe a new infelicity. This shall suffice at this present as touching that second opinion. The thirde opinion is, that the lust or concupiscence whiche is spreade abroade Augu­stines opinion. in the flesh and members, is originall sinne. Of which opinion was Augustine, as appeareth by his booke of the merites and remission of sinnes, and by many other places: whome the Schoolemen haue interpreted to haue ment not onely of the concupiscence of the grosser partes of the mind, but also of y ^e frowardnes of the will. But Pigghius repugneth and saith, that Augustine appointed only the concupiscence of the flesh and of the members to be originall sinne: as though Augustine ment not, that by the wickednes of the affections both the minde is blinded, and the will corrupted. For forasmuch as all these vices are ioyned together Augustine comprehen­ded all sins by this word iust. one with an other, he would by one word comprehend them all. And he vsed the name of concupiscence, bycause in it doth more plainelye appeare and shine forth the power of this disease. Wherefore Hugo de sacramentis writeth, that originall sinne is that, which we drawe from our natiuity thorough igno­rance into our minde, and thorough concupiscence into our flesh. Lastly Christ [Page] when he sayth, that none can be saued, except he be regenerated, ment not only of the flesh, or lusting part of the minde. For our reason and will, ought chiefely to be borne a new. Then followeth regeneration of the affects and of the body: wher­by all thinges are made subiect vnto the spirite, and word of God, as it is mete. What Au­gustine vn­derstod by lust. A simili­tude. Nether did Augustine by lust, vnderstād the acte of lusting: but the ability, prones and redy disposition to doo euill. Which vices are not alwayes knowen in chil­dren, but so farre forth as theyr age doth vtter it. For so is there no difference betweene one that can se being in a deepe darke place, and betweene one that is starke blind. But as sone as euer ether light cometh, or that it is day, the blinde mans fault is easely sene. The woolfe before he come to age declareth not hys nature and capacity. The scorpion stingeth not alwayes: howbeit he alwayes beareth the stinge, wherewith to sting. The serpent so long as he is frosen with colde in the winter, is handled without danger: not bycause he then hath no ve­nome, but bycause he is not then able to powre it out. And he saith, that this concupisence All man­kind in A­dam as in a lompe. is drawen by generation, bycause we haue all sinned in Adam. For he thinketh that all mankinde was in Adam as in one lompe. And bycause in him nature is corrupt by reason of sinne, we can not drawe thereof but onely a corrupt nature. For of thorns are not gathered grapes, nor of brambles, figges. But he chiefely thinketh that this concupiscence is traduced into Adams poste­rity by the feruentnes of the pleasure, which happeneth in procreation. Howbe­it The opini­on of cer­tain Scholmen. some of the Schoolemen of the wiser sorte iudged, that although there should happen no wickednes of lust in the accompanieng of the parentes, yet the child should not want originall sinne, bycause it was in the first man, as it were in se minali ratione (as they speake) that is, in the nature of the sede. If thou demaund Whither this lust be volumtary. of Augustine, whither he thinketh that this concupiscence, which he saith is ori­ginal sinne, be voluntary, he answereth, that it may be caled voluntary, bicause the sinne which our first parentes committed was voluntary: but in vs it can not be called voluntary, bycause we haue not taken it vpon vs by our owne e­lection, excepte paraduenture it may so be called, bycause it is not put into vs violently. Pigghius inueigheth against this opiniō: for thus he saith, If the sinne of Pigghius against Au­gustine. the first man hath corrupted mans nature, such an effect ought to be naturall vnto sin. For there was nothing in that first transgressiō, which had the meane to corrupte nature, more then other sinnes. Wherefore wee shall of necessitye graunt, that our nature is corrupted, not only by the faulte of the the first pa­rentes, but also by the sinnes of all our progenitors: which thing semeth verye absurd vnto Pigghius, that we should be so much the more corrupt, how much we are after them. But this chiefe point, whether the sinnes of all parentes be traduced into their posterity, I omitte at this present, and will speake thereof toward the ende, so much as shalbe thought méete. In the meane tyme I deny Corruption is not the naturall ef­fect of sin. that, which this man taketh for a grounde, namely, that corruption is the naturall effect of sin. For the reason thereof is rather taken of the iustice of GOD: whereby the grace of the spirite and heauenly giftes, wherewith man was endewed before hys fall, were remoued from hym when he had sinned. And thys wyth drawing of grace, came of the iustice of GOD, althoughe the blame bee to bee ascribed to the transgression of the fyrst Grace be­ing taken a way cor­ruption fol­lowed of his own accord. man: least a man shoulde straight way say that God is the cause of sinne. For when he had once withdrawen his giftes, wherewith he had adorned man straight way vices and corruptions followed of their owne accord, which were before farre from the condicion of man. Pigghius also demaundeth howe sinne hath the power to corrupt nature: whither it be for that that it is a priuation, or els by reason of the matter or subiecte of priuation. But it séemeth that it can not be for that it is priuation: for forasmuch as it is nothing, it can worke nothing: nether can it be by reason of that action, which is subiecte vnto priuation, as was the wicked election thoroughe will of the firste man: for Adam when he did eate the forbidden fruite, desired not this, neither was this his will, to corrupt his owne nature and the na­ture [Page 123] of his posterity. This is a very weake argument. For we sée that oftentimes Many thinges fol­low men a­gainst their will. A similitude many thinges follow men against their will and vnwares: which thinges though they would not, are yet ioyned together with theyr actions. They which immode­rately gorge themselues with meate and drinke, do it not with this mind and purpose, to bring vnto themselues the goute. But it followeth of his owne accorde. So although Adam woulde not haue these thinges to happen, yet when he had sinned, they happened of theyr owne accord. But saith he, seing that this luste hapeneth by a certaine necessity of birth, and not by choice or election, it cannot haue the nature of a fault or sinne. But this therfore he saith, for that he taketh sinne more narroly and straightly then he ought to do, for he will haue sin to be a thing voluntary, and a thinge spoken, done, or lusted, against the law of God. But if he take sinne for ini­quity (as Iohn hath described it) he shall sée that in lust, may be found the nature of In naturall lust there is the nature of sinne. sinne. For it is vniust, that the body should not obey the minde in honest thinges, & that lustes should be against the mind, and beare dominiō ouer it, and that reason, should be against God, and abhorre from his cōmaundements. These things seinge they are vniuste, whether they happen vnto vs with our wils or of necessitye, vn­doubtedly they are sinnes. But this man which obiecteth these thinges, doth he not sée, that he must also of necessity graunt, that the posterity of Adam is guilty of his sinne, and that not willinge and against their mind: which thinge is most of all a­gainst the word of God? For it is written in the Prophet: The Sonne shall not beare After Pig­ghius opinion the Son beareth the iniquitie of his father & not his owne. the iniquity of the father: also, The soule which sinneth, it shall dye: Which sayinge vn­doubtedly were false if we beleue Pigghius: forasmuche as children do dye and are guilty of eternall damnation, although they haue not sinned. Vnto which absurdi­ty we are not compelled: which do put in euery man that is born sinne, and a cause why he shoulde die and be condemned. Pigghius also thinketh it contumelious and blasphemous against God, for that he suffreth sinne to be planted in them that are borne, when as they can do no otherwise, but to be borne in suche sorte affected, as we sée all other menne that are borne to be affected. But let Paul answere to this obiection: who in this Epistle saith: O man what art thou, which answerest vnto God? Hath not the potter power ouer his clay, to make of one and the selfe same lompe one vessel for honor, and an other for contumely? Let Esay also aunswere: who saith, that it is not mete that an erthē pot should dispute with other erthē pots of the worke of his maker. God is not such a one to be brought into order by our reasō: which should come to passe if we should measure his iustice by y ^e rule of our iudgemēt And forasmuch as there passeth no day, wherin happeneth not somwhat in y ^e gouernmēt of worldly things which we find fault with & accuse, & fatisfieth not our wisdome, whē then shall we confesse God to be iust? For who can assigne a cause, why so much grace is not geuē vnto him whiche pearisheth for euer, as is to an other which is saued? I know that these men are accustomed to say, that God doth therein no vniustice, because he by no law is bound to destribute one & the self same and equal grace vnto al men. But vndoubtedly humane prudence will not there stay. For it wil complaine and saye, that although he be not bound by the prescripte of mans law: yet by the law of his goodnes he ought to be one and the selfe same vnto al men. Farther what humane wisedome can sée, what that iustice of God is, that some are taken away being yet infants and children, that theyr hartes should not be peruerted with malice, and so to attain to saluation: wheras other are kept safe till they come to ripe age, wherin to deserue vnto themselues distruction: when as otherwise they mought haue bene We oughte to haue in reuerence the secretes of God and not to cor­rect them. A saying of Cato. they had bene taken away in theyr infancy? Here we ought to haue in reuerence & to worship the secretes of the iudgement of God: and not to desire to correct them, or to amende them, accordynge to the prescripte of our lawes. Cato beinge an Ethnike when he tooke Pompeius parte, because he iudged it iuster then Cesars, at the last the victory declining, and Pompey being discomfited & put to flight, looked vp to heauen, and cried out, that in thinges deuine there is greate ob­scurenes. For he thought it a thing vnworthy, that the prouidēce of God should suffer Cesar to haue y ^e vpper hād. And I my selfe whē I consider these things am [Page] much delighted whith Augustines answere which he vseth agaynst the Pelagi­ans, Two argu­mentes of the Pelagi­ans. when he was in hand with this selfe same cause, which we are now in hand with. For the Pelagians obiected vnto him two argumentes somewhat subtle and hard. One was, how it can be, that God, which of his goodnes forgeueth vs our owne sinnes, will impute vnto any other mens sinnes? An other was, if Adam by originall sinne condemneth men vnwares, and agaynst their will, why doth not Christ also, to y ^e ende he might in no part be inferior vnto Adam, saue the vnbeleuers? To these thinges Augustine answereth, what if I were so An excellēt sentence of Augustine. dull, that I could not straight way confute these reasons, shoulde I therefore geue euer a whit the the les credit vnto the holy scripture? Yea rather it is much more conuenient, for me to acknowledge myne owne rudenes, then to ascribe vntruth vnto the holy scriptures. But afterward he dissolueth both the arguments. For to the first he answereth, God impu­teth not to vs an other mans sinne but our owne. Christ to saue his wayteth not for their will. The iustice of God hath no nede of our defence. that God is the chiefe good thing, nether doth he (as these men alleadge) in originall sinne impute vnto vs an other mans sinne, but our owne iniquity, which sticketh vnto our na­ture, euen from the very beginning. To the other he saith, that Christ saueth also those that are vnwilling: for he wayteth not for them to will, but of his owne accord commeth vnto sinners, both vnwilling, and resisting. And he also bringeth many infants to felicity, which as yet beleue not, neither by reason of age can haue fayth whereby to beleue. Therefore do I alleage these thinges, to shewe that it is lawfull for me if I will to vse the same answere, which this father vsed first, and to say vnto Pigghius: Let vs suffer God to defend himselfe: he nedeth none of our defence, that he should not be counted vniust or cruell. Let vs beleue the scriptures, which crye euery where, that we are borne corrupt and vitiate. Which thing also both death and an infinite heape of miseryes do manifestly declare vnto vs: which thinges vndoubtedly God would not lay vpon the childrē of Adam, vnles there were in them some sinne deseruing punishement. But they which discend not into themselues, neither behold their owne nature, how redy it is to all wicked­nes, those (I say) know not what this concupisence meaneth. Howbeit many Euen the Ethnikes wondred at the corrup­tion of our nature. of the Ethnike Philosophers saw it. For they do meruayle how in so excellent a nature there can be so greate wickednes, selfe loue, and desire of pleasures. And they so acknowledge these euils, that they iudged it very nedefull that children should haue correction and discipline: and to corect this naturall ma­lice they gaue counsell to sustaine labours, and excercises, and many other hard and gréeuous thinges. But they saw not the cause and fountayne of these The Eth­nikes saw the euil, but vnderstoode not the fountayne thereof. euils. For that can be perceaued only by the word of God. Farther this Pig­ghius reasoneth and sayth, that this desire which Augustine calleth concupisence is a worke of nature and of God: and therefore it can not be counted sinne. But we haue before answered, that it commeth not from the groundes of nature as it was instituted by God, but of nature corrupted. For man, when he was created, was made right, and (and as the scripture sayth) to the Image of God. Adam whē he was cre­ated had af­fectiōs geuē him which were gentle and mode­rate. Iulianus Pelagians praised lust. Wherefore that desire of thinges pleasant and preseruatiue in Adam, when he was first created, was not outragious or vehement, to be against right, reason, and the word of God: for, that followed afterward. Wherefore we ought not to call it the worke of God (as Pigghius sayth) but the wickednes of sinne, and corruption of affections. Wherefore Augustine calleth Iulianus the Pelagian an vnshamfast prayser of concupiscence. For he (which thing Pigghius also doth) commended it as a notable worke of God. Moreouer Pigghius is agaynst Au­gustine for this cause, namely, because he sayth that concupisence is sinne be­fore baptisme, but after baptisme he denieth it: when as (sayth he) the concu­pisence is one, and the selfe same, and God, is the selfe same, and his lawe the selfe same. Wherefore he concludeth, that ether it must be sinne in both or els in neither. But here Pigghius excedingly erreth two maner of wayes: first because What mu­tation com­meth by re­generation. he thinketh, that in regeneration is made no mutation: especially seing that he can not deny, but that in it commeth the remedy of Christ, and his righteous­nes is applied, and the guiltines taken away. For that God imputeth not that [Page 124] concupisence which remayneth after regeneration. Moreouer also the holy ghost is geuen, that the might of concupisence myght be broken, so that al­though it abide in vs, yet it shoulde not beare rule in vs. For to thys thynge Paul exhorteth vs, when he sayth, Let not sinne raigne in your mortall body. On Augustine affirmeth that those thinges which re­maine after regeneratiō are sinne. If at any time he de­ny it to be sinne, the same must be vnder­stād as touching the guiltines therof. That lust is not actu­all sinne. Why original sinne is called lust. Whither this sinne be the wāt of originall righteous­nes. What the scholemen vnderstand by originall righteous­nes. Not euery defect or want ma­keth the thing euill. the other side also he is deceaued, in that he supposeth, that Augustine thinketh, that the concupisence which remayneth after baptisme, is vtterly no sinne and especially if it be considered alone and by it selfe. For by most expresse wordes he sayth, that of hys owne nature it is sinne, because it is disobedience, against which we ought continually to striue. But when he denieth it to be sinne, the same is to be vnderstand, as touching the guiltines therof: for that is without doubt taken away in regeneration. For so it comth to passe, that God, although it be in very dede sinne, doth yet not impute it for sinne. Farther Augustine, com­pareth concupiscence with those sinnes, are called actuall, & being compared with them it may be said, that it is no sinne. For it is far from the haynousnes of them. But I meruaile how Pigghius could be so bold to say, that Augustine without testimony of the scriptures, affirmeth lust, to be Originall sinne, when as he, in his dis­putations against the Pelagians, doth mightely defend his sentence by the holye scriptures. But why he calleth Originall sinne concupiscence, this is the cause, for that Originall doth most of all declare it selfe by the grosser lustes of the mynde & of the flesh. Now I thinke it good to sée, what other men haue thought touchyng this. For besides this opinion there is also an other sentēce, which is of those, which say, that Original sinne, is the want of Originall iustice. Anselmus was of this o­pinion in his booke de partu virginis, and he drew many scholasticall authors in­to this his sentence. And these men by Originall iustice vnderstand nothing elles, then the right constitucion of man, when the body obeyeth the soule, and the infe­riour partes of the soule obey the superiour partes, & the mind is subiect vnto God & to his law. In this iustice was Adam created: & if he had abode, all we should haue liued cōtinually in it. But forasmuch as he fell, all we are depriued of it. The want of this righteousnes they affirme to be Originall sinne. But to make their sentēce more plaine, they say, that not euery defect or want is sinne or euill. For although a stone want iustice, yet shall not therfore the stone be called vniust or euill. But when the thing is apte & mete, to receiue that which it wanteth, then such a defect or want is called euill: as it happeneth in the eye, when it is depriued of y ^• faculty of seing. And yet we do not therfore say, y ^t in the eye is blame or sinne: for then cō ­meth sinne, when, by reason of such a want, followeth a striuing and resistyng a­gainst the law of God. Pigghius condemneth this sentence also. For he saith it is An obiectiō of Pig­ghius. no sinne, if a man kepe not the gift which he hath not receiued. For it may be, that he which is borne hauing his health and being whole of body and limmes, may fal into a disease, or lose one of his members, or become maymed: which defectes or wantes, yet there is no man will call faultes or sinnes: but this similitude serueth not to the purpose. For a disease or lamenes of the body serueth nothing, eyther to the obseruyng or violating of the law of God. But that which they call the wante of original iustice, bringeth of necessitie with it, the breach of the law of God. More ouer he contendeth, y ^• the losse of originall iustice, in children is not sinne: bicause it was not lost thorough their default, But this agayne is to call God to accompt. But God is [...]: that is, not to be compelled to order, neither ought he to be God is not to be broght to order. ordered by humaine lawes. But let Pigghius conferre that his opinion wyth thys which he impugneth. This affirmeth that God condemneth vice and corruption, which it putteth to be in children newly borne. But Pigghius maketh children gil­ty, and condemneth them of that fault and sinne, which is not in them: But onely is that which Adam our first parent committed. For otherwise he counteth those children most innocent. But whether of these is more farre from reason, & more abhorreth euen also from humane lawes: to punish an innocent for an other mās sinne, or to condemne him, which hath in himselfe a cause why to be condemned? Vndoubtedly they that consider the thing it selfe diligently, will say that the sentence [Page] of Anselmus is for many causes better, then this opiniō of Pigghius. For we know that to be true, which Ecclesiastes saith: namely, That God made man right. The sen­tence of Anselmus better then the opinion of Pigghius. But when he had once sinned, streight way followed crookednes. For he doth no more now behold God and heauenly thinges: but is perpetually made crooked to earth­ly and carnall thinges, and is made subiect vnto the necessity of concupiscence. And this is to want Originall iustice. For actions or doinges are not taken away from men, but the power to vse them well is taken away. As we sée happeneth in those that haue the palsey. They do in dede moue the hand, but bicause y ^• power is hurt, wherby to gouerne that motion, they moue it deformedly, and weakely. This hapneth also in vs. For, forasmuch as the deuine righteousnes is wanting in vs, the A similitude groūd is corrupt, wherby our workes ought to be rightly ordred & accōplished. But (saith Pigghius) to want this gift, cannot be sinne in yong childrē. For they are not bound by any debt or bond to haue it. And if the aduersaries (saith he) wil say otherwise, let them shew some law, wherby we that are borne are bound. Which thing (saith he) seing they cannot do, let them cease to say, that this wante of Originall iustice is sinne. But we canne alledge not one lawe onely, but also thrée lawes The first is, the institution of man. God made man after his owne image and si­militude. By what law they that are borne are bound to haue origi­nall righte­ousnes. What is the nature of the i­mage of God. Wherefore we ought to be such. For God doth iustly require that in our nature, which he made. And the image of God doth herein chiefly consist, to be en­dewed with deuine proprieties: namely, with iustice, wisedome, goodnes, and pa­tience. But contrarywise Pigghius crieth oute, that this is not the nature of the i­mage of God: for he sayth that it consisteth in vnderstanding, memory and will: as Augustine hath taught in his bookes de Trinitate, and in many other places. These thinges in deede do the Scholemen teach: but we wil proue that the matter is far otherwise, both by the scriptures, and by the sentences of the fathers. Firste in the Epistle to y ^• Ephesians it is thus written. Put away the old man cōcerning the conuer­satiō in time past, which is corrupted though the concupiscenses of error: but be renued in the spirite of your mind & put on the new mā which after God is created in righteousnes & holines of truth. And to the Collosians the 3. chap. Ye haue put on the new man, which is renued in knowlege after the image of him that created him. And a little afterwarde, A trimme reason con­cerning the image of God. he expresseth y ^• cōditions of this image saying, Put ye on tēder mercy, goodnes, modesty kindnes, gentlen [...]s, long suffering, forbearing one an other, & forgeuing one an other. And in y ^• 8. chap. to the Rom. Those which he foreknew, he also hath predestinate to be made like vnto the image of his son. All these things sufficiētly declare, what that image of God is, which the holy scriptures set forth vnto vs, in the creation & instauraciō of man. Neither abhorred the fathers from this sentence. Ireneus in his 5. booke saith, that by the powring into vs of the holy ghost, man is made spirituall, euen as he was crea­ted of God. And Tertullian against Marcian saith, that that is the image of God, which hath the selfe same motious and senses with God. And the reason which perswadeth vs therunto is, that man was therefore at the beginning made like vnto the image of God, to be ruler ouer all things created, as it were a certaine vicar of God. And no man can doubt, but that God will haue his creatures well gouerned. For he conti­nually commaundeth vs not to abuse them: and we are bound by a lawe to referre all those thinges, whereby we are holpen, vnto God, as from whome all things do flow. But the good vse, and right administration of thinges, can not be had, vnlesse we be endued wyth those condicions, whiche we haue sayde are required vnto the Image of God. But in that Augustine assigneth the Image of GOD to bee in the vnderstandynge, memorye and wyll, wee saye that he therefore Augustine is defended The facul­ties of the minde are the image of God, but not when they are spoyled of vertues. The law of nature re­quireth ori­ginall righ­teousnes. did it, to setforth vnto vs some form or example of the deuine persons, in what case they are one to an other. But he oughte not so to be vnderstanded, as thoughe he would make these faculties of the mind, being naked and spoyled of these vertues, which we haue declared, the image of God. Wherfore we haue a law geuen vnto vs either by the institution, or by the restitutiō of man, which Paul commandeth, and by this bond we are bound to haue originall iustice, whiche we haue loste. We haue also the law of nature, & to liue agreably vnto it (as Cicero saith in his 3. booke [Page 125] de finibus) is the principall and last end of mans estate. And this lawe dependeth of that other law which we before put: For it commeth of no other thinge, that we haue in our mind cogitatiōs, accusing, and defēding on an other, but onely for that they are taken of the worthines of nature, as it was instituted of God. For what­soeuer Philosophers, or lawgeuers haue written of the offices of mannes life, the same wholy dependeth of the fountaines of our constitution. For those preceptes The offices of the law of nature ar had of the institution of man. cannot come out of a corrupt nature, out of selfe loue, and malice, whereby we are prone to euil: but they come of that forme of vpright nature, which they imagine is required of the dignity of man, and which we know by the scriptures was insti­tuted of God, and commaunded of vs to be renued. And to this pertaineth (as some say) that law of the mind, against which the law of the members resisteth. There is also a third law, which God would haue put in writing: namely, Thou shalte not lust. Which precept, although our aduersaries wrest vnto actual sinnes, yet we wil By this precept, thou shalte not lust, is condemned the want of originall righteousnes. Infantes feele not these lawes in the 7. chapt. of this Epistle declare, that it also belongeth to originall sinne: and that God would by the commaundement haue all manner of wicked lust vtterlye cutte of from men, Wherefore we haue now lawes, whyche so longe as they be in force, wyll perpetuallye bynde vs, and make vs debitors, all our lyfe tyme to performe that ryghteousnes whyche they require. It is true in déede, that in­fantes féele not these lawes, and by that meanes sinne lyeth a sléepe in them as Augustine sayth in his 2. booke of the merites and remission of sinnes, follow­ing y ^• which is spoken of. Paul sayth: I liued sometimes without a law: not y ^• there was at any time no law prescribed vnto Paul: but bycause in his childhode, by reasō of age, he felt it not. Wherefore sinne (sayth Paul) was dead, which Augustine interpreteth, was on slepe. But when the commaundement came, y ^• is, when I began to know y ^• law, sinne reuiued. He had sin in him before: but forasmuch as it was not felt, it semed dead. Now appeareth how those thinges which we haue spoken a­gree with the holye scriptures. Yet still Pigghius vrgeth, that these thinges no­thing An obiecti­on of Pig­ghius. pertaine vnto infantes: for they oughte not to haue a law prescribed vnto them which can not be auoyded. But in so saying, he vnderstandeth not the meaning of the holy scriptures: for they sufficiently declare, that those things which A law may be geuen e­uē [...]or those thinges which can not be per­formed. are commaunded in the law, can not perfectly be performed of vs: when as yet they are most seuerely commaūded. Paul saith in this epistle, That which was imposible vnto the law, forasmuch as it was weakened through the flesh, God sending his sonne &c. By these words it most manifestly appeareth, that we cānot performe the law, [...]s it is commaunded. For if we could, we should be iustified by works nether had Christ neded to haue suffred death for vs. There ar also other offices Vtilities of the law. of the Law, for which it is written. For it is profitable to direct the actions of y ^e godly, but it is most profitable to declare sin. For by the law (sayth Paul) cōeth the knowledg of sin. Again I was ignorāt of lust, vnles the law had sayd, Thou shalt not lust. Farther by the law, sinne is also increased, & doth more lead vs, & greuouslier oppresse vs. For the law [...]ed in, that sin should abound: & to the Corrint. The power of sin is the law. And al these things tēd to this end, y ^• mā should as it were by a Schol­master be brought vnto Christ, and implore his ayd, and desire to haue strēgth geuen him: whereby at the least in some part, and with an obedience now begon to performe those thinges which are commaunded: and that those things wher­in he fayleth might not be imputed vnto him, but might be made whole by the righteousnes of Christ. Augustine in his first boke against Iulianus reproueth the The pelagians boasted that God commaun­deth not those things which can not be done. Augustine reherseth the sinnes of infantes. Pelagians, for that they thoughte that they had taught some great point of doc­trine, when they taughte, that God commaundeth not those thinges, whiche can not be doone: and he declareth those to be the endes of the lawe whiche we haue now expressed. Yea and Augustine also in his bookes of confessions maketh mencion of those sinnes, which euen suckinge infantes doo committe. Agaynst which no mā cā say they could resist. And they should not be sins, vnles they wer referred to some law, which is by them violated. Nether doth y ^• any thing helpe Pigghius, or put away their sinnes, for that they vnderstand them not. For that [Page] which is filthy, although it seme not so to vs, yet of his owne nature is it filthy Thinges filthy al­though they seme not filthy yet ar they neuer­thelesse of their owne nature fyl­thy. The opiniō of Augu­stine and Anselmus differ not in very deede. The defini­tion of Original sinne. [...] (as he saith) [...]. y ^• is, That which is filthy is filthy whither it seme so or no. This opinion of Anselmus concerning the lacke and want of originall iustice, doth in very dede nothing differre from the sen­tence of Augustine, wherein he calleth originall sinne luste: but that whiche in Anselmus is spoken somewhat more expressedlye is more obscurely wrapped in the word concupiscence. But bycause this want of originall iustice may so be taken, as though we vnderstoode onely the priuation of the giftes of God, with out any vice of nature, therefore it shall be good to set forth a more full defini­tion of originall sinne.

Originall sinne therefore is the corruption of the whole nature of man, traduced by generation from the fall of our first parent into his posterity, which corruption, were it not for the benefite of Christ, adiudgeth al men borne therin in a maner to infinite euills, and to eternall damnation. In this definition are contained al kinds of causes. We haue for the matter or subiect, all the partes & strengthes of man: The forme, is the deprauation of them al: The efficiēt cause is the will of Adam which sinned: The instrument, is the propagation of traduction, which is done thorough the flesh. The end and effect, is eternall damnati­on together with all the discomoditis of thys life. And hereof sprange sondrye Sondry names of this sinne. names of this sinne: so that sometimes it is called a defect or want, sometimes peruersenes, sometimes vice, sometymes a disease, sometymes contagiousnes, sometymes malice, and Augustine calleth it an affected quality, and [...] that is a disorder. And that the whole mā is corrupt, hereby appeareth, because he was to this ende created, to cleaue vnto God, as to the chiefe good. But now he vn­derstandeth The cor­ruption of the partes of man is declared. not things pertayning vnto God, nor with patience waiteth for the promises which are set forth in y ^• sciptures: but w ^t grief he harkeneth vnto y ^• pre­ceptes of God: and the paynes & rewardes he vtterly cōtemneth. The affections rebelling agaynst sound reason do wantonly deride the word of God. The bo­dy neglecteth to obey the soule. All these thinges, although they be experimēts of naturall corruption, yet are they also confirmed by testimonies of the holy scriptures. Of the corruption of vnderstanding Paul sayth, The carnall man vn­derstandeth not those thinges which are of the spirite of God: yea he can not: because they are foolishenes vnto him. In which wordes let vs marke by the way agaynst A proofe of the impossi­bility of the law. Pigghius, that the lawe was geuen of such thinges which of vs can not be per­formed. For the lawe doth chiefely commaund vs to haue knowledge in things pertayning to God, which thinges yet Paul apertly affirmeth, that the carnall man can not vnderstand. And to our purpose, we sée that Paul affirmeth, that this blindnes or ignorance is grafted in man, and that of nature: for we can not imagine, that it commeth by reason of tyme or age. For the elder in yeares a man is, so much the more and more is he instructed concerning God. Where­fore in that he is carnall, and vnapt to vnderstand thinges pertayning to God, it commeth of his corrupt nature. And this corruption is of so great waight, that Augustine in his 3. booke agaynst Iulianus the 12. chapter sayth, that by it the image of God is alienated from the life of man, by reason of the blindnes of the harte: whiche blindnes (he sayth) is sinne, neither is it very agreable with the nature of man. Blindnes of the hart is sinne. The same Augustine (in his 1. booke of the merites and remission of sinnes, the 30. chapter, where he bringeth these wordes of Dauid, Remember not the sinnes of my youth, and my ignorances) maketh mencion of most thicke darkenes of igno­rance, which is in the hartes of infantes being yet in their mothers wombe: who know not why, from whence, and when they were thrust in there. For the Blindnes and igno­rance are not agrea­ble with the nature of man. infant lyeth in the mothers belly vnlearned, vndocible, not able to vnderstand the commaundement, being ignorant where he is, what he is, of whome he was created, and of whome he was begotten. All which thinges were far from the nature of man as it was first created: and are rather vices of nature. For Adam was not so created, but he was both able to vnderstand the commaun­dement of God, and could also geue names vnto his wife and to all other li­uing [Page 126] creatures. But in infantes we must wayte a long tyme, that they may by little and little as it were disgest this dissines. Farther, that this ignorance is to be counted sinne, Reticius the most auncient byshop of Auston is a witnes (as Augustine testifieth of him in his first booke agaynst Iulianus) For when he speaketh of baptisme, thus he writeth: That it is the principall indulgence in the Reticius bishop of Auston in Fraunce. Church, wherein we put away all the waight of the olde crime, and we blot out the olde wicked actes of our ignorance, and put of the olde man with his naturall wicked actes. By these wordes we sée that wicked actes are naturall in vs, and that the sinnes of ignorance are blotted out in baptisme. Wherefore forasmuch as infants are baptised, it is manifest by the authority of this father, that they haue sinnes, and that their olde ignorance is blotted out in baptisme. Now concerning the The wil is also corrupt will, let vs see whether it also be corrupt or no. The Apostle beareth manifest witnes of it, that the sence and wisedome of the fleshe is enmity agaynst God. And vn­der this sentēce he comprehēdeth all the affectiōs of men which are not yet rege­nerate. But I meruayle at the impudency of Pigghius, who because he would by some meanes vnwrap himselfe, sayth, that this place is to be vnderstand of the sence of the letter, which he contendeth is agaynst God, nether can it be sub­dued vnto him. For both the wordes that go before, and the wordes that fol­low, are manifestly agaynst hym. For Paul straight way addeth the difference betweene men which are in the fleshe, and them which are in the spirite. Wher­fore it playnely appeareth, that he entreateth not of the diuersity of the sence of the scripture, but of the variety of men. The wordes that go next before that sentence are, that which was impossible vnto the lawe, in as much as it was weake by reason of the fleshe, God sending his sonne in the similitude of sinfull fleshe, by sinne, con­demned sinne in the fleshe, that the righteousnes of the lawe might be fulfilled in vs. These wordes also testify that Paul speaketh of vs, and not of the spirite or let­ter of the scriptures. For in vs is that weakenes, whereby the lawe was wea­kened, that it coulde not bringe vs to saluation: and by Christ the righteousnes of the lawe beginneth to be fulfilled in vs. Neither ought we to harken vnto The scrip­ture by flesh vnderstan­deth not the grosser part of the mind. them, which both in this place, and also in many other, will that by fleshe we should vnderstand only the grosser part of the mynde. For Paul when to the Galathians he rehearseth the workes of the flesh, doth not only number amongst them adulteryes, fornications, wantonnes and other such lyke, but also ido­latry, whiche no man can deny, but that it pertayneth vnto the mynde, and not vnto the fleshe. And Christ when he sayth, That whiche is borne of fleshe is fleshe, and that whiche is borne of the spirite, is spirite, exhorteth vs to regene­ration, whiche vndoubtedly pertayneth not only to the substance of the bodye, or grosser partes of the mynde, but also chiefely vnto the will, and mynde. And when he sayde vnto Peter, Blessed art thou Simon Bariona: for flesh and bloud hath not reueled these thynges vnto thee. he signified, that he had not lerned those thinges of naturall knowledge, but of the spirite of God. For vnder the name of flesh, he comprehendeth those things which pertaine vnto the mynde and reasō. Neither yet do we say (as Pigghius fondly cauilleth) that in the chiefest part of the minde, is nothing but flesh. For we know, though Pigghius had not told vs, Why the soule is called flesh in the scrip­tures. that the soule is a spirite: which yet before regeneration is in the scriptures called flesh: bicause when as it ought to make the flesh, that is, his grosser partes spiritu­all, and to bring it to the obedience of a minde instructed by the worde of God, it rather declineth vnto the pleasures therof, and so is made carnall. But they obiecte vnto vs that which is written to the Galathians: The flesh lusteth against the spirite: and the spirite agaynste the fleshe: as though this could not be possible, if we leue nothing vncorrupted in the mindes of men. But vnto this obiection we thus ease­ly aunswer: First, that Paul speaketh those wordes of the beleuers, which are al­redy regenerate: which thing those wordes which followe do sufficiently declare: That ye should do, not those thinges which ye would: by which wordes he declareth, y ^• they had obteined a right will of the spirite of Christ, which yet they were not able [Page] to performe by reason of the daily conflictes of the minde, and their great infirmi­tie. Wherfore the Apostle in that place ment nothing els, then that whatsoeuer is in vs which is not perfectly regenerate, altogether rebelleth against the spirite of God. Farther also we deny not, but that sometimes there is some such battaile in In the mindes of those that are not re­generate there are yet lawes of nature, and some il­lustration of the spirit of God. men which are not yet regenerate, not bicause their minde is not carnall, & prone to vices: but because in it remaine still grauen the lawes of nature, and bicause in it is some illustration of the spirite of God: although it be not such an illustration which can either iustifie, or worke an healthful alteracion. Farther, that reason is corrupted in vs, Pauls wordes sufficiently declare, wherein he admonisheth vs, to put on the new man, which he saith ought continually to be renewed in vs. Now forasmuch as he will haue a man to be so vtterly chaunged, and a man consisteth not onely of body and affections of the flesh, but also, and that much more, of mind, will and reason, it followeth of necessity, that these thinges also were corrupte in him. For otherwise what nede haue they to be renewed? Neither is y ^• of so great Thinges which are to be renu­ed, ought first to haue ben corrupt force, if a man say that these thinges ought to be vnderstand of those which are of full age, which thorough their owne choyse and voluntary sinnes haue corrupted these thinges in themselues. For I would aske, why all men vniuersally that are not regenerate, haue so contaminated themselues, that there is not one of them all found innocent? Vndoubtedly, vnto this question can nothyng els be aunswe­red, but that in them, euen streight way from the beginnyng the first groundes were corrupted and defiled. Augustine also teacheth that we are onely so far forth regenerate, as we are made like vnto Christ. For in that we are vnlike vnto him in the same we are not regenerate, but retaine still in vs the olde man. Wherfore let vs sée, whether euen from the very beginning our minde, will, and reason, be lyke vnto Christ? For if they be found vnlike, we must néedes conclude that they are corrupt and pertaine vnto the olde man. And as touching the corruption of y ^e inferiour partes of the minde, daily experience sufficiently teacheth vs. Farther, The inferiour partes of the mind are disper­sed in the members. this is proper to the inferiour partes of the minde, to be dispersed into the mem­bers, and to poure themselues thoroughout all the partes of the fleshe: which can­not agrée with the minde and reasonable part, which are spirituall and vndeuisi­ble. The bodye also hath fallen from his nature, so that it is rebellious and repug­nante vnto the minde. Whiche thyng also Paul teacheth, when he cryeth out: O vnhappy man that I am, who shall deliuer me from the body of this death? And again Thinges that are good ought not to be denied. Our sen­tence agre­eth with Augustine and Ansel­mus. Wh [...]ther guiltines be the for­mal part in this sinne. The bat­ta [...]l & strife against the law of God semeth to be the form of this sin. How our nature is good and not good. The flesh is in suche sort good, that in it dwelleth no good thing. when he saith: I feele an other law in my members. Lastly, that the whole man with all his strengthes is vtterly corrupte, the commaundement of Christ sufficiently proueth, in that he commaundeth vs to denye our selues. If that our nature were innocent and perfect, we should not nede to deny it. For good thinges are to be re­tained and not to be put away. With this our definition of originall sinne, wel a­gréeth the want of originall iustice. Also with it agréeth the description of Augu­stine, wherin he saith, that it is the concupiscence of the flesh: so that either of them be rightly vnderstanded. The chiefe of the scholemen acknowledged this doctrine, as Thomas, Scotus, and in especiall Bonauentura. These appoint for the materiall part in this sinne, the corruption of nature, or concupiscence: and for the formal part, the want of originall righteousnes: and so of these two opinions, which we haue now rehersed, they make but one. But yet some of our men will haue guiltines or im­putation of God to be the formall part. But forasmuch as that thing is vtterly se­perated from sinne, I rather leane to that sentence, which putteth for the forme, the battaile and rebellion against the law of God. For, that is the principall cause why the vices of nature are to be called sinnes. Neither ought we to geue eare vn­to them, which continually cry out, that our nature is good. For we graunt that to be true concerning nature, as it was first instituted, but not after that it fell. For it is in déede good, but yet so that it hath some corruption ioyned with it. But whē these men say, that concupiscence is also good, they must pardon vs if we rather be­leue Paul, then them. But he saith: I know that there dwelleth no good in me, that is, in my flesh. And streight way, when I would do good, I finde by the law, that euill is ad­ioyned [Page 127] vnto me. Here he calleth concupiscence euill. To the Galathians also he suffi­ciently Naturall lust desireth not alwaies thinges profitable. proueth it to be euill, when he admonisheth vs to crucifie it. It is false also which they say: namely, that it alwayes desireth thinges profitable and preserua­tiue: for we haue experience, that it is euermore prone to thinges hurtfull, and to those things which chiefly are enemies vnto life. Farther if nature were so inno­cent and good, as these men fayne it to be, why should God so greuously punish it? An argu­ment taken from the punishments and diseases of men. Amongst all kinde of creatures we sée none in a maner more full of misery then man, if we looke vpon his natiuity, infancy, childhode, education, and discipline. All things are ful of teares, sorrow, sighyng, infirmity, and labours. With the body he must labour to get his liuyng, the mind is perpetually vexed with troublesome af­fections, the hart is moued with sundry mocions, and the body afflicted with diuers diseases. All which things when some diligently weighed, they sayd: That Nature is not a mother, but a stepmother. I will not speake how the bodies and mindes of in­fantes and children are sometymes deliuered vnto the deuill to be vexed. For so Infantes are some­times deli­uered vnto the Deuill to be vexed. we read in the Gospell, that a child was so vexed of the Deuill, that he somtymes threw hym into the fire, and somtymes into the water. Wherfore the seuerity of God doth in such sort count the nature of man to be innocent, that it greuously pu­nisheth it. Farther the Ethnikes (it should seme) saw more in this thing then these deuines. For Plato in his 2. booke of a publike wealth, saith: That men are of nature euill: as which can not be led, to kepe iustice of theyr owne accord: but onely not to suf­fer iniury. And Socrates sheweth, that vertues cannot be had, vnles men (as it is sayde the Poetes were) be inspired with some deuine power. And Cicero in his 3. booke of a publike wealth (as Augustine citeth him in his 4. booke against Iulianus) sayth: That man is borne into the world of nature his stepmother beyng naked, frayle and weake of body, hauyng a mynde vexed wyth grieues, subiect to feares, weake to labors, prone to lustes, wherby is ouer whelmed the loue of God, and also the wyt, and mynde. Ecclesiasticall writers also leaned to this opiniō: whose consentes being many, Augustine gathe­reth Consentes of the fa­thers. together in his first boke against, Iulianus. Of Ireneus and Tertullian we haue already spoken. Ciprianus also sayth, that Christe hath healed the woundes whyche Adam inflicted, and the poysons wherewith the Deuil had infected our nature. Cyprianus acknowledgeth the infirmitye deriued from the synne of the fyrste parente: wherebye we are so prouoked to sinne, that none can flatter hymselfe of hys owne innocencye. For who can boaste that he hath a chaste harte? For as Iohn sayth: If we saye we haue no sinne, wee deceyue our selues, and the truth is not in vs. Agayne Cyprianus in hys Epistle to Fidus, teacheth, that infants oughte to be baptised, that they pe [...]rishe not for euer. Augustine also citeth the Bishop Reticius: whose wordes we haue before rehearsed. He citeth also Olympius a bishoppe of Spayne, who saith: That the sinne of the first man was so dispersed in the budde, that sinne is borne together wyth man. He also citeth Hilarius, who writeth thus of the fleshe of Christ: Therfore seyng he was sent in the similitude of sinnefull fleshe, so had he also sin. But because all flesh is of sinne: namely, of the sinne deryued frō the first parent Adam, he was sent in the similitude of sinnefull flesh: so that there was not in hym sinne, but the similitude of sinnefull flesh. The same father in an other place expounding the xviij. Psalme, vrgeth this sentence of Dauid. Behold in iniquities was I conceiued, and in sinnes hath my mother conceaued me. Also in his Homilie vppon the booke of Iob, he saith: That the body is a matter of malice: whiche can not be sayd to haue bene so from the first constitution. And Ambrose vpon Luke saith: that the body is a stinking pud­dle, and an harbor of sinnes: but by the benefite of Christ it is chaunged into the temple of God, and made a holy place of vertues. The same father against y ^e Nouatians saith that our byrth is in sinne: and in his apologie of Dauid he saith: that before we are borne, we are blotted wyth contagiousnes: and before we haue the vse of lyght, we receaue originall iniustice: & are conceaued in iniquity. And of y ^e Lord he saith, It was mete that he which should not haue in his body the sinne of falling, should fele no naturall contagiousnes of generation. Wherefore worthely did Dauid be wayle in him selfe the corruptions of nature: & forth at that filthines begā in mā first before life. The same Am­brose [Page] of the Arke of Noah: Whome then hath he now pronounced a iust man, but hym which is free from these bondes? whome doth the bondes of common nature not hold. Al­so vpon the Gospel of Luke he sayth, That the infants which are baptised, are by the washinges of the healthfull ministery reformed from maliciousnes. Ierome vpon Ionas the prophete sayth, that litle infantes are subiect vnto the sinne of Adam. And y ^• it should not be thought that he speaketh it only of guiltines, vpon the 18. and 41. chap of Ezechiell he vrgethe, that not euen a child which is but a day old is without sinne. He vrgeth this also, Who can make that cleane, which is conceaued of vncleane sede? Gre­gorius Nazianzenus saith, The image of God shall pourge the spot of bodely inundacion: & afterward: Haue in reuerence the natiuity, whereby thou art deliuered frō the bōdes of thyne earthly natiuity: And intreating of baptisme, by thys (sayth he) the spotes of the first natiuity are purged, by which we are conceaued in iniquities, and our mothers hath in sinnes begotten vs. Augustine defēdeth Basilius Magnus. For the Pelagians Augustine defendeth Basile. would haue him to seme to be one theyr side. For he writeth against the Mani­chies, that euill is not a substance, but a conuersation, which cōmeth only of the will: which saying he vnderstode of those which haue gotten the infection of conuer­sation by their owne will: which conuersation he sayth may easely be seperated from the will of them that be sicke. For if it could not be seperated from it, euil should be a substantiall part thereof. All these thinges Augustine affirmeth to be vprightly spoken. For the Manechies affirmed, that euil is a certaine substance, In opinion of the Ma­nechies. Euell may be seperated from vs thoroug [...] the mercy of God. The perfect seperation from euell is hoped for in the life to come. and that that euill was the beginning of all thinges in the world. But Basilius one the contrary side sayth, that that euill is in a good thing, and that it happened to be euill, thorough the will of the man and woman which sinned. But in that he sayth, that it may easely be seperated from the will, he ascribeth it not to our strēgths, but to the mercy of God. And wheras he sayth that there shalbe left no tokens therof, that also doo we hope for: but not in this life, but in the life to come. But that he acknowledged originall sinne, his sermon concerning fast sufficiently testifieth. For thus he sayth, If Eue had fasted from the tree, we should not now haue neded this fast. For they that are whole haue no nede of a phisitiō, but they that are sicke. We haue bene sicke thorough that sinne: let vs be healed by repentance. But repentance without fasting is vaine, By these wordes, Basilius affirmeth, that by reason of the sin of Adam we are not whole. Moreouer he citeth the 12. Bishoppes of the East which condēned Pelagius. Vnto which ought Origen also to be added, who, whē he interpreceth y ^• sentēce of Paul which we haue rehearsed, namely, Death hath gone ouer all men, saith, that Abel, Enoch, Mathusalē, and Noah sinned. But as for other fathers he sayth he will not recken, bycause they haue euery one sinned. For there is not one cleane from filthynes, although he haue liued but one day only. But he speaketh more manifestly vpon the 6. chap. of this epistle whē he sayth, that Baptisme ought to be geuen vnto infantes by the Apostolicall tradition: bycause the Apostles knew that there were in all men, naturall corruptions of sinne, which ought to be washed away by water and the spirite. And Chrisostome vpon Genesis entreating this question, why men are now afrayd of beastes, and are hurte of them, when as they were created to be lordes ouer them, thys thinge (he sayth) happeneth by reason of sinne, and by cause (saith he) we haue fallen from confidence and honour. And therby Augustine proueth, that the nature of infantes is fallen, bycause beastes doo not spare them. The same Chrisostome expounding y ^• place which we are now in hād with, sayth, That that sinne, whiche came thorough the disobedience of Adam hath cōtaminated all. He hath also many other places, which serue for the confirmation of thys sen­tence. And yet the Pelagians were not ashamed, and especially Iulianus to cite The Pela­gians went about to draw Chri­sostome vn­to them. thys father for a witnes, as thoughe he made with them, bycause in his sermon of those that are baptised, rehearsing many giftes of Baptisme, namely, that they which are Baptised doo not onely receaue remission of sinnes, but also are made childrē and heires of God, brethern of Christ, and his fellow heires, members and temples of God, and instrumentes of the holy ghost, addeth at the last, Seest thou howe manye are the giftes of Baptisme? And some thinke that the heauenlye [Page 128] grace consisteth in the remission of sinnes. But we haue reckened verye manye highe commendacions, and for that cause we baptise children beinge infantes: when as yet they are not defiled wyth sinne, that to them myghte be geuen or added ryghteousnesse, holynes, adoption, inheritaunce, and brother hoode of Chryste, to bee hys menbers. By these wordes Iulianus thoughte, that Chrisostome ment that there was no ori­ginall sinne. But Augustine sayth, that these his words are to be vnderstand of sinne, which they haue committed by their owne proper deliberation: from which sinne childrē Infantes may be cal­led inno­centes as touchinge sins whiche they haue committed of theyr own propre deliberatiō. We must vse great warines in reading of the fathers. To haue proper sins may be vn­derstande two maner of wayes. are without doubt free, and after this maner they may be called innocentes. According to which sentence Paul writeth of those two brethern, before they had done any euill or good: when as yet none at all is accepted from that which the Apostle sayd, By the sinne of one man, sinne came on all men to condemnation, and also, By the disobediēce of one mā, many are made sinners. By this it appeareth how ware we ought to be in rea­ding of the fathers. For sometymes we reade in them that infantes haue not proper sinnes of their owne: when as yet they do in especiall acknowledge in them the vices of nature, that is originall sinne. But to haue proper sinnes may be vnderstand two maner of wayes: Ether it may be vnderstand of those sinnes, which they haue committed of their owne proper will, and frée choise: and after this maner that sentence of Chrisostome concerning infantes, is coun­ted true: Or els proper sinnes are called proper vices of nature, wherewith we are both defiled and condemned: which sinnes can not be seioyned from in­fantes, forasmuch as they are borne in them, as Dauid manifestly proueth. Farther Augustine hath noted in the wordes of Chrisostome, which are in the Greke tonge, that there it is written sinnes in the plurall number, and not sinne in the singular number, as Iulianus had cited that place. For thus it is written Greeke wordes of Chrisostom in Greke, [...] that is, for this cause we baptise infantes, when as yet they haue no sinnes. Whiche woorde [...], that is, sinnes, being in the plural number, is (as Augustine thinketh) most aptly applied vnto those sinnes, which are called actuall. And he addeth, Why the auncient fathers spake little of O­riginall sin. A similitude that the auncient fathers disputed not so largely of originall sinne, because the Pelagians were not yet sprong vp which impugne it. These so many sentences of the fathers ought Pigghius diligently to haue weighed: especially seing he counteth them for Egles, which sée most sharpely, and do alwayes flye vnto the body. But me thinketh he reckeneth them as counters, wherewith men cast accompt: which being put in sondry places do sometymes signify a pounde, and some­tymes a peny, as it pleaseth him that casteth the accompt. So Pigghius wyll sometymes haue the authority of the fathers most ample, and sometymes if they please him not very well, he will haue it to be none at all. And so some­tymes he reuerenseth them as egles, and sometimes he dispiseth them as Iays. Pigghius dispiseth his Romish church. But in this thing he semeth to contemne the iudgement of his owne Romishe Church, which otherwise he euery where maketh equall euen with God him selfe. For, that Church doth in such maner acknowledge or originall sinne, that it suffereth not infantes dying without baptisin e to be buried, no not euen in the churchyard of Christians: and commaundeth that the deuill be by exercismes expelled out of infantes, when they are broughte to baptisme, because it iud­geth them to be the bondsclaues of the deuill. Which thing I do not therfore speake, thereby either to allow those exorcismes, or that I would haue them still retayned. For that ought to be obtayned of God by praye [...]s, and we ought not to do it, thereby to go about by a miracle to heale a [...] possessed with a de­uill. For forasmuch as at this day there is no such gift in the Church, there is Innocent liued in Au­gustines time. They which di­minish ori­ginall sinne diminish the benefite of Christ. no cause why we should desire to retayne it. Neither do we graunt that infāts whiche are not yet baptised, are possessed of the deuill. Innocent also bishoppe of Rome, which liued in Augustines tyme, condemning Pelagius concerning origi­nall sinne, was of the same mynde that we are of. We oughte not to extenuate this euill: otherwise we shall extenuate the benefite of Christ. And they which acknowledge not this spot, are neither sory for it, neither yet do they séeke re­medy [Page] of Christ. Vndoubtedly in this thinge Pigghius hath proceded farther thē euē the Pelagians. For they denied only the propagatiō of sinne through Adam: Pigghius erreth more greuously in this thing then the Pelagions. But Pigghius crieth out, that that sentence is wicked, and blasphemous and contumelious agaynst God. Agayne it suffised them to say, that infantes dy­ing without Baptisme, are both shut out of the kingdome of heauen, and also placed in the paynes of hell: but this man dreameth, that they shalbe happy through a certayne naturall blessednes, yea and so happy, that they shal blesse, prayse and loue God, with all their mynde, with all their hart, and wyth all their strengthes. But now let vs see, how he goeth aboute to darken and to ob­scure this definitiō which we haue before put. First he saith, that by these dark­nes and corruptions of nature ye vnderstand, either mere priuations of the giftes of God, or certayne thinges positiue. If ye vnderstand them to be priua­tions, then know I what ye meane. But your debatinges are nothing els, but tragicall names, and vayne wordes. But if ye will haue them to be thinges positiue, then forasmuch as in an infant that is newly borne, there is nothing but the soule and the body, which are cleane, and haue nature and God for their author, from whence or by what haue these pestilences burst forth, which ye make mencion of? We answere, first, that the priuations which we here put What ma­ner of priuations are vnderstand in originall sinne. are not like negations which take away the whole: as when we say, that Cen­taurus or Scilla are not: but we saye that they are such that they leaue the sub­iect mayned, vnprofitable and deformed: as it appeareth in an eye which wan­teth sight, and in the hand of one which hath the palsey, which is euer shaking. In such maner is originall sinne in vs. The powers indede and actions of the minde remayne, but they want their vprightnes, and therefore are wicked and corrupt. But Pigghius still erreth, because he fayneth that the nature of man A false imagination of Pigghius concerninge the nature of the first man. hath of it felfe a certayne naturall integritye whereunto were added those su­pernaturall giftes geuen vnto the first parent. But after sinne, whē those gifts were taken away, man fell into his olde estate. But this is a mere dreame: for the nature of man was instituted of God in such sort as was conuenient for it. Therefore the giftes being taken away, it is corrupted and hurt: and foras­much as it strayeth from his constitution, it is subiect vnto sinne, Farther we say not that originall sinne is only this priuation, but also it comprehendeth thinges positiue, as pronesse to euill, violence of nature agaynst the worde of God, and such other like. And therefore Bernhardus sayth, that in the coniunction of the soule with the body, it is euen as if it shoulde fall vpon an heape of most sharpe poteshardes, and hurting stones. But among y ^• Schoolemen Gulielmus Parisiensis in his booke called Summa de vitiis & virtutibus, bringeth this similitude: That the soule is in such maner let down into the body, as if a man should fall into a myry, depe and stony place, and so shoulde both be drowned, be arayed with myre, and also be hurt. So, saith he, by originall sinne we are drowned into the darkenes of ignorance, we are defiled with lustes, and as touching the powers and facultyes of the mynde we are woun­ded. But in that Pigghius saith, that both the body and the soule are good things, and haue God for their author, I graunt that: And when he afterward deman­deth, how thē should they be corrupted, I answere with Paul: By one man which fell: and that by procreation, as a little here afterward shalbe declared. But whereas he sayth, that they can by no meanes be corrupted, for that God is the author of them, to is no strong reason. For they which are of full age haue both body and soule which are the workes of God, and are continually preserued by his power: but yet may they be vitiated and corrupted. If he say that that commeth of mans will and free choyse, so also answere we, that the same may A false ar­gument of Pigghius It is false that men cā not be cor­rupted but by will and free electiō. come of other causes, namely through propagation, & sede. Wherfore Pigghius argueth frō that which is not the cause, as though it were the cause. For this is his meaning, if men be corrupted, y ^• can not be done but by will & free election, whiche thing is not true. All the argumentes which he obiecteth agaynst vs do springe of this, that he sayth, that he vnderstandeth not how this corruption [Page 129] should be deriued into our posterity: and how it is possible that infantes should be bounde by any lawe: and how there can be a law geuen of that thing, which we can not auoyd. But forasmuch as the holy scriptures do speake, testefy and teach these thinges, it is no matter how much Pigghius ether vnderstandeth, or not vnderstandeth. For we beleue many thinges, which we perceaue not, nor know by any sure reason. Which yet ought not to be of any such force, that e­uery man shoulde obtrude vnto vs thinges to beleue, whatsoeuer they thinke good vpon this pretence, because although they can not be vnderstand by reason, yet they ought to be cōprehended by faith, forasmuch as God can bring to passe farre greater thinges. For first, that thinge which we seke to be beleued, ought to be proued by the holye scriptures. And then althoughe we can not attayne vnto In humane nature and in Eth­nikes there is left some goodnes. it, yet let vs leane to fayth, and laye aside reason. And by our difinition it followeth not, that in nature, or in Ethnikes there is left no goodnes. On­ly thys we affirme, that this vice woulde destroye all, if God by Christ brought not a remedye in the regenerate. Also in those whiche are not rege­nerate, God is sometymes present, and illustrateth them with excellent and heroicall vertues: wherwith original sinne is brideled, and publike wealths & God suf­freth not Originall sin to wast and destroy so much as it might, or so much as Sathan de desireth Empires are retained at the leaste in some ciuill order. Socrates woulde not goe out of prison, when he moughte: Aristides when he was exiled, wished vnto his citisens, that they might neuer be in such euill case, to haue any cause to remember him. Phocion euen now going to his death, and being demaunded if he would any thing vnto his sonne. I would (said he) that he neuer remember the iniury done to me. The publike wealth of Rome had Curtians, Scipios, & Catos, men full of ciuill ho­nesty, and great louers of vertue. Which dueties, although, as they were in men which knew not God, they were sinnes, yet were they bridels of originall sin & of nature corrupted: lest all thinges should be turned vpside down, good lawes should fall to ruine, and the lighte of nature in a manner shoulde be extinguished. Now séeyng we haue confirmed Originall synne by the testimonies of the scriptures, and haue confuted the opinion of Pigghius, and haue reiected their opinion, which thinke originall sinne to be onely a guiltines, and obligation contracted thorough the sinne of Adam, and seing we haue alleaged Augustines definition, that origi­nall sinne is the concupiscence of the flesh, and Anselmus definition, that it is the want of originall iustice, and lastly seing we haue proued our definition largely, and by many testimonies: now resteth for vs to prosecute those thinges which we put forth in the thirde place: namely, of the conditions and proprieties of originall What are the conditi­ons and proprieties of original sinne. sinne how it is spred abrode, how it is abolished, in what sorte the remnants ther­of are in men regenerate, and what payne is due thereunto. And concernyng the maner how it spreadeth into our posteritie, we haue before rehersed sundry opini­ons. The first of those opinions was of the traduction of soules: which we shewed by Augustines iudgement to be easier then the rest, althoughe it be not receiued of all men: An other opinion was, which Augustine followeth: namely, that originall sinne is traduced by the lust and inordinate plesure of such as procreate. This opinion hath two errours: First, because it putteth this euill in procreation, as if it were of necessity: which yet may be seperated from it. And euen the scholemen thē selues graunt, that he which should be begotten without the corrupt affection of y ^• parentes, should yet neuertheles contract originall sinne. For to it they say it is sufficient, that he was in Adam, as in his first séede. An other error is, for that then o­riginall sinne should consist onely in the filthy affection of lust: when as in verye déede (as it is saide) it comprehendeth the corruption of the whole nature. Others thought, that God created the soule euill, because it should be a part of a man exe­crated and set vnder the curse. But because this semeth to be repugnant vnto the nature of creation, that it should be called a filthines, therfore that opinion is also What is the subiecte of Original sinne. reiected. The last opinion is of most men receiued, and it is, that the soule contrac­teth originall sinne by his coniunction with the body, which is alredy infected and corrupted of our parentes: so that if we be demaunded what is the place thereof, or (as they commonly speake) what is his subiect, we answer: that the place ther­of [Page] is in the fleshe, as in the roote and beginning: then out of that fountayne it also Seede is the instru­ment wherby this sin is traduced. possesseth the soule: and so it is extended thoroughout the whole man. Wherfore, séede is the instrument, wherby this sinne is traduced from the parentes into the children. Pigghius obiecteth, that vices can not be deriued by sede into the posteri­ty, vnles peraduenture, it be those vices which cleaue and sticke in the body of the parent: as we sée happeneth in the leprosie, in the falling sickenes, and other disea­ses of the body. Neither doth nature suffer, that in the very substance of séede, sinne should haue place, that by it, it should be traduced into the children. Here we aun­swer, Not onely the affecti­ons of the body are de­riued from the parents into the children, but al­so the affections of the minde. first, that it is not true, that onely the diseases of the body of the parentes are deriued into the children. For we sée many conditions of the minde, deriued from the parentes into the children: As wit, fury, ambition, gentlenes, hautines, & such other. To the other we graunt in déede, that the euill qualitie or corruption which is brought by the séede, as it is in the sede, is not sinne, But yet that letteth not, but that the corruption brought into the children by seede, as by an instrument, may haue in it the nature of sinne. As the qualities which we haue now rehersed, do not make the séede it selfe wittie, docible, or couetous: but yet those qualities brought vnto the child conceiued, do make him such a one. But whether God may be put Whether God be the author of this traduction of ori­ginall sinne the author thereof, they commonly say, that the deformitye and vnrighteousnes which is in this sinne, is drawn out of nature already corrupted: which as it was created of God, was not so vitiated, and so they graunte, that whatsoeuer is good in nature, the same to be of God. And whatsoeuer is therein euill, for as much as it is nothing ells but a defect or want, of it, it is not or necessity to put an ef­ficient cause. For that which is but a want, it is not of necessity that it should be made: for if it should be made, it should also remayne in it. But this is not e­noughe. We agree indede with them, that God is the author of the subiect, or of the thing layd vnder the defect or want. But in that they say, that this defect it selfe hath not an efficiēt cause, therein we agree not with them. For there ought to be something to remoue or prohibite that perfectiō which is wanting, and to with hold the grace and giftes, wherewith our nature was endewed at the be­ginning. Wherefore we must needes referre this priuation or defecte vnto God, which geueth not perfection vtterly without want: which thing he euer­more doth by his iust iudgement, although it be not alwayes manifest vnto vs. And it is most certayne by the scriptures, nether can it be denied, but that God punisheth sinnes by sins. But yet they are not so laid on vs of god, y ^• they should be sinnes as they depende of him: for whatsoeuer God doth, the same without all controuersy is both righte and luste. And euen punishementes, so farre forth as they are punishementes, pertaine to the nature of goodnes. Howbeit as they procede from vs, they are sinnes. For we doo not affirme, that God by himselfe God when he createth the soule corrupteth it not. when he createth the soule, corrupteth it. For it contracteth the filthines of sin from a corrupt body where vnto it is adioyned. But in this thing humane wisedome is muche offended. For it thinketh, that by no meanes there ought to be made any suche coniunction. For it semeth to be like, as if a man should cast a Wherein humane wisedome is here of­fended. precious thinge into an vncleane vessell. It semeth also vniust, that the soule which hath done nether good nor euil, should be ioyned with abody, from which it should contract originall sinne. Yea rather, if it should be so, men ought to absteyne from procreation. As they that are leprous are also exhorted to absteyne if it be possible, from procreatiō, lest by it they should cōtinew to infect humane nature. And bycause the end whereunto man is instituted, is eternall felicity: it semeth not agreable, that the soule should be placed in that body whereby it should be called backe from the end prescribed. And as it is vniust, that the soule which hath not offended should be punished in hell fire: so also semeth it vniust y ^• it should be cast into that body, wherein it incurreth not payne, as in hell, but sinne and hatred of God, which are thinges more grenous, and doth so incurre them, that it can by no meanes auoyde them. These thinges are so hard and ob­scure [Page 130] that they can not fully be satisfied by mans reason. There are indede cer­tayne These ob­iections may be l [...]nified, but not so dissolued, that they can satisfy mans reasō. consolations gathered out of Ecclesiasticall writers, which doo only mi­tigate and lenefie these obiections, so much as is sufficient for godly myndes: but not so much as mans reason requireth. For the soule is ioyned with an vn­cleane and infected body, in consideration of the whole world: that the kinde of man which is the chiefest, should not be wanting in it. God cesseth not of from his office. He letteth not the course of nature: but the body being now made, ac­cording to his prefixed order he treateth the soule: and will rather a man to be, God will rather haue a man to be although he be corrupt, then that he should be nothing. Of those thinges which he gaue at the beginning he geueth certaine. He hath put forth the remedy of Christ. God myght otherwise haue helped if he had would. God she­weth a form of his good­nes in re­nuing of this our kinde. A sentence of Grego­rius. although he be not borne without sinne, then to be nothing. And though he geue not al those thinges which he gaue at the beginning, yet of his mercy he geueth many of them. Farther he hath set forth the remedye of Christ our mediator, by whome the sinne which we haue contracted should be purged. Which corrupti­on driueth the Elect, before their conuersion, vnto Christ: that feling the strēgth of their disease they may receaue medicine of him. And then after they are once grafted into Christ, they haue this sinne lefte to striue and to wrastle agaynst, that at the last they might cary away the victories and triumphes. But thou wilt say, God mought by some other meanes haue saued mākind, that it should not be abolished, if he had ereated an other man pure and perfect, that Adam being dead without issue, all that other mans posterity should be procreated without corruption. There is no doubt but that God could haue done this, if he had would. But this had not bene to erect one that had falen, to saue that which was spilled, and to redeme him which had vtterly perished. God would shew forme of his goodnes, that notwithstanding the corruption of nature, he might saue from destruction, as many as he had chosen. For he would not vtterlye breake the brused reede, nor quench the smoking flaxe. For he would bring forth Christ, as it were an other Adam: which mought in such sort saue his, as the o­ther had destroyed them. These and such like thinges led Gregorius to crye out: O happy fault, which deserued to haue such a redemer. Which wordes I would not gladly pronoūce, forasmuch as I se nothing in y ^• matter, which is not miserable & to be lamented. For in y ^• so great saluatiō folowed, y ^• same is to be ascribed to the goodnes of God, and not to the sinne of Adam. For of it is deriued not so greate a good thing, but only by accidens, that is by chanse. These thinges al­though they can not satisfie the obiections whiche we haue put, so much as hu­mane The con­traction of originall sin condēneth not the e­lect. The order of nature requireth that a soule should be ioyned to such a body lest the body should be left with­out life. If we coc­ker our owne reasō there wilbe no end of expostulating with God. The good­nes of pro­creation ought to be considered by the effect which is of it selfe. reason woulde require, yet by them we haue somewhat after a sorte to answere them. The coniunction of the soule with the corrupt body, maketh no­thing to the destruction of the elect. For in Christ as well the body as the soule is renued. And as by the body the soule is infected, so by fayth in Christ, which is in the mynde, the soule together with the body is repayred. The order of na­ture requireth, that an innocent soule whiche hath done nether good nor euyll, shoulde be ioyned with a corrupte body: except the body shoulde be left without a soule, and the worlde depriued of the kinde of man. And if we go aboute to ex­postulate with God, there shalbe no measure, or ende. For an infinite number of soules would complayne, for that they were created, and were not predesti­nate to be saued: which yet neuer deserued it. Many would complaine, for that they were borne of vngodlye, vnbeleuinge, and barbarous parentes and died in their tender ago, whereby they coulde come to no knowledge of God. And a man might inuent a thousand such kinde of complayntes. As touching procreation we say, that it is laudable, forasmuch as it consisteth of lawfull matrimony. In it is to be considered the man whiche is begotten, that is, (as they call it) the effect proper and naturall. But man is a good creature of God: and sinne or corruption is added per accidens, that is, by chanse. And this e­uill hath a remedy, which thinge happeneth not in the leprosy, and other vncu­rable diseases. We graunt also, that man is created to the ende to attayne to eternall felicity. And whereas it is sayde, that he is by the sinne of the body cal­led backe from this ende, we on the contrary say, that he is by the selfe same [Page] stirred vp to Christ. Lastly we graūt, that it may seme a thing vnworthy, y ^• the innocent soule should haue his place in hell: for y ^• there, there is no redemption The elect are by thys euell stirred vp vnto Christ. Reasons to proue that this sinne is spread a­broade by seede and generation. We depend of Adam by generation. to be hoped for. But being put in a body, though it be neuer so corrupt, yet it may attayne both redemption, and also saluation: Now let vs bringe reasons, firmely and surely to proue, that originall sinne is spred abrode into men by séede and generation. And we will therefore declare it by the holy scriptures, because many are agaynst it, and thinke it to be a thinge altogether fayned. First Paul sayth, that sinne by one man entred into the world. Wherefore let vs con­sider how men depend of Adam, thereby to be pertakers of his sinne. And there can no other way be found, then sede and generation. Farthermore, forasmuch as the Apostle to the Ephesians sayth, that we are by nature the children of wrath, and nature (as the naturall philosophers affirme) is the beginning of mocion, we must nedes haue recourse vnto sede and generation: for they are the ground of our motiō and beginning. But Dauid more expressedly declareth this thing, when he sayth, Behold I was conceaued in iniquyties, and in sinnes hath my mother cō ­ceaued me. By which wordes he apertly teacheth, that this sinne is traduced by generatiō. But that is farre more manifest whiche Iob saith: who can make that cleane, which is borne of vncleane seede? By this place the infected seede of our el­ders is reproued as vncleane, how much soeuer Pigghius cryeth out against it. But now let vs on the contrary side diligently consider, by what meanes this sinne may be taken away. Euen as it was brought in by one man, so also is it How thys sin may be taken away remoued away by one man. And euen as the sinne is powred in from Adam by seede, and generation: so agayne on the other side there are some thinges (in that multitude which pertayneth vnto Christ) which may haue the considerati­on of seede, and those are, election, or predestination, grace, the holy ghost, the worde of God, and baptisme. These two last instrumentes God vseth for the re­generating of his. But if a man aske whether the outward word, or visible signe The in­ward word is required of necessitye [...]n them that be of full age. The out­ward word is an ordinary instru­ment wherby they that are of full age are cal­led. Baptism is not to be contemned. Baptisme is threefold. Of the in­fantes of Christians which dye without baptisme. Some chil­dren of the Saintes pertaine not to predesti­nation. The re­liques of this sinne which re­maine after regeneratiō are not un­puted vnto death. of baptisme be altogether necessary, we answere that indede the inward word, whereby men are moued vnto Christ and are reformed, is vtterly required, if we speake of them that be of perfect age: but in children, neither the inward word hath place, nor the outward word is an ordinary instrument. But doubt­les the outward worde is an ordinary instrument, whereby God calleth those that be of full age vnto saluation: although in some he doth by an extraordina­ry way vse only y ^e inward word. For so he called Abraham out of his countrye, and instructed Adam immediatly (as they are wont to speake) without all out­ward ministery. The signe of baptisme is in no case to be cōtemned. For such as neglect it, whē they may attain to it, obtain not regeneratiō. But if they cā not attayne to it, it shalbe no hurt vnto a godly man, and to him that is conuerted vnto Christ, though he bee not baptised. And hereof it came, that the fathers made mencion of the Baptisme of blood, and of the spirite. And Ambrose vpon the death of Valentinian the Emperor sayth, that he wanted not the grace of Baptisme, for as much as he so excedingly desired it, although he were not baptised. But if I should be demaunded concerning infantes of Christians which dye without Baptisme, I would answere, that we ought to haue a good hope of them, & that the same hope leaneth vnto the word of God, namely, vnto the league and couenaunt made with Abraham, wherein God promiseth, to be not only his God, but also the God of his séede. Which promise yet, forasmuch as it is not so generall, that it comprehendeth all, therefore I dare not perticularly promise saluation to any which so departeth: For there are some children of the saintes which pertayne not to predestination: as we rede of Esau, Ismaell, and many other: whose saluation was not therefore letted bycause they were not baptised. Howbeit whilest we liue here, there re­maine euen in them that be regenerate remnantes of this sinne. For originall sin is not vtterly taken away by regeneration. The guiltines indede is taken away: and such thinges as remayne are not imputed to eternall death. But euery [...]hinge ought to be iudged by that, that it is in it selfe: wherefore if we be demaunded, whether [Page 131] it be sinne which remayneth in the regenerate, we answere, that it is sinne. And if thou rede at any time, that it is not sinne, thou must vnderstand that to be spokē That which re­maineth of this sinne after rege­neration is sinne. of the guiltines thereof. But of this matter we will speake more at large in the 7. chap. But in death this kinde of sinne shall vtterly be ouerthrowne. For in the blessed Resurrection, we shall haue a body renewed, and apt for eternall felicity. But in the meane time, so long as we are here, our old man and naturall corruption is cōtinually dissolued, that in death at the last it may cease to be. Now haue we sene three thinges, how originall sinne is spred abroade: by what thing it is takē away, and what is to be iudged of the remnantes thereof. Now let vs speake of the payne due thereunto. Some of the scholemen thinke that the payne shalbe without fe­ling. What is the punish­ment of ori­ginall sinne. The Pelagians thought that they should only be banished out of the kingdōe of heauen: and farther they affirme nothing: but Pigghius addeth this also that they which dye hauing but this sinne only, shalbe blessed with a certayne naturall feli­citye: and shall loue God with all theyr hart, with all theyr soule, and with all theyr strength, and shall set forth his name and praises. And although he dare not af­firme these thinges as certayne, yet he alloweth thē as very likely. But Augustine de fide ad Petrum, and in other places also, oftentimes adiudgeth infantes that are not regenerate, if they dye so, to eternall fire. And in dede diuers sentences of the holy scripture seme to agree with his opinion. For in the last iudgement sen­tence shalbe geuen but to maner of wayes: nether is there appointed any third place betwene them that are saued, and them that are condemned. The Papistes also although they thinke that Purgatory shall continue vnto the day of iudge­ment, yet after that day they put no middle place. And it is manifestly writtē, that they whiche beleue not in Christ, shall not only not haue eternall life, but also the wrath of God abideth vpon them. And so longe as we be without Christ, we are called the childrē of wrath, nether is it to be doubted, but that God punisheth those with whome he is angry. Wherefore we will say with Augustine and with the ho­ly scriptures, that they shalbe punished, but how or in what sort, we can not define: but that, for asmuch as there are sundry punishementes of hell (for euen the scrip­tures affirme, that some shall be delt with more tollorably then other some) it is credible, that they, forasmuch as they haue not adioyned other actuall sinnes vnto originall sinne, shallbe more easely punished. Howbeit I alwayes except the chil­dren of the sayntes, for that we doubt not but that they may be nombred with the beleuers, although in very dede by reason of age they beleue not as the children of the infidels are nombred among the vnbeleuers, although by themselues they re­sist not fayth. Wherfore the children of the godly departinge without Baptisme may be saued, thorough the league which God hath made with theyr parentes, if so they partayne vnto the nomber of them that are predestinate. I except also, if there be any other which by the secret counsell of God belong vnto predestination

These thinges being now thus discussed let vs come vnto the argumentes of the Pelagians, whereby they sought to proue, that there is no originall sin. Their The argu­mentes of the Pela­gians a­gainst origi­nall sinne. first argument is, that it is not very likely, that God will still persecute the sinne of Adam, whē as he hath long since sufficiētly punished it: especially seing Nahū y ^e prophet saith, that God wil not twise iudge one & the selfe same thing. I know there be which āswer, y ^• he hath not twise geuē iudgemēt vpō y ^• sin, but [...]s only: for in one iudgement he cōprehēded Adā, & all his posterity. But to declare y ^e thinge more manifestly, I say, that in euery one of vs, as often as we are punished, there Euery man beareth his owne sinne, and not an other mans How this is to be vn­derstande, that God reuengeth in vs the sinne of A­dam. A similitude is a cause, why we ought to be punished: and therefore in euery man is con­demned his owne proper fault and not an other mans. And though we reade, that God doth reuenge in vs the sinne of Adam, that is so to be vnderstand, by reason our sinne had his beginning of him. As if a man being sicke of the pesti­lence should infect other, and they dye, we can not say, but that euery one of them died of his owne and proper pestilence, and not of an other mans. But if a man will say, that they perished by his pestilence from whome they drew the contagiousnes, that is so to be vnderstand, because he brought in the pestilēce [Page] first, and with tooch infected them. But that sentence of Nahum the prophet ma­keth A place of Nahum. nothing to this matter. In déede Ierome when he interpreteth that place, sayth, that by those wordes Marcion is confuted. For he falsely alledged, that the God of the olde testament semed a reuenger and cruell, because he punished men with most greuous punishementes. Which thing Ierome sayth, is to be as­cribed vnto goodnes, and not to cruelty. For God (saith he) did for no other cause pu­nishe men so greuously in Sodom, in the floude, and at other tymes, but that they should not perish for euer. For he punished thē once, that they should not afterward be punished agayne. But the same Ierome, peraduenture, because he sawe these reasons not very strong, obiecteth vnto himselfe: By these wordes it may seeme, that adulterers if they be taken, are in good case, for so it should come to passe, that they being punished with death, should escape eternall punishementes of hell. Wherefore he aunswereth, that the iudge of this world can not preuent the sentēce of God, nether is it to be thought, that by a light punishement those sinnes are put away, which deserue a greuous and lon­ger In Ie­roms time adulterers were puni­shed with death. punishement. In these wordes of Ierome are two thinges to be noted: the one is, that at that tyme adultery was punished with death: and the other, that that interpretacion semed not to satisfie him: wherefore he alledgeth an other expo­sition of the Iewes, that God by those wordes would signifie, that the Assirians should not be able, after they had led away the ten tribes, to obtayne also the kingdome of Iudah, as they had attempted to do vnder Ezechyas. God (saith he) will not suffer a double vexatiō to arise. It is sufficient to him, to haue destroyed ten tribes, he will haue the king­dome of Iuda preserued. This exposition, although it haue in it nothing contrary to piety, yet it semeth not to declare the minde of the prophet. For he prophesi­ed the threatning of God agaynst Niniue, and that it shoulde be ouerthrowen. And mindinge to exagerate the vengeance at hand, he sayth, that the vehemēce of the destruction which the Chaldeyans shoulde bring, shoulde be so greate, that God should not nede to afflict them againe: for he would punishe them suffici­ently in the first vengeance. For the kingdome of the Assirians was vtterly ouer­throwen of the Chaldeyans. And it is a common saying amongst vs, that when a man is beaten euen to the death, he was so striken with one blowe, that he ne­ded not the second stroke. This is the Prophetes scope, and the proper sense of this place. But as touching the matter, we deny not, but that afflictions in god­ly men do tende to this end, that they should not be condemned with this world, as Paul saith. For they are fatherly chastisementes, whereby God calleth them backe to repentance. But out of that we ought not to draw a generall rule, to God puni­nisheth ma­ny of the vngodlye both here and al­so will pu­nish them in the world to come. ascribe vnto God a measure, that when he hath begon to punishe the vngodly in this life, he can not also punishe them in an other life, if they dye without faith and repentance. If they returne vnto God, they shall suffer nothing in an other life: and yet not because they haue in this life with theyr punishementes made satisfaction vnto God, but because Christ hath throughly payd the price of redemption for them. Wherefore euen as vnto the godly are certayne good thinges geuen in this life, which are vnto them an ernest peny, and beginning of the life to come, which shalbe accomplished in an other world: so in the vn­godly, eternall punishementes are begon with the preambles of the afflictions Punish­mentes of this life are to the vngodly pre­ambles of the punish­mentes to come. A place of Ezechiel. of this life. Which thing also Christ semeth to signify, when he sayth, Feare him, which can both kill the body, and also cast the soule into hell fire. By these thinges I thinke it manifestly inough appeareth, that the oracle of the Prophete, which we haue playnely interpreted, pertayneth nothinge to the matter whiche we entreate of.

An other of their arguments is taken out of the Prophet Ezechiell: The sonne shall not beare the iniquity of the father. To this we may briefly aunswere, as we a little before sayd: namely, that the children beare not the iniquity of their fathers, but their own & proper iniquity, which cleaueth vnto euery man frō his natiuity. But bicause that place is of diuers diuersly expounded, we will briefly declare our iudgement therin. This was a prouerb much vsed among the Iewes: Our fathers [Page 132] haue eaten sower grapes, and the childrens teeth are set on edge. And not only Ezechiell maketh mencion of this saying, but also Ieremy in his 31. chap. The meanyng of y ^• sentence is this. Our fathers haue sinned, and we are punished for thē. And as the Rabines say, they which were of the kingdome of the ten tribes semed, to referre these things to Ieroboam the sonne of Nabat, which first made the golden calues. But they which were of the kingdom of Iuda referred the same vnto Manasses: for whose impiety they thought, that that captiuity honge ouer their heds, which the Prophets denounced. This prouerbe God reproued, & sayd: that it should not be so henceforth. Myne are the soules (sayth he) the sonne shall not beare the iniquitye of the father: but euery man shall dye in hys owne sinne. Many will haue these wordes to be vnderstand concerning ciuill punishment: bicause God in the 24. chapter of Deut. commaunded, that neither the parents should be killed for the children, nor the children for the parents. Which thing also Amasias king of Iuda obserued, as it is written in the 14. chap. of the 2. booke of kinges. For he slew them that mur­thered his father, but spared their children, accordyng to the commaundement of y ^• law. Howbeit the Israelites did not alwayes obserue this. For we read in y ^e booke of Iosua the 7. chap. that not only Acham was put to death for the accursed thyng, Iosua did against the common law, when he punished the children with the father. which he had stolen, but also together with him, both his sonnes and daughters, & also his cattell. But this was done by a singuler commaundemēt of God. Neither is it preiudiciall vnto the law vniuersally geuen. Howbeit this exposition concerning the ciuill law, agréeth not with the wordes of the Prophet. For the Iewes complained not of the punishment which was inflicted on them by the iudge, or by the Prince: but of those calamities whiche God himselfe had layde vppon them­namely, of the destructiō of their goods, of the ouerthrowing of the kingdom of Iudah, and of the captiuity of Babilon. In these thinges they spake euill of the iudge­mēts of God, and murmured, that his way was not right. Wherfore others haue interpreted that place to be spoken of eternall punishments, of the withdrawyng of grace and the holy ghost: which things they say happē vnto euery man for their owne sinnes, and not for the sinnes of other mē. Howbeit in the meane time they affirme, that both the children do suffer temporall punishments for the parentes, and the people for the princes sake. For God (say they) will punishe the fathers in the children. For the children are a certaine part of the parentes. Neither is it ab­surd (say they) if the children by their afflictions profite their parentes, when as by this meanes both they are called backe to repentaunce, and also they haue no iniu­ry done vnto them, if forasmuch as they be mortall, they suffer death. For God prudently dispenseth the tymes either to liuing or dying: and taketh away life frō the children, either that they should not be corrupted with malitiousnes, or if they be now already in sinnes & in damnation, y ^• they should not be more & more aggraua­ted, and that they might once at the length make an ende of liuing wickedly. And Augustine semeth somwhat to incline to this sentence, in his questions vpon the boke of Iosua the 8. and 9. question. And they which wil haue these remnants of o­riginall sinne which remaine after regeneration to be no sinnes, are compelled so to say. For they can not say, that in infantes their owne sinnes are punished, for as much as they affirme that they haue none. But we, which say that they are vtter­ly sinnes, do teach, that they are not in déede imputed to eternal death, but yet they are sometimes punished with some paynes, to the end we might vnderstand, that God is displeased with thē. But neither doth that erpositiō of Augustines so well agrée with Ezechiels meanyng. For the Prophete sayth, that it should not so after­ward come to passe, that the children should say that for their parentes sake, they suffred temporall punishments, such as were banishment and captiuity. For the Lord sayth: the sonne shall not beare the iniquity of the father. Wherefore, thys no­thyng helpeth them, in that they say, that this is true in spirituall punishementes, & in eternall dampnation. For the Prophete speaketh most apertly of the bodely punishementes of thys lyfe. Augustine hathe an other interpretation in hys Enchiridion to Laurentius in hys 46. chapter: namelye, that it is a prophecye [Page] of the benefite whiche shoulde be geuen by Christ. For, forasmuch as thorough his death satisfaction is made for Originall sinne, the Prophet sayth: that the child henceforth shal not beare the sinne of his father, but his owne. And Augustine sée­meth to be led into this sentence, bicause when as Ieremy in his 31. chap. writeth in a maner the selfe same thing, streight way is added a promise of the new Testament. Behold saith he) the dayes shall come, and I wyll make a new couenaunt wyth the house of Iuda. But this sence also semeth not to agrée with y ^• meanyng of y ^e prophet which we haue before rehersed. Moreouer although Christ suffered at a tyme ap­pointed, Children in the old Te­stament were saued by the po­wer and grace of the death of Christ. yet by the power & grace of his death, children were saued also in the old Testament. What neded then to say, that henceforth it shall not be so, when as in very dede it was not so before. Farther they also, which are without Christ, beare their owne iniquity, neither do they suffer punishmentes for an other mans sinne, but for their owne. Wherfore we say, that the sentence of the Prophet is general­ly true: and that all, both children, and also those that be of full age as well of the olde Testament as of the new, do beare euery one their owne iniquitie. For al mē that are borne, haue in themselues sinne and corruption, for which they ought to be punished. Wherfore this sentence confirmeth our opinion: so far is it of, that it can be alledged against vs. But this maketh most of all against Pigghius: for he affirmeth, that children beare the sinnes of the parentes, when as he sayth: that otherwise they are cleane, and borne without sinne. The Iewes published abrode that they themselues were innocents, and that as for the punishments which they suffred, they suffred them for their parents sake. For their parentes (said they) had sinned, and not they themselues. But God sayth, y ^• henceforth they should no more vse that prouerbe. For he would by the Prophet declare an aboundant illustration of the holy ghost, which should come to passe in the new Testament. For his iudgements are not such, that for an other mans sinne he will punish one that is guilt­les. Wherfore he doth not say, that henceforth it should not be so, as though it werso at any tyme before: but this he sayth, that it should come to passe, y ^• they should not vse any such prouerbe, when they had once knowledge of the truth. But the How God taketh ven­geaunce vpon the chil­dren for the iniquiries of the fa­thers. law semeth to be against this exposition. For in it God sayth: that he will visite the iniquity of the fathers vpon the chyldren vnto the thyrd and fourth generation. These thinges séeme not very well to agrée, y ^• God will both visite the iniquitie of the fa­thers vpon the children, and also that the children shall not beare the sinnes of the fathers, To satisfie this obiection, we will first interprete the wordes of the lawe. For so shall we perceiue, that there is no contrarietie betwene the Prophet and the law. This sentence of the law, some referre to the mercy of God, some to hys seuerity and iustice. They which thinke that by these woordes is commended the mercy of God, do say that God is so good and mercifull, y ^• he will not streight way destroy a man when he sinneth, but rather will tary for his repentaunce. There­fore sometimes when he spareth the father which hath sinned, yet he punisheth y ^e child, and sometimes when he spareth both the father and the childe, he punisheth An example of Iehu. the childes childe: sometimes also he differreth the punishments vnto the fourth generation. As we sée came to passe in Iehu kyng of Samaria. For although he him selfe greuously sinned, yet God tooke not away the kingdome from his posteritie, but after the fourth generation. Wherfore it séemeth, that by these wordes is set forth the goodnes of God, which so long restraineth his anger, nether doth streight way poure it out. But others thinke that the goodnes of God is set forth, when it is sayd that he will do good vnto those that loue him euen to a thousande generati­ons. But contrarily, that his seuerity and iustice should be known, it is added, that he will visite sinnes, not only vpon them which haue sinned, but also vppon theyr children, and childrens children, euen vnto the fourth generation. And this they declare by examples. For Amalek had done many euils vnto the Isralites, wandring An example of Amal [...]ch Iehez [...] the seruant of Helizeus as strangers through the desert: & a long time after his posterity wer afflicted of y ^e Israelites, and so afflicted, that at the last God commaunded Saul vtterly to destroy euery one of thē. Iehezi also the seruant of Helizeus, bicause he had in his maisters [Page 133] name receiued money of Naaman the Sirian, was both hymselfe striken wyth leprosye, and also all hys posteritie for euer. Eyther of these sentences is god­lye: and maye be confirmed by examples. Howbeit the latter semeth better to a­gree with the texte. But how God visiteth the iniquity of the fathers vpon the chil­dren vnto the third and fourth generation, the law it selfe sufficiently declareth. They beare the iniquity of their pa­rents which haue also themselues hated God. To hate God is ta­ken two manner of wapes. For it is added. Of them that hate me. whereby it appeareth, that no other children shall beare the sinnes of theyr elders, but those which haue bene like vnto theyr parentes. For if they depart from theyr wickednes, they shal not beare theyr sinnes. But this is to be noted, that, To hate God, may be takē two maner of waies: ether in acte (as they speake) which agreth only with those that are of full age, or in pro­nese and vice alredy contracted in nature: which hath place in infantes. But some will obiect, If we vnderstand that God punisheth those onlye, which imitate the sinnes of theyr parentes, what neded this addition, vnto the third and fourth gene­ration: when as he will perpetually punishe all sinners what soeuer they be? Au­gustine was so moued with this obiection, that he sayd, that by this forme of spea­king, vnto the third and fourth generation, is vnderstand the whole posterity: for in it a determinate nomber is vsed for an infinite. For if a man adde 4. to 3. then is The num­ber of seuen is put for any other number. it the nomber of 7. Which is vsed to be put for any other nomber. After the same maner he sayth it is written in Amos the Prophet, ouer three euills and ouer fower, I will not conuert him. And he sayth, that this is the meaning of that place: If a man transgresse once or twise, God can forgeue hym: but if a man heape sinnes vpon sinnes, and so procéede vnmeasurably, then God can not forgeue hym. Here 3. and 4 sinnes are put for a continuation of sinnes. So God may be sayd to punishe euen to the third and fourth generation of them which hate him: when as he will punishe all such whatsoeuer they be be. But it may be answered otherwise, that God therefore Why God hath deter­mined the third and fourth generation. hath determined the third and fourth generation, to shew that his anger is moderate, and ioyned with lenity: sometimes to staye from punishmentes and to go no far ther in punishing. Although there are others which thinke, that the third and fourth generation is expressedly put, bycause euen to that time the posteritye are peraduenture entised to sinne by the euill example of theyr great grandfather: for none of the elders liue past that, for for y ^• most part after the fourth generation they no longer liue. By these thinges we se, that the words of the Prophet are no­thing repugnant vnto the law, but doo rather interpret it. For he therefore sayth, that the child shall not beare the iniquity of the father, bycause the law sayth, that he visiteth the iniquity of the fathers vpon the children, if they also imitate the sins of theyr parentes: that when they are punished, they should vnderstand, that they are punished for theyr owne sinnes, and not for the sinnes of theyr parentes. But it is sayd, that God therefore punisheth the sinnes of the fathers in them, bycause the sinnes began in them, and were continued vnto the children. And if the childrē had not had fathers or grandfathers, which had so sinned, paraduenture God had yet still withheld his anger: and euen as by his patience he bare with theyr elders, so also paraduenture he had borne with them. But forasmuch as both theyr elders haue sinned, and they also depart not from theyr example, God will no longer dif­fer God will not differ punishment longer then it behoueth least he should seme to haue cast of the care of thynges. Of him that was borne blind▪ the punishment, lest he should seme to haue cast of the care of worldly thinges, and so other men should sinne more securely. Howbeit in the meane time, they which are so punished can not be called innocent, when as they themselues also doo hate God, Nether is that repugnant to these thinges, which Christ spake in Iohn concerning the man that was borne blind, Nether hath this man sinned nor his pa­rentes. For the meaninge of that place is not, that that blinde man was punished without desert. But only this is noted, that the prouidence of God had directed that fault of his eyes to an other end, then that the blinde man should be punished. For God would vse that occasion to illustrate the deuinity of Christ. So god distribu­teth paynes not only by them to punishe sinnes, but also for other endes which he hath vnto himself appointed. And thus much concerning that place of the prophet: whereby may be manifestly sene that it nether repugneth with the law, nor yet [Page] with the definition by vs alledged. Yea rather the same sentence is to be returnes agaynste our aduersaries, whiche affirme that children are guiltye of an other mans sinne.

The next reason was, that forasmuch as both the soule and the body are the workes of God, and the parentes are oftentimes holy, and godly, and are commended in the scriptures, and the worke of generation, and matrimony are praysed, how among so many aydes of innocency sin hath crept in? First we aunswere with Paul, that it crept in by one man. And whereas they saye that the parentes are cleane and holy it is vtterly vntrue. For although they be en­dued with piety, and originall sinne (as touching the guiltynes) is forgeuen vn­to them, yet there still remaineth in them a corrupt nature, and an vnpure con­dition. Wherefore such a nature as they haue in themselues, such I say do they deliuer vnto their posterity, and that (as it is sayd) by seede, and generation. Nether doth this any thing hinder, that some imagine that the body can not The body worketh not agaynst the spirite by naturall action. preuaile against the spirite. For we say not, that the soule is corrupted of the body by a naturall action. But forasmuch as the body is corrupt, it reststeth the soule: and the soule not being confirmed with those giftes, which it had at the beginning, obeyeth the inclination thereof, nether gouerneth it (as it were mete it should) but is gouerned of it. Farther phisicall or naturall reasons teach A naturall agreemente betwene the soule and the body. vs, that there is a naturall agrement betwene the body and soule: for the soule is diuersly affected according vnto the temperature of the body. For they which abound with choler, or melancholy, are commonly angry or heauy of mynde. Wherefore forasmuch as this kinde of reasoning procedeth of false principles, it can conclude nothing.

Farther they alledged a place out of the first epistle to the Corrinthyans: Your children are holy. Wherefore it is not probable that they haue contracted origi­nall A place of the first E­pistle to the Corrinthi­ans. sinne: for holines agreeth not with sinne. Some expounde that sentence thus, namely, that the children of Christians are holy as touching a ciuill con­sideration: namely, for that they are to be counted for legitimates, and not for bastardes. But that is not sufficiente. For by that meanes the matrimonye of Christians, shoulde in nothinge excell the matrimonye of Infydelles: for theyr chyldren also borne in lawefull matrymonye, are legitimate, and are The chil­dren also of infidels be­gotten in lawfull ma­trimony are legitimate. A godlye e­ducation ma [...] also happen vn­to bastards Adeodatus the sonne of Augustine. Some holi­nes redoundeth from the parents into childrē by the power of the couenāt of God. What is the promes that we leane vnto when we deliuer our infants to be baptised. made heyres. Other expound holynes for a godly education. For if the godly yoke fellow should depart from the vngodly, paraduenture the children should be left with the vngodly, and so be led away from Christ: but if they dwell to­gether, the godly parent will euer instill some piety into the children. But this exposition also semeth not to make much to the purpose of Paul: for a godly e­ducation may happen also vnto thē which are born in adultery, or fornication. Which thing we see came to passe in Adeodatus the son of Augustine. Wherefore the Apostle semeth rather to signifie, that some holynes redoundeth from god­ly parentes into their children: which yet dependeth not of the fleshe, but of the promise geuen in the couenant. For God promised Abraham, that he would not only be his God, but also the God of his sede. Wherefore God in the prophetes calleth the infantes of the Iewes his, and complayneth that his sonnes and daughters were sacrificed vnto Moloch. And we in the hope of this promise, do offer our infantes vnto the Church to be baptised, because they pertaine vnto God and vnto Christ: that the promise which we haue now spoken of might be confirmed with some outward seale. But thou wilt say: thou mayst be decea­ued: for that paraduenture thy sonne doth not pertaine to the number of the elect. Hereunto I answere that the like difficulty is there in those that be of full age: for it may be, that a man professeth faith with a fayned hart, or may be led only by humane perswasion, or may haue but a faith for a time, so that in very dede he pertayneth not vnto the elect. But these thinges the minister re­gardeth not, but only considereth the confession, which he that is to be baptised professeth: and will say, that the election of God is hidden vnto him: therefore is he not carefull thereof, he can appoynt nothing of perticular thinges: but on­ly [Page 134] considereth the generall promesse: from which although many are excluded, A place to the Rom. yet longeth it not to him, to define who they are. So Paul speaketh of the Iewes: If the roote be holy, the branches also shalbe holy: if the first fruites be holy, the conspersi­on or masse also shalbe holy. By which wordes he declareth, that the loue of God was bent vnto the Iewes because of the promise, and for their fathers sake: and for that cause saluation was due vnto them. Although therefore this pro­mise The pro­mes of God is indeter­minate and true. be indefinite, and many are excluded from it, yet neuertheles it remay­neth vnshakē and firme. For alwayes some of them are conuerted vnto Christ and shalbe conuerted euen vnto the ende of the world. Which thing is manifest in Isaake: vnto whose seede although God promised he woulde be mercifull, yet An example of Isaak. that promise tooke place only in Iacob & not in Esau. And yet was that no cause, why Esau should not be circumcised. So we graunt, that the children of Chri­stians, which pertayne vnto the election of God are holy: but yet they are spot­ted with originall sinne: because by nature they are the children of wrath, as others are. And if God do put away the guiltines, and impute it not vnto them to the ende they may be saued, that commeth vnto them of the grace of God, & & of his mere mercy, & not of the purenes of their nature. Seing therefore they Infants e­lect, when they are borne, are both holy, & the children of wrath in diuers res­pectes. are borne of a corrupt masse, and also they pertaine vnto the number of the e­lect, we affirme ether: both that they are holy, and that also by nature they are the children of wrath. Wherefore it plainely appeareth how this argumente may be dissolued.

But they adde moreouer that in infantes is found nothing spoken, done, or thought against the lawe of God, and therefore they haue no sinne at all. How fowly they are herein deceaued, plainely appeareth by those thinges whiche we haue alredy sayd. For this is as much, as if they should thus reason & say. They haue no actuall sin: Ergo, they haue no sin. For to reason frō the species to the A false ar­gument. generall word by a negatiō, is an ill kinde of reasoning. But they are deceaued, for that they follow not the vniuersall nature or definition of sinne: whiche we haue so before described, that it cōprehendeth all things that are by any meanes repugnant vnto the lawe of God.

They obiect also, that it is not wel sayd, that originall sinne is spred abrode by the sede and fleshe, because they haue an insensible and brutishe nature, and therefore can not receaue sinne. But we haue alredy taught, that sinne is not in them but by inchoation as in the roote. But then the nature of sinne is fini­shed, when the soule is now ioyned to it.

We haue declared also, what is to be aunswered vnto the Pelagians, when they contend, that these thinges which Paul speaketh in this place, ought to be Against the Pelagians. vnderstand as touching imitation. For first that can not stand with all the sayinges of the Apostle. For he sayth, that all men haue sinned, and that by the disobe­dience of one man, many were made sinners: and (which is more firme) he hath pro­ued, that therefore sinne was in the world before the lawe, because death raigned from Adam euen vnto Moses. There are also other reasons which Augustine vseth a­gainst the Pelagians, which are not nedefull now to be repeted.

Farther they adde, that humane afflictions, and death it selfe are naturall: for they haue in vs principles of nature from whence they do flowe. But here­unto we answere, that these principles were not so framed, when the nature of man was first instituted: but they were afterward vitiated and corrupted, as we now see they are. The philosophers resolue the effectes which they see, into these principles which are now extant: but Christians do rather resolue them into the word of God. Seing therefore that the scripture teacheth, that death en­tred through sin, and that man as he was created mought haue liued alwayes, let Pigghius and they which follow him beware, how truely and godly they af­firme, that death happeneth vnto man by nature.

They adde also, that that ought not to be counted sinne, which cannot be a­noyded: but this is hereby proued to be false, because the lawe is set forth vnto [Page] vs, which yet no man can absolutely performe, or auoyde all the faultes com­mitted against it. In examining of sinnes we ought not to looke, whether anything Chaunce and necessi­ty enter not into the na­ture of sin. be done by chance or by necessity: but whether it be repugnance or agrea­ble with the lawe of God. By this balance ought sinne to be weighed. Where­fore it is light and trifling, which they bring against vs concerning necessity.

Lastly they obiect vnto vs, that if the sinne of the first parentes be deriued into the posterity, there can be no reason geuen, why the sinnes also of the other parents should not be traduced after the same maner into the posterity. Which Whether the sinnes of the nexte parentes be deriued in­to the posterity. An opinion of the schole men. thing if we graunt, they thinke that that will follow whiche is most absurde, namely, that our estate is most miserable, which are borne in this latter time: for in vs should be deriued not only the sinnes of our first parentes, but also of all our elders. The schoolemen thought that it is not possible, that the sinnes of the next parentes should passe into the children. And it semeth that they were led thereunto, chiefely by two reasons. Of which the first is: that the next pa­rentes do communicate vnto their children only nature, and such other thinges, which of themselues do follow nature: but as for singular conditions and ac­cidences they communicate not them vnles peraduenture they pertayne vnto the body. For oftētimes diseases of the parents, as the leprosy or gout, do come vnto the children. But the qualities of the minde are not propagated, nether per­taine they to procreation: for a Grāmarian begetteth not a Grammariā, nor a Musitian a Musitiā. Wherefore forasmuch as sinnes pertaine vnto the minde, they say that they can not be propagated from the parēts. The other reason is: The first parents had originall iustice: which consisted not only in the minde, but also in the body, and in the members. Therefore in doing the acte of genera­tion, they might poure into their children the want of this righteousnes, for that it sticketh in the body, and in the flesh. But actual sinnes, which afterward followed, forasmuch as they pertayne vnto the minde, can not be propagated into the children. Howbeit Augustine in his Encheridion to Laurentius the 46. chap. Augustine thinketh that the sin of the nexte parents are communi­cated vnto the childrē. sayth, that it is probable, that the sinnes also of the next parentes are communicated with the children. For the proofe whereof, he compareth together two places of the scrip­ture, which we haue before entreated of: That God sayth: that he will visite the sins of the fathers vpon the children vnto the third and fourth generation: whē in an other place he saith, that the sonne shall not beare the iniquity of the father. If the sonne (saith he) beare not the iniquity of his father, but his owne, and yet God visiteth in him the sin of the father, it must nedes be that the sonne haue in himselfe that sinne: Otherwise these places should not agree together. Sinne therefore is of his owne nature such, that it Sinne de­stroyeth not onely the soule but al­so the body. not only wasteth the soul of man, but also corrupteth the body, flesh and members. Wherefore Paul to the Corrinthians sayth, that our bodies are the Temples of the holy ghost: and greuously threateneth that man which destroyeth the temple of God: If therefore God punishe the sinnes of the parentes in the children, and the child beareth not an other mans iniquity, but his owne only, it consequently followeth, The iustice of God is not to be proued, if the sinnes of the fa­thers be powred into the children The parēts must liue holilest they procreate children pertakers of their sinnes Wherein o­riginall sin and the sins of the nexte parentes do differ. that the infantes of wicked men, when they are afflicted, to the end theyr fathers should be punished in them, haue also in themselues some of theyr fathers wicked­nes. Nether can any man here complayne of the iustice of God. For if God by hys most vncorrupt Iustice can deliuer thē which sin, into a reprobate sence, & punish sins with sins, why may he not also iustly will, that the corruption of sinne should not only destroy the soule, but also that the vnpurenes thereof should redound like­wise into the body? Wherefore they which are begotten of sinners, doo contract of them such a nature, as they finde in them. And by this sentence men are admoni­shed, to liue holyly, lest they should pollute both theyr owne soules and bodies, and also by the same meanes infect theyr children. If this should be so as we haue now sayd, a man might demaund, what difference there is betwene originall sin, & that which is drawen from the next parentes? We answer that the propagation of o­riginall sinne is perpetuall, as the holy scriptures doo teach: but the continuacion of other sinnes is not of necessity. For sometimes there is powred no sinne from [Page 135] the next parentes into the children, vnles it be originall sinne. For God semeth to God some­times de­ferreth the pouring in of the sins of the nexte parents, in­into the children. haue prefixed a measure, least euill should rainge abrode vnmeasurably, & semeth to temperate the propagation of this euill. And this experience teacheth: for Eze­chias a most holy prince had to his parent king Achaz, a man most wicked: and the same Ezechias agayne begat Ammon a very vngodly sonne, who also begat Ma­nasses farre worse then himselfe. Or ells though the beginnings and principles of sinnes be powred from the parentes into the children, yet God will sometimes minister so much grace, fauor, and strength, that they may ouercome them. But this way these differ nothing from originall sinne. For vnto godly men is geuen Why God suffereth good chil­dren to be borne of e­uell parēts, and euell children of good pa­rentes. Grace can not be deri­ued from the parents into the children. God hath promised to do good vnto the chil­dren of the godly, but not for the merites of the parents An other reason why God suf­freth eueil children to be borne of good parēts A curse a­gainst the children of the vngod­ly. grace also to ouercome it. Farther when God geueth good children of euill parēts, he declareth the powre of his goodnes, whereby he represseth the filthines and cor­ruption of the parentes: that it should not flowe abrode into the children. And con­trariwise when he causeth euill children to be borne of good parentes, this he con­sidereth that the holynes of the children should not be ascribed vnto the merites of the parentes. For they can not by procreation of the body poure grace into the children: forasmuch as it is a thing altogether spirituall, nether hath it any naturall fellowship with the fleshe. Wherefore forasmuch as goodnes & holynes are the mere and pure giftes of God, God doth in dede promise that he will doo good vnto the po­sterity of godly men, euen to a thousand generations. But that is not to be vnder­stand, as though there were put any merit in the parentes. God was of his mercy moued to make this promise, and not by the merites of men. And to declare his li­bertye herein, he suffereth it sometimes to happen otherwise, and by that meanes teacheth, that holy parentes are not so holy, but that they haue still much wicked­nes and corruption in them, which they may se to be naturally grafted in theyr children. Whereby we may manifestly se the corruption of our nature, which also followeth the sayntes euen to the death. And for the more establishing also of thys sentence, some bring out of the Psalme a curse of the Churche agaynst the chil­dren of the vngodlye: That they shoulde be orphanes, that no man shoulde haue compassion on them, that they shoulde begge theyr liuinge. If the children of the vngodly be innocents, then is this no iust prayer. Wherfore it semeth by these words of necessity to follow, that they are partakers of the wyckednes of their parentes. And bicause they are infantes, it can by no other meanes be done, but by propaga­tion. I know there are some, which will haue these wordes of Dauid to be prophe­sies of thinges to come: wherin the holy ghost hath foretold, that these misfortunes shall come vnto them. But graunt that they be prophesies. Yet can it not be deni­ed, but that there is in them both the forme & the affect of a prayer. But a prayer Whether the latter mē be more miserable then the first. ought to be iust, for otherwise it should be no prayer. But where as they say, that that is most absurd, which followeth of this doctrine (namely, that the last men al­so should be more miserable then all others, bicause they should beare the synnes both of Adam, & also of all their elders) it may be answered two maner of wayes. For first not all thinges which seme absurd vnto vs, are also absurd before God. The things that are ab­surde vnto vs are not absurd be­fore God. For (not to depart from this selfe same matter) Christ threatneth the Iewes, that all the murther of the godly, from Abell euen to Zacharias, the sonne of Barachias, should come vpon them. And who séeth not, that the estate of the children of Israel which were led away into captiuity, was much more miserable, then very many generations of their elders, which had defiled themselues with the selfe same sins. Farther we aunswer, that that should in dede be absurd, if the sinnes of the elders should continually passe into the children. But seyng we haue declared, that that is not alwayes so, but that the prouidence of God hath appointed an end and mea­sure To the reasons of the scholemen. Affections of the mind [...] are communicated frō the parents vnto the children. vnto this euil, and hath therfore determinately pronounced onely of the third and fourth generation, there is no cause why it should seme absurd vnto any man. But the reasons of the scholemen wherwith they withstand this propagation are very weake. First they alledge that the qualities of the minde are not communi­cated from the parentes vnto the children, which thing euen experience teacheth to be false. For we sée oftentymes, that of angry persons are borne angry children: [Page] and of sad parentes sad children. Neither doth this similitude serue thē to any pur­pose, when they say, that of a Grammarian is not borne a Grammarian, nor of a Musician, a Musician. For these are artes which are gotten by precepts and exer­cise: & not affections, which are naturally grafted in men. And yet by experiēce we sée that it somtymes commeth to passe, y ^• in what arte y ^e father chiefly excelleth, he hath children very prone vnto the same: whither. if be husbandry, or y ^e arte of war fare, or els some liberall science. Farther, we in this place principally speake of those affections, which are the groundes and beginninges of actions. In the other Sinne de­fileth both soule and body. argument they say, that sinne in the parentes doth vitiate only the soule, which is not true. For as we haue before taught, their body is also defiled. And therfore it is no meruaile, if fathers do communicate such a body vnto their children. Wher­fore, as touching this matter, I gladly agrée with Augustine, that it is probable and agreable with the scriptures (and this sentence Martin Bucer a man no lesse ler­ned then holy hath allowed) that priuate sinnes are deriued from the parents vn­to the children. But we must note, that that commeth by chaunce and is not of necessitie. For God sometimes stayeth the sinnes of the parentes, and of his goodnes suffreth not the nature of men vtterly to be destroyed. But when he will either represse this traductiō of sins, or els suffer it to take place, he himself only knoweth. Howbeit vnto vs it is sufficient to consider these two things: First, y ^e sinne is pou­red from the parentes into the children: Secondly, that the same is by the benefite of God sometimes prohibited, which yet can by no meanes be spoken of Originall sin. For we al are borne infected with it. Now let vs returne vnto the words of the Apostle, which we haue so long tyme intermitted.

Moreouer the lawe entred in by the way, that sinne shoulde a­bounde. But where sinne abounded, there grace abounded muche more. That euen as sinne hath raigned in death, so might grace al­so raigne by righteousnes vnto eternall life, through Iesus Christ.

Moreouer the law entred in by the way, that sinne should abounde. But The Me­thode of Paule. where sinne abounded, there grace abounded much more.] We muste call to memory that the Apostle began to reherse the effectes of iustification: namely, that by it we haue peace with God: and that we do reioyce, not onely bicause of the hope of that glorye, but also we reioyce in tribulations, bicause we are assu­red of oure saluation. For the confirmation of whiche hope he hathe declared, that GOD hathe geuen his sonne vnto the deathe, and that when we were yet sinners, enemies & vngodly. And that it should not be obscure, by what meanes the righteousnes of Christ could saue vs, he sheweth by a comparison, that euen as by the sinne of Adam, all men haue perished, so by Christ, all men haue reui­ued. And in this comparison he teacheth that the effect of sinne is death: And that men are deliuered from it only by Christ. Now bycause a man might aske, whether the law hath any thing profited to the attayntment of that saluation, he answereth by preuention, that it rather augmented the disease, so farre was it of The law deliuereth not but ra­ther increa­seth the dis­ease. that it could deliuer men from it. And by the way he heateth downe the pride of the Iewes, for that they importunatly hosted of the Law, as though it onlye could make a man blessed. And it is certayne, that by the name of Lawe, he vn­derstandeth not, the Law of nature, but that law which was geuen by Moses: a­mongest other endes whereof this was one, that by it sinne shoulde be aug­mented: that it beyng aboue measure augmented, grace also might excedingly much more abound. Howbeit this is to be noted, that these increases of sinne happened not through the default of the law, but of men. For if the law had lighted The increases of sinne happened not through the defaulte of the law but of men. A simili­tude. vpon sound natures, and a nature confirmed, sound actions should thereof haue sprong. But forasmuch as our mindes are full of diseases, and our nature weake, it followeth of necessity (as Paul sayth) that when the lawe commeth, sinne is increased. For euen as horses with shadowes and thinges, that they are not accustomed vnto, are so made afeard that oftentimes they run backeward, [Page 136] and throw themselues hedlong into diches and riuers: so we when we light vpō the commaundements of God, do leape backe, and do rather throw our selues in to the dungeon of our lustes, then that we will obey the law. Chrisostome thinketh that this particle, [...], whiche is, that, in this place is not a coniunction causall: but noteth onely the euente of the thing: which we also graunt, if it be referred vnto the nature of the law. For, forasmuch as it of his owne nature is good, it cannot be said, that of it self it augmenteth sinne. But if we haue a consideratiō vnto the counsell of God, wherfore he gaue the law. I see not why that particle may not be taken causally. For it is not to be doubted, but that God therefore gaue the law, to the ende sinne should be augmented. And lest it should seme ab­surd We must not stay in the nerest endes. to ascribe that vnto the prouidence of God, we say that God hath manye endes, all which are ordinate: and therfore we ought not to stay in one or two of them, but to go on farther. For euen the prouidence of God directeth such endes to other endes, which follow. Wherfore we cannot thus gather: God hath geuē the law: ergo, sinne simply and of hys owne nature pleaseth him: but we must streight way adde (which Paul also doth) sinne beyng incresed, grace hath more abounded: and man hath obteined righteousnes and eternall lyfe. So may we rightly conclude, that the law was therfore geuen, that man might at the last be The law was geuen that man through grace should be saued. A simili­tude. saued thorough grace. Which thing may be declared by an other example: when it is said, that by the prouidence of God it is ordeyned that murther should be puni­shed with death, we cannot therby gather that God is cruell, as one which deligh­teth in death, bicause he will haue death reuenged with death. But we must pro­cede farther, and say, that it was therfore ordeined, that a māqueller should be put to death, to the ende the seuerity of the iustice of God might appeare, and that mē being so admonished, might restraine themselues from so wicked a crime. Paul saith, in the singuler number Sinne, alluding to y ^e corruption of our nature, which, the law beyng once put, so increaseth, that it breaketh forthe into innumerable e­uil workes. By which kynd of speach that is manifest, which we haue before said: namely, that the law is repugnant vnto naturall lust.

But by that which Paul sayth: that the Law entred in by the way. Chrisostom The law was not made to continue for euer. gathereth, that it ought not to be perpetuall, but ought so long to continue, vntill sinne being increased, grace should abound. And this in dede is after a maner true: for as touching the ten commaundementes in men regenerate in Christ, and a­dorned with grace (in respect that they are such) they haue no power to accuse and condemne: and as touching ceremonies that part of the law is now vtterly abrogated, yea, and the politicall iudgementes are not now in theyr olde force. But Ambrose weigheth these wordes (entred in by the way) more diligentlye and thinketh that thereby is signified, that the law was so receiued, as thoughe men supposed that by it they shoulde be saued: for thus they thoughte, that if they once knew, what thinges were to be done, they would easely accomplishe them, But the thing happened farre otherwise. And Ambrose addeth, If the lawe did Why the law was of necessity according to Ambrose therefore enter in by the way, that sinne should abound, a man may iudge that it was not geuen, that sinne should not abound: howbeit on the other side it was necessary, because the lawe of nature was after a sort extinct and quenched in men. For it was so febled (saith he) that mē could not performe their duty. That therefore the law of nature might receaue some strēgth, & be maintained, the law of God came: which hath not only confir­med it, but also with a most manifest expositiō illustrated it. But now we ought to apply our endeuor vnto the law geuen vs and diligently to entreate of it, & to meditate vpon it day and night. We haue the like kind of speach in the epistle vnto the Galathyans: The lawe was geuen because of transgression. Now let vs see by what meanes sinne Howe sinne is augmen­ted by the law. Our lust is stirred vp by the pre­cepts of God. is augmented by the lawe. First we must know, that this is the nature of our lust, that it can not be kepte vnder by the commaundements of God: yea rather it is stirred vp by them. Whereof came this accustomed sayinge, Nitimur in vetitum semper, cupimus (que) negata, whiche signifieth, we labour alwayes for that which is forbidden vs, and euer desire thinges denied vs. And euen as ri­uers [Page] being otherwise quiet and caulme inough, yet when they runne against a rocke or heape of stones, do swell and rage, and as it were gathering together their force more vehemently, driue and cary away all lettes: So our lustes, whē they are prohibited by the lawes and decrees of God, are more vnbridledly and insolently stirred vp, and do as it were by a certaine fury cary vs headlong in­to transgressions. And so by reason of his contrary, lust may be saide to be en­creased, [...]. when the bridle of the lawe is put vpon it. Wherefore Cicero in his ora­tion for Roscius Amerinus saith, that Solon in his lawes ordained nothing tou­ching murtherers of parentes, because, forasmuch as that wicked crime had neuer before happened, he feared, leaste if he shoulde haue made a lawe thereof, he should rather haue stirred vp men thereunto, then repressed them there fro. An other way also the lawe increaseth sinne, because he which sinneth knowing and wittingly, is more greuously to be accused, then he which sin­neth He that sinneth kno­wing and wittingly, is more greuously to be accu­sed. vnawares. The lawe of nature was nowe so decaied, that it wincked at many thinges. For many counted lust for no sinne: yea rather they semed happy, which could obtaine that which they lusted for. But when this voyce sounded from heauen, thou shalt not lust, man began to consider that lust was vnhonest and filthy. Wherefore when he endeuoured to striue against it, being destitute of strength (as Agustine saith) he found not a victory, but captiuitye. For he saw now that he was a bondsclaue vnto it. Farther, sinne is therefore increased by the lawe, because in it we see paynes and punishementes set forth In the lawe we see the paines and punishmēts of sinners. vnto sinners. Whereby it commeth to passe, that men hauing their conscience accusing them, leape backe from God, as frō a seuere iudge, and cruell reuen­ger. And when they haue begon once to hate him, they rather throwe thēselues hedlong into any euil, then that they will light vpon him. Fourthly, Chrisostome saith, that the lawe of nature containeth a few and certayne briefe preceptes, By the law of Moses the law of nature is deuided and distinct into many parts Before the law sinne was on slepe and halfe deade. That grace should a­bound, sins being incre­sed, is not true in all men. The law and aboun­daunce of sinne are not the per­fect causes of saluatiō. which are amplified by the lawe of God: For that it hath deuided those fewe into many partes, whereby is augmented a heape of preceptes. And because vnto euery commaundement his proper transgression is repugnant, therefore sinnes may seeme also to be increased. Neither doth the lawe by these meanes which we haue alledged, onely increase sinne, but also accuse and condemne it. Wherefore in the first to the Corrinthians he saith, that the lawe is the power of sin, because they which sinne, are by it proued guilty. But these thinges are not so to be vnderstand, as though there had bene no sinne before the lawe. For there was sinne in dede, but it was on sleepe and halfe deade. Wherefore Paul in the 7. chapter of this epistle saith, when the commaundement came, sinne reuiued. Which words declare, that sinne was also before, although it were not felt. Farther, we must note, that the connexion betwene the law, and the increase of sinne, is vniuersall, and pertaineth vnto all men: but y ^e connexiō which is betweene sinne increased, & grace abounding hath not place, but only in the elect and predesti­nate. For in the reprobate, after sinne was by the law increased, sorrow and griefe which come thereby, engendreth desperation. For these are not the full causes of saluation, but instruments, by which God vseth to deliuer his. And the nature of instrumentes is, that if a man remoue from them the power of the principal agent, of themselues they bring to passe nothing. God doth in dede What is the nature o [...] instruments. God by cer­tain meanes prepareth or bringeth vs to rege­neration. An [...]ror of the Sophi­sters. God vseth euell things to our sal­uation. vse the law, the feeling of sinne, and terrors of paynes, wherby to prepare away to iustification. And although before our conuersion the same be sinnes, yet by them he prepareth our minds: but yet not with that kinde of preparatiō, which the Sophisters haue fayned. For they affirme, that a man by these meanes de­serueth grace (as they are accustomed to say) of congruency: which thinge we haue in an other place declared to be repugnant vnto the holy scriptures. But we graunt, that as touchinge Gods behalfe, there is a preparation: for he vseth these meanes, whereof some are of theyr owne nature euill, and directeth them to a good end: which ought to be ascribed only to his most wise prouidence. But that grace hath abounded, euen this thing may teache vs, for that the Elect doo [Page 137] not only obteyne remission of sinnes by Christe, but also are adopted to be the How grace is sayd to a­bound. children of God, made brethren of Christ, heyres of God, and fellow heires of Christ, and they reioyce also in tribulations, and in the hope of the glory of God. God dealeth as good phisitions vse to doo: which doo not only heale the disease, but also doo adde strength and forme, which the sicke man had not before. But it semeth more agreable that Paul should haue sayd, that sinne beinge augmen­ted paynes and punishementes should haue more abounded, for, that doo sins deserue. But he inuerteth his oration, and in stede of paynes and punishements Paule in­uerteth hys oration. sayth, that grace abounded. Which thing we first fele by our owne experience to be true. For we which were before oppressed with griefe, and in a maner consumed with sinnes, when we se our selues to be reconciled vnto God can not but count it for a most singular benefite. For he which hath the more forgeuen him, forasmuch as he feleth the greater gift, loueth the more. Farther the common people commonly weigh and esteme giftes by the consideration of the necessity that went before. Wherfore, forasmuch as sin being increased was after a sort vnmeasurable, the grace also which should blot out the same, ought likewise to What it is to haue the gospell preached vnto them that are in mise­ry. Of the na­ture of the law. The Ma­nichies and Pelagians vnderstood it nor. be in amaner vnmeasurable. By this place we may vnderstand, what it is to haue the Gosple preached to mē broken & in misery, as it is written in Esay: and what that is, that Christ called vnto him those which were in trauaile and were laden. For they which fele not themselues to be such, come not vnto him when he calleth them. Here I thinke it good somewhat briefly to speake of the nature of the Law, and therewithall to declare how the Maneches and Pelagians vn­derstood it not, and what it worketh in vs ether before regeneration, or after we be iustified.

First as touching the forme therof, we may affirme the self same thing that Paul sayth in this epistle, when he writeth, that it is spirituall. But the vniuersall end therof, & which pertayneth vnto all men, is to bring men to the knowledge of sinne. Which thing Paul hath both here signified, and also before manifestly tought, saying, that by the law is the knowledge of sinne. Here if a man aske, why the Apostle sayd not rather, by the law is the knowledg of righteousnes: I an­swere, bycause a man that is not yet regenerate, so long as he is without Christ can not haue within himselfe the fealing of good workes, or of true righteous­nes, which satisfieth the law of God. Wherefore when he compareth his doings with the law, he findeth them to be nothing but onely falles and transgressions. But if we speake of the end of the law, as touching the elect, the same is Christ: which thing Paul also teacheth, saying, The end of the law is Christ to saluation: The law doth not by it selfe bring men to Christe and to saluatiō. The Eth­nikes opinion concerning the end of the law. What is the law. which yet he speaketh not vniuersally, But to euery one that beleueth. For the law doth not of it selfe bring a man to thys end. The Ethnikes sayd, that the end of the law is knowledge, which it engēdreth of thinges that are to be done. Wherfore Christippus (as he is cyted in the digestes, fayth, that the law is the knowledg of thinges diuine and humane. But thys end, and thys definition extend to largelye. For all wisdome, and all good artes doo geue some knowledg of diuine and humane thinges. Now resteth diligently to se what is the matter and efficient cause of the law. And briefely to speake of these thinges, I say, that the Law is a commaundement of God, wherein both hys will, and also disposition or nature is expressed. When I say a commaundement, I note the generall woorde: For there are commaūdemēts of people, Senators, kings & of Emperors. But whē I say, of God, I adde the difference, which noteth the efficient cause. But in that I The law expresseth vnto vs, the disposition & na­ture of God say, that in the law is expressed the will of God, that is so manifest, that it nedeth not to be expounded. But this may peraduēture seme more obscure, in that I said, that in the law the disposition of God is taught vs, and we are stirred vp to the knowledge of his nature: we wil therfore by examples make it more playn. Whē God commaundeth vs to loue him: he therebye teacheth, that he is of nature ami­able. For those things cannot iustly be beloued, which are not worthy to be belo­ued. And vnles he bare great good will toward vs, he would not set forth vnto vs y ^e [Page] chiefe good, which we should loue. Wherfore, he for this cause exhorteth vs therun­to, bicause he desireth to haue vs pertakers of himselfe. We sée therfore, that he is such towardes vs, as he desireth vs to be also. And when he prohibiteth vs to kill: First therin he declareth his will, farther he sheweth himselfe to be such a God, which abhorreth from violence and from iniuries, & had rather do good vnto men, then hurt them. After the same maner these two thinges may also be declared in the other preceptes: and out of this definition may those thinges also be gathered, which we haue before spoken concerning the forme and ende of the law, bicause of necessity such doctrine ought to be both spirituall, and also to engender a wonder­full excellent knowledge, and we are taught, that God by it hath geuen no small Benefites of the lawe. benefite vnto men: for it causeth vs, both to know our selues, and also to vnder­stand the proprieties of God. Plato in his bookes of lawes of a publike wealth, and Platoes definition. in Minoe, seemeth thus to define the lawe: namely, that it is an vprighte manner of gouerning, which by conuenient meanes directeth vnto the best ende, in setting forth paynes vnto the transgressors, and rewardes vnto the obedient. This defini­tion may be most aptly applied vnto the law of God: yea there can be no such law Lawgeuers made God the author of theyr lawes. vnles it be of God. It is no meruaile therefore, if the olde lawgeuers, when they would haue their lawes commended, fayned some God to be the author of them. For Minos ascribed his lawes to Iupiter: Licurgus his to Apollo: Solon and Draco, theirs to Minerua: and Numa Pompilius referred his vnto Aegiria. But we are assured, and that by the holy scriptures, that our law was geuen of God by Moses The Ma­nichies do wickedly condemne the law. There is no good or euill whych is not by the law of God either com­maunded or forbiddē. The law requireth not onely deades but also the wil The law bringeth vs to the knowledge of God and of our selues. in mount Syna. And these thinges beyng thus sene concerning the nature and definition of y ^• law, we mayeasly vnderstand, how fowly the Manichies erred, which blasphemed it, and cursed it as euil. For seyng that the law commaundeth nothing but things worthy to be commaunded, and prohibiteth nothing, but thinges mete to be prohibited, how can it iustly be accused? For there can be no iust or honest duety found, which is not commended in the law of God: nor nothyng filthy or vnhonest, which in it is not forbidden: neither are wicked actes onely prohibited in y ^• law, but also wicked lustes are there condemned. Wherfore it sheweth that not onely outward workes are to be corrected, but also the mynd and will. And foras­much as a great part of felicitie consisteth in the knowledge of God: and Philoso­phers do so much extoll the knowledge of our selues: and the law of GOD, as we haue taught, performeth either, it can not but with great wickednes be reproued as euill and hurtful. Howbeit this place wherein it is sayd, That the law entred in, that sinne should abound, may seme to make somwhat with the Manichies: as doth that also vnto the Galathians. That the law was put for transgressions, and that also in the 7. chap. of this epistle, That sinne through the commaundement killeth: and that likewise which is sayd in the second epist▪ to the Corint: That the law is the ministe­ry of death. All these thinges may seme to confirme the error of the Manichies. But The things which are ioyned vn­to the law of them­selues, and the thinges that come by chaunce, must be se­perated. A simili­tude. we must diligently put a differēce betwene those things, which of themselues per­taine vnto the law, and those things which follow it by reason of an other thing, & per accidens, that is, by chaunce. For as we haue before taught, sinne, death, dam­nation, and other such like do spring of the law, by reason of the corruption of our nature. But if a man compare not the law with our nature, but consider it by it selfe, or if he referre it to a sound & vncorrupt nature, then can he affirme nothing els of it, then that which Paul sayth: Namelye, that it is spirituall, holye, good and instituted vnto lyfe: and it is said rather to shewe synne, then to worke synne. Wherefore if men deformed lying hidde in the darke shoulde saye vn­to a man whiche by chaunce bryngeth a lyghte vnto them: gette the hence least by this thy light thou make vs deformed, vndoubtedly we could not ga­ther by their wordes, that the power and nature of light is such, that it doth make men deformed but this we might rather gather, that those things which of themselues are deformed, are by the light vttered and shewed what they be. And so is it of the lawe: for it after a maner bringeth light, and openeth to our knowledge the sinnes, which before lay hidden. But a man will say: if the law [Page 138] be good and holy, why is it so displeasant, and had in hatred? Because it calleth Why the law is had in hatred. men backe from those thinges, which of their owne nature they are prone vn­to: for it gréeueth them to haue those thinges forbidden them. And when we looke vpon the lawe, we sée those thinges which we ought to do: and by reason of the pride which is naturally plāted and grafted in vs, we will not be restrai­ned by any rules. Farther thereby we sée how our actiōs are writhed from that vprightnes, which is set forth in the lawe: and whiche is more grieous, we feele our selues to be so weake, that we can not correct them, and call thē backe to the prescribed rule: howbeit in the meane while we behold the paines and an­ger of God, whereinto by reason of sinnes we incurre. All these thinges do so We are not angry with our selues as it is meete but wyth the law and wyth God. How the law of God may please vs. Christ be­ing ioyned with the law maketh it swete. offend our minde, that we are angry, not indeede with our selues, and with our sinnes (as it were mete we shoulde) but with the lawe geuen of God: when as otherwise it is most perfect, and most holy. Howbeit this discommodity may be remedied, and we may bring to passe, that those thinges which before were displeasant vnto vs, may afterward be pleasant vnto vs. And that shall we do, if we ioyne the lawe together with Christ. For euen as the waters of Marath were most bitter vnto the people of Israell in the desert, and yet the selfe same by casting in the wood, which God had commaunded, were made swete: So although the law by it selfe be bitter, yet if Christ be ioyned with it, whom God hath set forth vnto vs as an only sauior, and also as the iust and due ende there­of, we shall then feele it to be sweete. Which thing to haue happened vnto Da­uid, the 119 Psalme manifestly declareth, wherein are wonderfully set forth the prayses of the lawe of God. For there it is called pleasaunt, delectable, sweete Prayses of the law in the Psalmes. How the law of God is written in our hartes. aboue hony and the hony combe. And this is it which is promised vs in the pro­phete, that God would write the lawe in our hartes: which is nothing els, but that he will geue vnto vs the spirite of Christ, whereby we may be inclyned to those thinges, which the lawe hath commaunded to be done, that at the least way the commaundementes of God should be pleasant to our minde. Which thing also the Apostle teacheth, when he saith, In minde I serue the lawe of God. This they that are regenerate do fele, who although they can not performe a perfect obe­dience vnto the commaundementes of God, yet they loue them, and excedingly desire them, and embrace them as the chiefe good, and do dilligently desire of God, to come to the perfection of them as nigh as is possible. By these thinges it plainly appeareth, how the vtility and righteousnes of the lawe is to be de­fended against the Manechies. But on the other side the Pelagians are no les to be auoyded, which ascribe vnto the lawe more then is mete: for they affirme it to The Pela­gians attri­bute vnto the law more then is, which they thinke to be sufficient vnto saluation. Pelagius sometymes confessed the grace of God in woorde and not in dede. By grace Pelagius vnderstoods nature and the law. The schole men come very nye vnto the error of the Pelagians. be sufficient vnto saluation. For they say, that if men once vnderstand, what is to be done they may easely by the power of nature performe the same. Wherfore Pelagius, for feare least he should haue bene condemned of the Bishoppes of Palestine, as one which vtterly denied the grace of God, cōfessed the same grace in word: for he affirmed, that to our saluation the grace of God is necessary. But by grace he vnderstoode nothing els, but nature it selfe geuen vs freely of God, because God hath made vs reasonable, and endued vs with free will. Far­ther he saide, that the lawe or doctrine of the lawe was grace: because of our selues we are ignorant what thinges are to be done or to be beleued, vnles God reuele them vnto vs. Wherefore Augustine writeth in his books of the grace of Christ against Celestius, that they with mouth affirme that the possibility of nature it holpen by grace. But he addeth, that if their meaninges were examined, and narrowly waighed then shall we see that by grace, doctrine and the lawe, they vnderstand nothing els, but that a man, hauing receaued only the knowledge of the lawe hath of himselfe strength inough to do the thinges that are commaunded. Vnto which error the schoole deuines approch very nye, when they teach, that a man euen by the power of nature, can obserue the preceptes of God, as touching y ^e substance of the worke, although not according to y ^• intēt of the cōmaunder. By which words this they signifie, that we can perform the very works, although not in such sort, as God [Page] hath commaunded they should be done, namely, of charity & the spirite. Which latter part I thinke they added, that they might seme in some point to disagree from the Palagians. But Augustine so abhorred from such sentences, that not euen vnto the regenerate so long as they liue in this flesh he graunteth a perfect Euen the regenerate are not able perfectly to obserue the law. The Pela­gians make the death of Christe vaine. obseruation of the commaundementes of God: whiche thing manifestly appea­reth by his Retractations. And that his iudgement therein is most true, Paule declareth in the 7. chap. of this epistle. Vndoubtedly if the thing were so as Pe­lagius hath taughte, the comming of Christ and sacrifice of the crosse had bene nothing nedefull. For these thinges were therefore geuen, bycause by our owne strengths we could not attayne vnto the righteousnes of workes. That thing Paul most manifestly testefieth, saying, That which was impossible vnto the law, for asmuch as it was weakened by the flesh &c? These wordes apertly declare, that mā by reason of the infirmity of the flesh could not fullfil the law. Farther he saith, The wisdome of the flesh is enmity towards God, for it is not subiect vnto the law of God, nether certainely can it be. For although the law hath power to teach and to illus­trate the minde, yet it doth not therefore minister strength, or change the will. Wherefore Ambrose in his booke de fuga seculi, The law (sayth he) cā stop the mouth of all men: but yet it can not conuert the minde. And afterward: The law indede shew­eth the fault, but it taketh not a way the malice. Wherefore vnto it must be adioyned grace: which forasmuch as the Pelagians contemned, they wandred from sal­uation, & were iustly condemned of the Church. But as touching the office of y ^• law, these few thinges are to be obserued. First that it is not vtterly vnprofita­ble, no not euen without regeneration: for it may serue to some ciuile discipline The office of the law. For if mē do the outward workes of the law in such sort as they may, although vnto them which doo them, they are sinnes, yet by thē may be obserued a ciuile order. For where there is no obseruation of these thinges, all thinges are confoū ded: iniuries are committed: filthy lust rāgeth abrode: the wrath of God is kindled, so that he suffreth not publike welthes being in such maner corrupt verye long to continew. There is also an other worke of the lawe which is inwarde, which pertayneth vnto the conscience: that it should perpetually accuse, vrge, scourge, and condemne it. And by this meanes God (as we haue sayd) bringeth a man at the length to iustification. Which iustification being obteyned, nether then doth the law lye idle, but is like a glasse, wherein the regenerate do behold After rege­neration the law is not idle. what fruites they ought to bring forth, how much they ought dayly to profite, what they haue to geue thankes for, and how muche they want of the iust in­stauration, to y ^• end to obtaine it they may the more ernestly call vpon God: The law also putteth before theyr eyes y ^• marke, wherevnto they ought to leuel in al theyr actions. Vnto which although they can not attayne in this life, yet they must doo theyr diligence, not to depart far from it. By these thinges it manifestly appeareth how much the law helpeth in outward workes, what it worketh in the conscience, and how much it helpeth them that are regenerate Now re­steth this to marke, that this sentence of the Apostle pertayneth not only to cere­monies, Vnder this sentēce are compre­hended not onely cere­monies, but also the mo­rall precept. but also to the morall preceptes. For sinne is by them most chiefely in­creased: and it is of more greater wayght to stray from them, then from out­ward ceremonies. But now let vs returne vnto the Apostle.