Ksse^scs

- " ." ¦¦.¦'.

t£J:

LOGICAL ANALYSIS

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS,
BY CHARLES FERME,
TRANSLATED FROM THE LATIN BY WILLIAM SKAE, A.M.;

A COMMENTARY ON THE SAME EPISTLE
BT ANDREW MELYILLE,
IN THE ORIGINAL LATIN.
EDITED, WITH A LIFE OF FERME,
BY WILLIAM LINDSAY ALEXANDER, D.D.,
F.S.A. SCOT.

EDINBURGH:
PRINTED FOR THE WODROW SOCIETY.

MDCCCL.

MKtIO Wat

PK1STKD BY A1EX. WALKEB, 6. JAMES'S COUBT, EDINBUEGH.

EDITOR'S PREFACE.

Several years ago I happened, in looking over the contents of
an old book-stall at Newcastle, to lay my hands on a little, ill-
conditioned volume, the title-page of which bore, as the author's,
a name with which at the time I was not acquainted. That title-
page, however, promised attractively for the book, intimating that
it professed to furnish a Logical Analysis of the Apostle Paul's
Epistle to the Romans — a profession which no man who had ever
endeavoured to master the train of reasoning pursued by the
Apostle, in that most logi'cal of all his writings, could peruse with
indifference. I perceived, also, that the work was of Scottish
authorship — that it belonged to the age immediately succeeding
He era of the Reformation, and that it had been issued under the
Bigh sanction of John Adamson, Principal of the University of
Edinburgh, the friend of Andrew Melville, and one of a noble band
of theologians, to whose love of literature, liberty and evangelical
truth, Scotland owes so much. I accordingly secured the work,
and having, as soon as I could, commenced the perusal of it, I
speedily discovered that I had secured a prize indeed. So saga
cious, exact and perspicuous a commentary on the Epistle to the
Romans I had not before had the good fortune to peruse. To the

IV EDITOR S PREFACE.
gratification I felt, however, in possessing such a book, succeeded
an emotion of regret that it should be so little known to biblical
students, and so utterly inaccessible to any but a very few ; and
this begat in me a desire, should opportunity offer, of sending it
forth anew, either in the original or in a translation.
I had not been long on the Council of the Wodrow Society till
I brought the book under the notice of that body, and urged the
desirableness of their issuing a translation of it as part of their
series. After some delay, my wishes were acceded to, and the
duty of procuring a translation and editing it was devolved upon
me. Unable to find time to execute the translation myself, I was
fortunate in securing the services of a gentleman in whose exact
scholarship and general fitness for the task I had perfect confidence.
The principles which have guided Mr Skae in making his transla
tion I leave the reader to gather from his own statement ; I have
only to say, that having carefully revised every sheet as it passed,
through the press, I issue the translation unaltered, as it proceeded.'
from Mr Skae, with the utmost confidence that it will meet the
approbation of all competent judges.
On the merits of the work itself I will not enlarge. I belieVej
it will be found to deserve all I have said of it, and will be hailed^
by students of scripture as a valuable addition to their helps for
ascertaining the meaning and connection of the Apostle's words in
that all-important part of his writings to which it is devoted. . I
anticipate on all hands an accordance in the eulogy pronounced
upon it by Principal Adamson, when he calls it " eruditionisj
pietatis et exacti judicii plenam."
In the life of Ferme inserted in this volume, I have endeavoured

EDITOR 8 PREFACE. V
to put together all the scattered notices, bearing upon his history,
I could find. With this object in view, I thought it better to write
a continuous narrative of my own than to translate the short sketch
prefixed by Adamson to his edition of the Analysis, and thus be
compelled to introduce any additions I might have to make to it
in the form either of interpolations or of notes. To that sketch,
however, I have been principally indebted for the few facts I have.
been able to gather concerning Ferme. I have also to express my
acknowledgments to Mr Laing for some valuable suggestions com
municated as the sheets were passing through the press.
As the Analysis of the Epistle to the Romans is not long enough
to fill an entire volume of the size usually issued by the Wodrow
Society, it became necessary to find some other work which might
with propriety be issued along with it. At first I thought of some
of the exegetical writings of John Cameron, sometime Professor at
Saumur, but a native of Scotland, and whose name is well known
to biblical students and readers of ecclesiastical history. But this
idea was at once relinquished when I became acquainted with the
fact that the Council of the Wodrow Society had had before them
the proposal of issuing a hitherto unpublished commentary of
Andrew Melville on the Epistle to the Romans. This proposal I ,
seconded with all my might ; believing that, to Scotsmen especi
ally, nothing which had proceeded from the pen of Andrew Mel
ville could be otherwise than interesting. The Council having,
after careful deliberation, consented to print this work, I had the
high satisfaction of being permitted to carry it through the press in
conjunction with the Commentary bf Ferme.
The MS. from which this work of Melville is printed is the pro-

vi editor's preface.
perty of David Laing, Esq., to whose courtesy in placing it in the
hands ofthe Council, the members of the Wodrow Society are in
debted for its publication, as they are for many other invaluable
services rendered to the Society by that gentleman. It is not in
the handwriting of Melville himself, but in that of Daniel Deme
trius, a native of Frankenthal, a town in the lower Palatinate, four
leagues to the west of Heidelberg, one of Melville's students at St
Andrews,* and who asserts that he transcribed it from Melville's
own copy. It consists of one hundred leaves in small quarto.
As this work has never before been published, it was deemed
proper to issue it in the original, that those interested in Melville
might enjoy the satisfaction of perusing his ipsissima verba. In
judging of the work, the reader will not fail to bear in mind that
it was not purposed for the press by the author, and therefore must
not be taken as affording a specimen of Melville's full powers as an
expositor of Scripture. It seems, in fact, to have been prepared
only as a book of notes, to be used by him in his class in prelecting
upon the Epistle to the Romans. Notwithstanding, however, all
the disadvantages under which it thus labours, I believe it will be
welcomed by the Members of the Wodrow Society, not only as a
valuable relic of an illustrious and venerable man, but for its in
trinsic merits, as expository of the words of the Apostle.
The editing of this work has been, to myself and to the printer,
* See M'Crie's Life of Melville, vol. ii., p. 492. May not this individual have been some
relation of Emmanuel van Metern or Demetrius, the historian ? He was a native of
Antwerp, but having zealously embraced the doctrines of the Reformers, he had to
flee to this country, where he resided until his death in 1612. He was a voluminous
writer.— See Biographie Universelle sub voce. Demetrius and Metern. There is a por
trait of him in the Bibliotheca Belgica, with a couple of epitaphs, one written by the
celebrated Ortelius, who was his kinsman, the other inscribed on a monument raised
(O his memory by his widow.

EDITOR S PREFACE. Vll
a task of no small toil. The MS. though beautifully executed, was
written, the transcriber tells us, in the space of eight days, and is
consequently full of contractions which have occasionally severely
exercised the patience and ingenuity both of compositor and of cor
rector. The punctuation also had been but little attended to, and,
in consequence of this, the author's meaning was often rendered
obscure or uncertain. In one or two instances errors have evi
dently been committed by the transcriber or by the author, as the
construction is faulty, or the latinity inadmissible; but these
are rare. Amid such a multitude of corrections as I have had to
make on every sheet, I cannot hope to have so perfectly fulfilled
my editorial functions as to issue an immaculate edition ; but I
trust such errors as may have been allowed to remain will be found
to be trivial and not such as at all to impede the reader. I can
certify for myself and the printer, that no pains have been spared
by us to render the work as correct as possible ; and I hope if any
blemishes are found by the critical reader, he will remember the
difficulties with which we have had to contend, and not be offend
ed with a few blots, " quas [non] incuria fudit, [sed] humana parum
cavit natura." I trust also that the Members of the Wodrow
Society will accept of the apology which the manifold impediments
of such an undertaking furnish for the delay which has occurred
in the issuing of this volume.

W. L. A.

PlNKIEBURN,
Isi March 1850.

LIFE OF FERME.

LIFE OF FERME.

Of Charles Ferme or Fairholm, * the author of the Analy
tical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, of which a trans
lation is now offered to the public, little is known beyond a few
facts. For these we are principally indebted to two of his pupils, —
Principal Adamson, who has prefixed a short notice of him to the
original edition of this work, published in 1651, and Calderwood,
who repeatedly names him in his history.
From Adamson's notice, we gather that Ferme was a native of
Edinburgh, and that he received his education thefe. To whom
he was indebted for laying the foundation of his attainments we
are not informed ; Crawford says,t that he was of obscure parent
age, and was bred up in the family of Mr Alexander Guthrie.
* Fairholm appears to have been his proper name. Calderwood always writes it
Farholm, and Row says expressly, (Hist, of ihe Kirk of Scotland, p. 421, Wodr. Soe.
edit.,) " Mr Charles Farholme, {alias Ferme contracte.") Adamson, however, always
calls him Fermaeus, and it is by the contracted form that he seems to have been usual
ly spoken of and to by his contemporaries. In the college books his name seems to
be written Pharm. On a copy of the Scholia of Didymus on Homer (Argent. 1539)
which seems to have belonged to him, the name appears thus, " Mr Carolus Pharum,"
with the motto, " Christus mihi vita." In the Records of the Presbytery of Edin
burgh, from 1593 to 1598, his name is usually written Pharum, but sometimes Ferum,
Ferme; and in a letter, dated 21st February 1605, he signs his name " Chairlis
Ferm." I owe this piece of information to the kindness of Mr Laing.
t History ofthe University of Edinburgh, p. 33.

Xll LIFE of ferme.
After he had acquired a knowledge of grammar and the Latin au
thors, he was, apparently in the year 1584, being of "good age,"*
transferred to the University, then recently opened under the aus
pices of the never-to-be-forgotten Robert Rollock. Here he en
joyed the instructions of that distinguished promoter of learning in
Scotland during the course of four years — the term prescribed by
him as the curriculum of study preparatory to the taking of the
degree of Master of Arts. Under Rollock's guidance Ferme
studied, in addition to the Greek, the Dialectics of Ramus, (to
which his preceptor attached the .greatest value, as an instrument
so admirably adapted to the study of logic, that no one, in his opi
nion, who was ignorant of it, could either excel in synthetical, or
know anything of analytical reasoning) ; the rhetoric of Talaeus,
the pupil and follower of Ramus ; the Organon, Physics and
Ethics of Aristotle ; the treatise De Sphaera Mundi, of John Sa-
crobosco or Holybush; and a few other works in philosophy.t
From these he was conducted to theology, where, besides the study
of the Catechism of Ursinus, he listened to prelections on the
Loci Communes of the Christian system, and to analytical exposi
tions of some of the Epistles ; he also acquired the rudiments of
the Hebrew tongue. In 1587 Ferme had completed his academi
cal course, and, along with forty-seven of his fellow-students, took
his degree of M.A.; in the Laureation book his name stands se
cond on the list. In the month of October following his laurea
tion, he offered himself as a candidate for the office of Regent
but on this occasion without success; his fellow-student Philip
, * Crawfurd, History ofthe University of Edinburgh, p. 33.
t See Bower's History of the University of Edinburgh, vol. i. c. iv. ; Life of Bollock
by Dr Gunn, prefixed to the Wodrow Society edition of his Select Works, p. 66.

LIFE OF FERME. xiii
Hislop, the fourth on the list, proving the successful competitor.
For a season he devoted himself to the further prosecution of
his theological studies and to a more complete acquisition of the
Hebrew, still under the direction of Rdllock, who, on tne laurea-
tion of his first class, had been promoted to the Professorship of
Divinity; but in the early part of the year 1589, he was chosen
one ofthe Regents ofthe University, and commenced the duties
of his office with a numerous class, which he conducted with credit
through the ordinary curriculum.* In 1593 he entered with a
new class, which he also conducted to its laureation, 30th July
1597; the number graduated was 35, including Robert Ker of
Newbattle, afterwards Earl of Lothian. He had but just com
menced his instructions to a third class when he was summoned
to another sphere of labour at Fraserburgh.
Of Ferme as a teacher Principal Adamson says, " He taught
his pupils not only erudition but piety, modesty and industry ; and
that not by word only but by his life, by his manners and example.
Among his pupils," he adds, " were several who became men of
piety, learning, and eloquence, and rendered excellent service to
the Church of God. Of these may be mentioned that keen an
tagonist of the pseudo-bishops, David Calderwood, who, in his
Altare Damascenurn, styles himself, by an anagram, Edwardus
Didoclavius, feeling it necessary to conceal his name, lest he should
fall into the cruel hands of the bishops. Besides him may be
named Robert Scot, who faithfully, and to the salvation of many,

* The number of students laureated August 12. 1593, was 19, besides John Earl
of Gowrye, and two others, added separately, probably, (Mr Laing suggests) because
they had not attended the four years' course.

XIV LIFE OF FERME.
discharged the functions of the ministry at Glasgow; William
Craig, afterwards a distinguished Professor of Theology at Sau-
mur; Oliver Colt, who, after being a Professor of Latin in the
same University, devoted himself wholly to the study of theology,
and afterwards became minister at Fulden, where he closed a life of
many labours in peace ; Edward Bryce, who both here and in Ire
land brought many to Christ ; and not a few besides, who have
been famous men in the Church." To these may be added the
name of Adamson himself, who was a student in the class which
graduated in 1597, not the least worthy certainly ofthe band.
It would appear that, whilst engaged in his academical duties
at Edinburgh, Ferme was also employed in occasionally preaching
the gospel. In the records of the Presbytery of Edinburgh it is
stated under the date of 12th September 1598, that at the " de-
syre of Patrik Cohren and Georg Heriot commisionars direct from
ye session of ye kirk of the north-west quarter of Ed*.," the Pres-;
bytery " tollerat Mr Charles Ferume to preach in the Kirk of that
quarter, at sic tymes and necessary occasiones as he salbe imployit
be said session."* From the records of the Presbytery of Hadding
ton, also, it appears that he was at one time invited to be second
minister of that town, f
In removing to Fraserburgh Ferme had in view the double office
of Minister of the town and Principal of a University which had
been recently founded there by Sir Alexander Fraser of Philorth.
This gentleman, to whom the town was under great obligations
for many important services, and from whom it takes its present
name, having been formerly called Philorth, had obtained in
' Cited by Dr M'Crie, Life of Melville, vol. ii., p. 287. f Ap. eund.

LIFE OF FERME. XV
1592 a charter from the Crown, in which full powers were given to
him and to his heirs to erect and endow a college and university,
to appoint, place, or remove officers of all kinds requisite for such
an institution, and to make and enforce all statutes needful for its
due order and working. The same immunities and privileges were
secured to this projected institution as were enjoyed by the exist
ing universities ofthe realm; and in 1597 the Parliament gave its
approbation to the institution, highly commending the patriotic
liberality of the founder, and confirming him in all the rights con
ferred on him by the royal charter.
Anxious to secure for his infant college a Principal of approved
character and experience, Sir Alexander invited Ferme to the
office, and, at the same time, as patron of the church of Fraser
burgh, offered him the situation of minister of that parish. Ferme
probably hesitated before accepting a post of so much responsibi
lity and labour ; it is certain that he declared to the General As
sembly of the Church that he would not accept it without their
command to do so. There seems also to have been some hesita
tion in issuing such a command, on the part of that venerable body
when the matter came before them at their session of 21st March
1600, in consequence of a " supplicatione given in be the Pres-
bytry of Deir ;" but " having considered the necessity of the
said worke, and how the said Laird of Phillorthe hes refusit to sus
tain ane pastor at the said kirk, unless he undertake both the saids
charges," they at length resolved to " command and charge the
said Mr Charles Ferme to undertake and awayte upon, alsweill the
said kirk, as to be Principall of the Colledge of Fraserburgh."*
* Booke ofthe Universall Kirk of Scotland. Peterkin's edition, p. 486.

XVI LIFE OF FERME.
In his new position Ferme was destined to enjoy little ease.
The establishment of Episcopacy in 1600, led to keen contro-
' versies, in which Ferme seems to have taken no unwilling part.
" The Bishops," says Adamson, " he denounced as plants which
God had not planted, and as, therefore, to be extirpated ; he ac
cused them of violating the covenant, and held them guilty of
perjury." The consequence was that he became a marked ob
ject of resentment to the Episcopal party, who afflicted him and
interrupted his labours by every means in their power. He was
a member of the General Assembly held at Aberdeen in 1605, and
for his share in its proceedings was imprisoned in the castle of
Doune.* Along with others he was summoned to appear before
the Lords of the Privy Council at Edinburgh, the 24th of October ,
of that year, to be convicted of having proceeded " verie contemp-
tuouslie and seditiouslie," in having assembled themselves and
acted as they had. f This summons the imprisoned ministers de
clined to obey ; but, at the same time, under protest, and for the
sake of clearing themselves of the crimes alleged against them,
they sent to the Council an elaborate vindication of their conduct,
both as to the holding of that Assembly and as to the business
transacted during its sessions. The Council, disregarding their
protest, asserted its competency to decide in such questions, and
remitted the ministers to their several places of confinement. After
remaining incarcerated in Doune castle for more than twelve
months, Ferme was banished to some place of confinement in the
* Calderwood, vol. vi., p. 292. Calderwpod says, Ferme was "wairded" in Stir
ling, p. 292 ; but a document printed at the time, and preserved by him, says it was at
Doune ; p. 445.
t Calderwood, vol. vi. p. 344.

LIFE OF FERME. xvii
Highlands, the name of which has not been ascertained.* Here
he suffered the greatest severities, which he seems to have borne
with inuch fortitude. " I have to this hour," he wrote to Mr
Robert Bruce in 1608, " been relieved by the comfort of no crea
ture ; neither have I here to whom I may go. A thousand deaths
hath my soul tasted of; but still the mercy and truth of the Lord
hath recovered me. The Lord perfyte [accomplish] his own work
in me." f
How long Ferme continued the victim of this cruel injustice is
uncertain. In 1609 he was still in confinement; and, as Calder
wood terms it, " put to his shifts."} Archibald Simson in his [un
published] Annales Ecclesiae Scotorum says, that Ferme was con
fined " fere triennio." As he was sent to the Highlands in Octo
ber 1606, if he was liberated in the fall of 1609, his banishment
would be exactly for about three years. How far Simson is cor
rect in this statement, however, may be doubted ; all we know for
certain is, that Ferme was restored, and continued at Fraserburgh
till his death. §
Notwithstanding the interruptions and harassment to which he
was thus exposed, he discharged the functions of his office with
credit in his new sphere. " With what zeal he taught at Fraser
burgh," says Adamson, u both publicly and privately, from house
* Calderwood simply mentions (vol. vi., p. 590), that the ministers " who were wairded
in Stirline, Doune, Dunbartane, were to be confynned in barbarous parts, as the
Lewes, the Des, Kintyre, Ireland, Cathnesse." Further on (p. 702) he mentions that
Mr Ferme " was confynned in the Hielands."
t Quoted by Calderwood, vol. vi., 702.
X Vol. vii., p. 21.
§ In the Assignation of Stipends for the year 1607, Mr Charles Ferme, as minister
of Philorth, had for " his stipend the haill personage of Philorth, iijxxxiiij (74) lib.
xvs. vjd. with the haill vicarage of Philorth, xij. lib. ijs iijd. In 1608, his name is
omitted ; and, (with the exception ofthe year 1614, not quite perfect), the books of
Assignation, of a later date, are not preserved. b

xviii LIFE OF FERME.
to house, is known to the whole north. Through his industry, and
by the divine blessing, such a light blazed forth that even children
could render an admirable account of their faith, and that not
without some feeling of piety  A Tydeus in body he was a
Hercules in spirit." The sword, however, proved too sharp for its
scabbard, bruised and battered as the latter had been by ill usage
on the part of others. Worn out with study, broken by incessant
toil and frequent sufferings, he expired on the 24th of September
1617. His remains were buried in the old Church of Philorth.*
Adamson says, that he left behind him " various monuments of
his genius," and specifies, besides the work of which a translation
is contained in the present volume, another, entitled Lectiones in
Esterem; both of which he recovered through the means of Wil
liam Rires, " a learned youth, and minister of the word," as he
styles him. The Logical Analysis of the Epistle to the Romans
was written by Ferme during his residence at Fraserburgh, in con
sequence, Adamson tells us, of a request made to him by certain
ministers and probationers. The manuscript lay for many years
in the north, "as it were, buried with the author." After a
lengthened search, Adamson at length procured it, and caused it
to be printed at Edinburgh, where it was published in a small
octavo volume in 1651. It was his intention to issue the Prelec
tions on Esther very soon after the publication of the work on the
Romans ; but this he did not live to accomplish. I am not aware
that any copy of this exists; the other productions of Ferme'spen
have certainly perished.
* Hist, of Scots Affairs, by Gordon of Rothiemay, vol. i., p. xxxiii. note. Spalding
Club edition. " The old Church of Philorth stood amongst the sands. It was dedi- :
cated to St Midan, a bishop in great favour with King Conran, about a.d D III."
—Spalding Club CoUections from the Shires of Aberdeen and Banff, p. 431. ' ' ' , '

LIFE OF FERME. xix
After his decease, the College at Fraserburgh seems to have
been suffered to fall into decay ; eclipsed, in all probability, by the
superior advantages of Marischal College, erected at the same
time in the town of New Aberdeen.* At the beginning of the
present century, there still stood at the west end of the town of
Fraserburgh, an old quadrangular tower of three stories, which is
said to have formed part of the building erected for the college, by
Sir Alexander Fraser.t
Besides writing a sketch of his Life, Principal Adamson has re
corded his feelings of respect and veneration for his former pre
ceptor, in three Latin poems, wliich, along with one in English,
also by himself, and two epigrams in Latin from the pens of H.
Wallace,} and William Rires, he has inserted at the end of his

* M'Crie, Life qf Melville, vol. ii., p. 287.
t Statistical Account of Scotland, vol. vi..p. 9. For the following information re
specting the traces stUl extant of this relic of the olden time, as weU as certain tra
ditionary reminiscences of the college, I am indebted to the Rev. A. Gruar Forbes of
Fraserburgh : —
" The old tower can scarcely be said to be still extant. It has been reduced to a
heap, and is almost covered with soil and herbage. Last time I saw it there was a
couple of goats feeding on the top of it.
" There is an old house of three stories between the site of the ruin and the town,
which I have been repeatedly told was intended to form part of the college buildings,
and to be used as dwelling-houses by the professors. This tenement is still entire, and
is occupied by several families. On the front of it there are four oblong tablets with
inscriptions, — " Trust ye in God, for he is good, — His mercy is for ever,
And thank ye him for all ye have, — For he is only giver."
" Tradition does not seem to be correct, however, in declaring this to have formed a
part of the projected college, — the date is too recent ; over the door is an inscription
of an anchor, with the letters, P. W., — J. R., — 1718 — It is said that this stone over
the door was put into the building at the time of its becoming private property. But,
all things together, there does not appear to be evidence of the existence of any re
mains of the college but the heap of rubbish already referred to. There never having
been a completion of the buildings, or an appointment of professors, — there is no tra
dition beyond what you know from the Statistical Account of Scotland."
t Probably the son of Hugh Wallace, Laird of Carnoll, so frequently mentioned by
Calderwood.
62

XX LIFE OF EERME.
Memoir. These, with the original of Adamson's sketch, his dedi
cation of the Analysis to Sir Ludovick Stuart, and a few other
poetical effiisions called forth by the death of Ferme, and tending
to shew the estimation in which he was held by his friends, it has
been thought desirable to preserve in this volume. The poems
have been taken from the MS. Annals of Simson already referred
to.

CAROLI FERM^I
Viri undiquaque Doctiffimi,
ANALYSIS LOGIC A
IN
EPISTOLAM
APOSTOLI
PAULI AD
ROMANOS. IN QUA
Omnia verba, fententise & Phra
fes difficiliores ex facris Scriptu-
ris exacte, folide & dilucide explicantur.
Ioan. ] . 39. Venite et videte.
Rom. 8. 23. Sujpiramus adoptionem expectantes.
EDINBVRGI,
Excudebant Haeredes Georgii Andersoni, Academiae
Edinburgenee Typographi, Anno Dom. 1651.

VIRO ORNATISSIMO,
D. LUDOVICO STUARTO, EQUITI,
ORATORI CAUSIDICOQTJE JURISPRUDENTISSIMO, DISSERTISSIMOQUE
GRATIA ET PAX MDLTIPLICETUR A DEO PATRE, ET
DOMINO NOSTRO IESTJ CHRISTO.

Carolus Fermaeus, cum Fraserburgi sacro verbi ministerio fungeretur,
rogatu quorundam ministrorum, et ministerii Candidatorum, scripsit
Analysin Logicam in Epistolam Pauli ad Romanos, eruditionis, pietatis,
et exacti judicii plenam. Qui quidem liber multos annos post obitum
authoris jacuit in aquilone, quasi cum authore sepultus. Eum ego diu
investigavi et tandem, per divinam providentiam, in manus meas de-
venit ejus exemplar : quod ego Praelo excudendum curavi typis non in-
elegantibus. Librum istum, ut tuo nomini inscribam, ut tibi dicem, de-
dicem, consecremque, multa sunt quae me argumenta moveant et per-
moveant. Primum, quia ut ego illi regenti meo, sic tu mihi regenti tuo
in hac academia dilectissimus discipulus ftristi. Ideoque, ut ego patris,
sic ille avi tibi loco fuerit. Deinde, quod tu, dum sub nostra ferula phi-
losophiae et bonis artibus operam dares, non tantum tuae classi, sed et
toti Academiae bono exemplo, et ornamento fueris. Tu enim modestia,
gravitate, observantia et doctrina omnibus condiscipulis praeluxisti, et
micuisti (ut ait Flaccus) velut inter Stellas Luna minores. Tertio, quia
utilissimam tibi fore confido seriam hujus libri lectionem: nam ut Christum
Dominum sincere amas, ita, ut magis, magisque ames, animabit, ad
Christum propius adducet, unicamque docebit semitam ad remissionem
peccatorum, aeternam justitiam, et vitam consequendam : quae est fides
in Dominum Iesum Christum. Postremo, si nihil aliud, sane perpetua
tua in me benevolentia et beneficentia me induceret ad hanc tui nomi-
nis nuncupationem. Quod reliquum est, gratiae Domini nostri Iesu

[24 ]
Christi te commendo, rogoque ut in filiam meam unicam ejusque maritum
M. Andraeam Morum, MD., eorumque liberos, haereditario quasi jure,
amorem tuum, me vita functo, transferas. Si quaeras quid agam, scias
me, hoc anno nativitatis meae 75, animam paene agere : nam gravi-
bus senectutis laboribus et doloribus attritus, post longam in undoso hoc
vitae pelago jactationem, jam portum specto, expecto et expeto. Aeter-
num salve atque vale, mi Ludovice, animo meo charissime.
Tuus ut suus,
Io. Adamsonus,
Collegii Jac, E. Primarius. M.

[25]

LECTORI ERUDITO ET BENEVOLO.
Scias velim, lector benevole, de authore hujus libelli nonnihil. Author
est M. Carolus Fermaeus, qui Edinburgi natus et educatus : ubi Gram-
maticam et Latinos Authores didicisset, D. Eoberto Eolloco in disciplinam
academiae traditus est : Rolloci ductu et auspiciis didicit grammaticam
Graecam, authores Graecos, dialecticum P. Eami, (quam semper maxim,
fecit D. Eollocus, utpote ad Analysin et Genesin instrumentum maxime
idoneum, quo qui uti nesciunt, in synthesi forte aliquid praestare pote-
runt, in Analysi nihil) Ehetoricam Talaei, Aristotelis Logica, Physica,
Ethica, et doctrinam de Sphaera Ioannis de Sacrobosco, Ursini Catechesin
locos communes Theologicos, quarundum Sacrae Scripturae Epistolarum
Analysin, et Hebraicae Linguae rudimenta. Absolvit quadrimum cur
riculum et Laurea donatus est, a.d. 1588. An. 1589, cum D. Eolloco se
totum dedit studio Theologiae et Linguae Sanctae. Anno 1590, Eollocus
praefecit eum numerosae classi, quae An. 1593, emissa est cum laurea.
Hoc anno novam Classem aggressus, quam etiam ad metam perduxit.
Auspicatus est tertiam Classem, sed vocatus ad Ministerium, Fraserbur-
gum ex Academia vocatus est : docuit autem Discipulos cum eruditione
pietatem, modestiam, et industriam : nee verbo tantum, sed et vita docuit,
moribus et exemplo. Ex discipulis habuit plurimos, viros pios, doctos
et disertos, qui egregiam operam navarunt Ecclesiae Dei. Ex iis erant
David Caldervodius, acerrimus Pseudepiscoporum hostis, qui in Altari
Damasceno se Edwardum Didoclavium per anagrammatismum appella-
vit : placuit enim viro bono nomen suum celare, quia mutuebat in Epis
coporum, Orci satellitum, crudeles manus incidere : Eobertus Scot, qui
sacro ministerio Glasguae ad multorum salutem fideliter functus est :
Guilielmus Craig, qui Salmurii Theologiam magna cum laude publice
professus est. Olivarius Colt, vir disertus, qui postquam in hac Academia
Latinos juxta et Graecos authoris publice professus esset, totum se studio
theologiae dederat : ad sacrum deinde ministerium Fuldennum vocatus
est, ubi, post inultos exantlatos labores, vitam cum morte feliciter commu-
tavit : Edwardus Bryce, qui et hie, et in Hibernia multos ad Christum
adduxit. Hi erant ex Fermaei discipulis, et alii complures, viri in Ecclesia

[ 26 ]
et Eep. eximii. Quanto cum zelo docuerit Fraserburgi Carolus, et pub
lice, et privatim per singulas domos, totus Boreas no vit. Ex ejus indus-
tria, per benedictionem divinam, tanta lux affulserat, ut etiam pueruli
fidei suae in Christum, non sine affectu pietatis, optime rationem redde-
rent. Sed Episcopi, quia eos vocabat plantas a Deo non plantatas, ideo-
que exstirpandas, quia eos rupti foederis et perjurii reos arguebat, omnes
intendebant nervos, ut eum exstirparent : saepe a grege semotus est, et
carcere conclusus. Sed nullis minis, nullis terriculamentis a fideli officio
absterreri poterat. Invicto et imperterrito animo hostium impetum ex-
cepit et fortiter sustinuit. Nam quamvis Tydeus corpore, animo tamefl
Hercules erat. Tandem autem studio maceratus et laboribus assiduis
fractus, beatissimam illam immortalitatem cum aerumnosa hac mortalitate,
Christi gratia et misericordia, commutavit. Ingenii monumenta varia
reliquit : ad meas manus duo pervenerunt, reconditam eruditionem, insig-
nem pietatem et Dei zelum luculenter ostendentia ; Lectiones nimirum in
Esterem, et Analysis ista Logica in Epistolam Pauli ad Eomanos : se
cundum Deum de iis recuperatis gratias ago M. Guilielmo Eiresio, Juveni
docto et ministro verbi. De hac Analysi, Lector erudite, judicium tuum
fore confido, quod nullus unquam Commentarius Analyticus ad Logicae
regulas, tanquam ad amussim, tarn accurate factus, antehac in lucem
prodierit. Bene vale, Lector benevole, in Domino nostro Iesu Christo, et,
ad aeternam Dei gloriam, et animae tuae salutem, isthoc fruere, donee
alterum opus prodierit ; quod cum bono Deo, propediem futurum spero.
Tuus in Domino,
Jo. Adamsonus.

LECTORI.
Vix ullum videas, Lector, prodire libellum,
E mendicatis non tumidum Elogiis.
Quas merces nimium mercator laudat avarus,
Suspectas merito has emptor habere potest.
Hunc ego si possem, nolim laudare libellum,
Nam facile emptorem merx proba repperiet.
M. H. WAUACE.

IN FERMIUM EPICEDIA. 27

LESSUS IN FUNERE CAROLI FERMAEI.
Quis mihi amaroris tristes porrexerit undas,
Queis caput explere, et rorantes luminis orbes
Larga liquare queam totos in flumina aquarum ?
Lumine tarn claro cum Ecclesia cassa gemescat,
Fermaeo morte extincto : quern pectore lethe
Nulla meo delere queat, nee iniqua voracis
Temporis invidia imis exstirpare medullis.
Quippe virum gelidam tractu in telluris ad arcton,
Qua colitur Christus Dominus tellure Britanna,
Vix alium invenias parilem pietate, Deique
Zelo, quo totus flagraverat entheus, alma
Quum pietas probitasve malis afflicta gemebat ;
Qui verbo et vita solum spirabat Iesum.
Quid memorem ingentes animos % quid dia feracis
Ingenii monumenta canam ? quibus aethera pennis
Alta petens, apinas mundi alte despiciebat :
Et, Christi in causa, cuiquam succumbere causae
Aut homini indocilis, fidenti pectore adibat
Et patiebatur, quae homines discrimina quibant
Aut dextra inferre, aut animo intentare feroces :
Nam Dominum vitae et mortis cognovit desum,*
Et Christum in morte et vita lucrum esse sciebat,
Omniaque in mundo compendia stercora duxit.
Tu quanta virtute homines ad caelica regna
Duxeris e tenebris, norunt queis conscia mens est,
Quam tu, divino afflatus spiramine mentem,
Summa sacra Dei panxisti oracla potenter,
Sive homines corde elatos Tu fulmine Legis
Dejicis in Barathrum, terroris dura sagittis
Pectora configens, seu tristi pondere pressas
Peccati recreas Verbi solamine mentes.
Tene igitur siccis oculis meminisse licebit,
* [Qu. Iesum ?]

28 IN FERMIUM EPICEDIA.
Tarn rara virtute virum ? Tarn dotibus alti
Ingenii clarum, et magnum Jehovae incrementum ?
Ast ego, si doleam, coelesti luce receptum,
Vivida te auratis ubi cingit gloria pennis,
Invidiae, Macarita, notam mihi inurere posses.
Sin propriam lugebo vicem, tibi me superesse
Vivum, tarn docto et fido monitore carentem,
Memet amore mei dicas studioque teneri.
Ut lachrymis igitur deceat me parcere, non te
Desinet afflictis exstinctum Ecclesia rebus
Plangere, qui promptus fueras succurrere lapsae :
Atque ego, te talem recolens Ecclesiae ademptum,
Et lessum faciam, et rorantes luminis orbes
Larga liquabo mihi totos in flumina aquarum.
Io. Adamsonus moerens
merenti Praeceptori suo parentavit.

AD CAROLUM FERMUM MUTATO NOMINE FIRMUM.
EJUSDEM.
Semper honoratus sis Firmi nomine, nam Tu
Semper pro Christi nomine Firmus eras.
Firmior et rupe es, quae clausa est undique ponto,
Disrumpit fluctus, Firma sed ipsa manet.
Te Papistarum, Praelatorumque catervae
Perdere quum nixi, nixus inanis erat.
Hlorum, Domino ceu petrae Firmus adherens,
Contempsisti insons probra ferasque minas.
Nam Christus Firmum sibi te praestare volebat
Et ruit in casses impia turba suos.
In spumum versae, quae te petiere, feroees
Undae, Tu, ut Bassus, Firmiter usque manes.
Te pietas, te sancta fides, Dominique potenteis
Firmum et invictum constituere manus.

IN FERMIUM EPICEDIA. 29
Et verbo et vita, calumoque insignia Christi
Praetuleras populo, ut te sequeretur ovans :
Adduxsti ad Christum multos, nunc tute triumpha
Cum Christo, Angelicis consociate choris.
Ingenii monumenta tui praeclara cluebunt,
Ignea dum. volvet lucidus astra polus.
Sed sequiora manent hostes, nisi Christus Iesus
Commiserans, mentes his renovare velit.
Interfere simul, subita grassante ruina,
Pontifices, animam qui petiere tuam :
In squalore jacent, ignominiaque sepulti,
Et meritas poenas impia turba luit.
In spumam et fumum pariter vertantur inamem,
Quotquot de servis sic meruere DEI.
At Firmi maneant Domini qui jussa capessunt,
Atque illis tecum vita beata siet.

EJUSDEM IN DIE OBITUS.
Una luce prius Sol unicus occidit orbi ;
Occidere haec soles lux videt una duos.
Sol coelo est Phoebus, terrae Fermaeus, at ille
Luce oculos, caeca hie pectora luce beat.
Sed surget Phoebus luce et Fermaeus eadem,
Quum veniet felix ultimus ille dies.
Postea non surget Phoebus, sed culmina Coeli
Scandet Fermaeus, ut super astra micet.
Purior et Phoebo splendebit terrea moles,
Aeterno felix irradiata die.
Christus, justitiae Sol, tunc erit omnibus omnia,
Ulaque Sanctorum gloria Christus erit :
Gloria tunc Patri, aeterno tunc gloria Nato,
Spiritui et Sancto gloria semper erit.

30 IN fermium epicedia.
ANOTHER EUNERALL ELEGIE AND ELOGIE IN MEMORIE OF THAT
FAITHFULL SERVANT OF JESUS CHRIST,
M. CHARLES FERME.
If Learning, Grace and Godlinesse
Could lengthen humaine life,
So soon, then, had not Atropos
Drawn forth the fatall knife,
To cut the short threed of thy dayes,
Scarce fiftie yeers out-spunne,
Nor should another mortall thee
in length of life out-runne.
But sith thy ghost is gone, and left
Its little house of clay,
Let all surviving souls be sure
That here they cannot stay. I. A. P.

EPITAPHIUM.
Carolus hie situs est Fermaeus, servus lesu,
Quo nemo vixit doctior, aut melior. M. G. Eiresius, M. V.

[Quae sequuntur sunt ex Simsoni Annalibus deprompta.]

IN FERMIUM EPICEDIA. 31

Hoc anno duo in Christo et honorabiles et fldelissimi Dei servi,
Carolus Fermius Frazerburgensis pastor, fere triennio ob hanc
Ecclesiae Scoticanae tuitionem incarceratus ; necnon Eobertus Wal-
ijesius, Fani Andreae pastor, inde violentia expulsus, et in Tranen-
tum, Lothianae oppidulum, detrusus et ad mortem huic inclusus ;
ambo inquam hoc anno moriuntur, et felicissime constantissimeque
Christi causam morte signaverunt ; de quibus : —
Valesius moritur, sic Fermius imbribus istis
Hujus opus Boreas : illius Auster habet.
Quos pietas dedit esse pares, carcerque, fidesque,
Immatura, etiam, mors dedit esse pares.
Ad D. Carolum Fermtom sub obitum 24 Septemb : Prosopopeia.
Cujus habet cunas Auster, Boreasque labores
Carcerem et occidui littoris antra nigrum,
Nunc vehitis * liquidas Eoi ad cardinis auras,
Et Solymas aeterno Phoebus ab axe nova es.
Pompeio 6 magno major ! tres nempe cadenti
Huic patuere plagas, te quoque quarta capit.
D. Wederburotus.
In Carolum Fermium Frazerburgensem, verbo et opere stigmatibusque
insignem, ArCHIBALDI STMSONI «i/Mrg£<r|3»T£gao, xxi rvfifiagTveos 'Emuuhmi-
Quid tibi vita fuit nisi mors ? quid mors nisi vita ?
Ferme ergo vivis, Ferme etiam moreris,
Cum tibi jam Christus, magnum est in funere foenus
Vita etiam Christo victima sacra tuo.
Carole tu vivas, aut tu moriare perinde est
Tarn vivens moreris, quam moriendo viges.
Anagramma ejusdem, Carolus ; O clarus.
Cum pietas sincera facit te Carole Clarum
Vero ergo a Claro nomen et omen habes.
* [Qu. veheris ?]

32 IN FERMIUM EPICEDIA.

Epitaphium Caroli Fermii.
Non hie marmoreo condendus Episcopus antro,
Sed viridi tantum cespite contegitur ;
Non ventri, aut veneri, aut mundo servivit, ut ista
.ZEtas produxit plurima mancipia.
Petro successit zelo, pietate, labore,
Carceribus ; necnon vulnere sanguineo.
Mitram armenta gerunt, stolam, fatuique cucullum
Et terras nati regia sceptra petunt.
Carolus igne Dei Borealia frigora solvit
Et verbo et vita lumen erat Boreas.
Flet Boreas tanto privatum lumine se esse
Tarn superis amor est quam Boreas dolor est.
Ad Episcopos de obitu D. Caroli Fermu Frazerburgensis Episcopi,
Nicodemus.
Vos quibus est curas sacro redimire tiara
Tempora, queis peplo conciliatur honos,
Gaudete : en vestri similis jam Fermius ille
Carcere nee clausum quern retudisse datum
Vobis pro Sparta solida solitaque docendi
Otia, muta : Suum nee dolet ille gregem
Vos procul a gregibus nisi cum tondenda quotannis
Vellera : oves tandem liquit et ille suas.
Vos symistarum censuras haud subdita turba
¦Nunc censuras omnem ridet et ille metum.
Vos Cereri Bacchoque litatis ut aulice : at ille
Aulai in medio pocula libat ovans
Quique prius renuit minimus vel Episcopus esse
Suspicite en instar jam patriarcha tui est.
Presulibus sic ille prius licet hostis (ut olim,
Vos) nunc inversa vos ratione refert.
Cur? quia dum patriis alios populistis ab arvis,
In patriam hunc vestra est laus pepulisse suam.

A
LOGICAL ANALYSIS

EPISTLE OE THE APOSTLE PAUL
TO THE EOMANS.

IN WHICH

ALL THE MORE DIFFICULT WORDS, SENTENCES, AND PHRASES,
ARE EXACTLY, FULLT, AND CLEARLY EXPLAINED
FROM THE SACRED SCRIPTURES :

BY CHARLES EERME,
A MAN OF PROFOUND AND UNIVERSAL LEARNING.

John i. 39. — Come and see.
Eom. viii. 23. — We groan, waiting for the adopti(

EDINBUEGH :
PEINTED BY THE HEIES OF GEOEGE ANDEESON,
printer to the college of edinburgh,
In the tear op the Lord 1651.
c

TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE.

The interesting and valuable relic of a bygone age, of which the
following is a Translation, being of a strictly critical and scientific
character, I have made it my chief aim to give a faithftd transcript
of the meaning of the author, even at the expense of an occasional
stiffness of manner, or harshness of expression. Nor did it seem
to me to be in accordance with the nature and objects of the So
ciety, for which the Translation was undertaken, that the anti
quated and scholastic phraseology of the original should be ex
changed for more modern and popular language. I have therefore
endeavoured to render, as literally as the difference of idiom of the
two languages, and a reasonable attention to euphony would per
mit : I have studied, as far as practicable, to translate the more
important words by the same English synonyme throughout : such
supplements as were of any moment, or in regard to which I was
under any hesitation, have been included within brackets (thus
[ ]) ; and the more obscure and obsolete logical, rhetorical, and
ontological terms explained in foot-notes, on their first occurrence.
In regard to the text of Scripture, I judged it necessary to be
still more literal ; and as our author seems to have used Beza's

xxxvi translator's preface.
version of the New Testament, and that by Junius and Tremel-
lius of the Old, fhe reader will not be surprised to find that the
Scripture quotations do not always tally with our own version ;
where, as sometimes happens, the chapter and verse are different,
those of the English version have been added within brackets.
With the punctuation and division of sentences I have taken
greater liberties. Finding that the former was of the most
wretched description, I have everywhere pointed in such a manner
as seemed to me best calculated to elucidate the sense; and have
not scrupled to break down inordinately long sentences into shorter
ones, or to group smaller ones together. Wherever the words ofthe
Greek text introduced into the original were accompanied by a
Latin version, they have been allowed to retain their places inthe
Translation, included within brackets ; in other cases) they have
been turned into English, and the words themselves, at least on
the'first occurrence of the same term or phrase, given at the hot-1.
torn of the page.
W. Skae.
P.S. — I ought perhaps to have noticed the word " disparate" in its
proper place. This term is variously used and defined by differ
ent writers. According to some, " disparates" are — < things so
unlike that they cannot be compared together;'' according to
others, they are — ' different species under the same genus :' but
Cicero and Quinctilian employ the term in the sense of ' negative-
opposite,' (disparata, ut ' dura' < non duns.' Quinct. Inst. Orat.'
Gernh. V. 11, 31.) It is in the last acceptation that it is com
monly used by Mr Ferme.

.

LOGICAL ANALYSIS

OF THE

EPISTLE OE PAUL TO THE ROMANS.

The Apostle, being about to proceed to Eome, sends this Epistle
on before him ; in which it appears to be his aim and design to
prepare the minds of the Eomans, by it, as by a sort of Isagoge,*
for hearing and eagerly embracing the gospel, when he himself
should come and preach it. He seems, therefore, purposely to
select for discussion in this Epistle, the. position, that ihe gospel is
ihe power of God unto salvation ; that is, that the gospel is the sole
truth, according to which God is rightly worshipped, and which
brings righteousness, peace, and eternal life to men. Having dis
cussed this, he, by way of an appendix or inference, exhorts to a
life worthy of the gospel, which is the second part of the prepara
tion. The Epistle therefore consists of three parts : the first as far as
chap. i. verse 16, is the Exordium ; in the seeond part, extending
to the 15th verse of chap, xv., the intention and aim of the
Apostle is handled, and the minds of the Eomans are prepared for
hearing the gospel ; from chap. xv. verse 15, to the end, there is a
lengthened and multifarious conclusion.

[* Introduction, opening of the case.]
A

logical analysis of the

CHAPTEE I.

Of the Exordium, or first part, there are two sub-divisions ; the
salutation, as far as verse 8 ; and thence to verse 11, an attempt to
secure the good will of those whom he addresses.
The salutation, according to Paul's usual manner, includes
three things ; viz., the person saluting, in the first six verses : the
persons saluted, with the salutation itself, and prayer, verse 7.
1. " Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ," — the person saluting^ who
is described by the adjunct of his function and office, first gene
rally — u a servant," then particularly — he is " an apostle." This
apostleship of Paul is described by its object — he is a servant or
apostle " of the Lord Jesus Christ ;" then by its efficient cause —
it was not assumed by himself, but he was " called" to the apostle
ship by the calling of God, separated to preach' the gospel of God.
His calling Paul explains by a definition ; for the calling of Paul
to the apostleship is ' his separation to preach the gospel of God
concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord : ' a definition which is
made up of the genus, the calling is < the separation of the person
called ;' and the end for the specific difference — ' to preach the
gospel.' 2. " Which he had promised before through his prophets in the
Holy Scriptures." A digression explanatory of the gospel of God,
which is described by the adjunct ofthe promises going before, of
which the prophets were the instrumental cause, and the holy
Scriptures the subject place.*
?
3. " Concerning his Son." Here we have a second, illustration
of the gospel from its subject, which is, the Son of God. He is
described, first, by his human nature, and its material cause— he
[* Or place where (they are to be found.)]

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 3
was < made flesh ofthe seed of David;' secondly, from his divine
nature — ' he is the Son of God ; ' this is demonstrated from its
effect—' his powerful resurrection from the dead,' which is also
explained by its cause — ' his own sanctifying spirit.'
4. " (Namely), Jesus Christ our Lord." A third illustration of
the Son of God from his names and titles. Of these, the first is
taken from his effect * in saving us — he is " Jesus, " (Matt. i. 21);
the second from the adjunct of his anointing — he is " Christ ;"
and the third, from the dominion procured by him as the author of
our redemption — he is our " Lord."
5. u Through whom we have received grace and apostleship."
In these words we have a fourth illustration of the Son, from his
effects in the case of Paul, or the benefits conferred on him ; he
gave him the grace of preaching the gospel, and the apostleship,
by which he was authorised to exercise that grace, and to preach
the gospel. " For obedience to the faith among all nations for hia
name." He explains the grace and apostleship conferred on Paul
by its twofold end. Of these the first is — " obedience to the faith,"
which is illustrated by its subject — " among the nations." The
second and more remote end is — the ' glorifying of the name of
Christ ' through that obedience ; or the name of Christ is put for
Christ, the object of the grace of the fkith preached among the
nations : for there is no other name, (Acts iv. 12.)
6. "Among whom are ye also." He applies the end of his
apostleship to the Eomans in this way : The apostleship has been
given to me for obedience to the faith among the nations : ' But
you are among the nations, therefore also for obedience to the
faith among you.' " The called by Christ Jesus," a, setting forth
and subjoined explanation of those Eomans for whose obedience
to the faith the apostle has said that the grace of the apostleship
had been given to him. They are " the called," not merely by
[* i.e., what was effected or done (by him.)]
a2

4 logical analysis of the
external ministration, but by Jesus Christ," that is inwardly and
effectually. Thus far of the person saluting.
7. "To tdl that are in Eome ;" — the persons saluted, viz., the
Eomans, who are described by the adjuncts of the love of God
towards them, their calling and saintship. " Grace be to you and
peace, from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ." The
third part of the salutation, containing a prayer, in which he in
vokes upon the Eomans the blessings of grace and peace from their
causes and authors — " God the Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ."
8. " In the first place I give thanks to my God through Jesus
Christ." Here commences the second part of the exordium, in
which he endeavours to gain the good will of the Eomans to whom
he writes. The arguments are taken from the things done by
Paul, of which he here enumerates four, all manifesting in the
apostle a friendly disposition towards the Eomans, such as merited
a reciprocal regard on their part.
The first thing done by him is the giving of thanks. This
giving of thanks is illustrated by three particulars : First, By its
subject or object, and that twofold; (1.) The ultimate object, which
is God, explained by the accompanying profession of Paul, for ' to
my 'God,' says the apostle, ' I direct my giving of thanks;' (2.) By
the mediate object, which is Jesus Christ, " I give thanks to
God through Jesus Christ." Hence Paul wishes to teach the
Eomans, in passing, that no giving of thanks is either lawful or
allowable, which is not presented as a sacrifice to God, or accept
able to God, unless it be presented through Jesus Christ ; and,
consequently, that the thanksgivings* of the Gentiles, which were
offered to idols, as well as those of the Jews, which were offered
to God indeed, but not through Christ, were both inappropriate
and unacceptable to God; "For you all" — the second particular
and the material cause of the thanksgiving of Paul ; ' I give
thanks to God, and you are the subject-matter,' or 'concerning
He T-* /

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 5
you all.' " That your faith is announced throughout the whole
world." This is the third and last particular, and the [occasional]
cause of Paul's thanksgiving, viz., the faith of the Eomans ; ' I
give thanks to God concerning you all,' says the apostle, ' and
your faith is the occasion ;' wliich faith is explained by the adjunct
of its announcement and the subject place bf the same ; viz.,
" throughout the whole world." By " faith" I here understand
their piety towards God, and profession of the doctrine of faith
in word and deed.
9. " For God is my witness ;" the second argument for gaining
their good will, and the second thing done by Paul, viz., ' the in
creasing mention made by him of the Eomans ;' which I conceive is
to be understood not merely of the giving of thanks, for that goes
before, nor ofthe prayers, for these follow after, but still more ofthe
anxious zeal and zealous anxiety of Paul in inquiring, on every
occasion, into the state and condition of the Eomans as it respected
God and the gospel of Christ. Hence it would appear that, imme
diately he has said that the faith of the Eomans was announced
throughout the whole world — that is, was reported to him by every
one in whatever part of the world he might happen to be ; it is
by way of accounting for this that he immediately subjoins —
" For God is my witness that I make mention of you ;" as if in
timating the reason why that faith of the Eomans should be an
nounced to him more than to any other person, namely, because he
' made mention of them, and enquired concerning their state more
frequently than others. Moreover he assures them that he thus
made mention of them, by an appeal to Deity, and describes
God, as the witness of his anxiety, by the adjunct of his own ser
vice ; " For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in
the gospel of his son." This service again is amplified by two par
ticulars : the first of which is the adjunct of the manner of serving
" with my spirit ;" that is, ' cheerfully, with my whole soul, and
unfeignedly ;' the second is taken from the subject of his service :
" (I serve him) in the gospel."

6 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
10. " Always making request in my prayers ;" the third argu
ment for good will, and the third thing done by Paul by which he
endeavours to secure it, viz., ' the prayers offered up by him to God
for the benefit and behoof of the Eomans.' These prayers are am
plified by their material cause, which is ' his coming to them.' " (I
pray) that I may come unto you ;" and by the adjunct of the man
ner of praying, for he prays hypothetically and conditionally—"; if
a prosperous journey may be granted me by the will of God ;" leav
ing to the will of God the time and the manner of his prosperous
journey. In this Paul teaches us by example what James does by
precept, viz., that we ought to subordinate all our desires to the
will of God in everything in regard to which that will has not been
previously ascertained from the word of God, such as are almost
all the affairs of this life.
11. " For I greatly desire to see you ;" the last argument for good
will, drawn from the fourth thing done by Paul, or if you prefer it,
from the adjunct of his desire. This desire is illustrated by its
twofold end : the first — " that I may impart unto you some
spiritual gift;" the second and more remote — "in order that ye
may be established."
12. " That is, that being with you, we may be comforted toge
ther." This is an epanorthosis * in which he at the same time both
corrects and explains the two proximate ends of his desire, and
intimates that he desires to be with them, that whatever comfort
God might bestow on them through him, he might be a partaker/;
of the same along with them, so that teacher and taught might be
encouraged in common, and the faith of each increased to their
mutual advantage. By this the apostle teaches us, that the
brightest lights in the Church shone by communicating Hght, were
instructed by teaching others, and by ministering to the faith of
[« A correction in which the writer, as it were, recals himself so as instantly to
correct what he has said." — Glass. Phil. Sac. Tr. ii. cap. 4.]

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 7
others, were more and more confirmed in their own belief. (1 Cor.
ix. 23.)
13. " For I would not that you should be ignorant, brethren,
that I have often times purposed to come unto you." This is said
proleptically ; for the Eomans might say to Paul, ' If you are so
very desirous to see us, how is it that you have been so long an
apostle without ever coming to visit us ?' He answers, ' That he
has often purposed to come to them, but that, however desirous,
he has been hitherto prevented.' His purpose is amplified by its
end ; that I might have some fruit among you also : and the end
by the like, " even as among other Gentiles."
14, 15. "I am debtor both to the Greeks and to the barbarians."
Having removed the objection, he returns to his last argument,
viz., his desire to see them ; a reason for which he here gives from
the adjunct of his own debt, which is illustrated by its subjects
distributively.* He reasons, therefore, in this way — ' I am debtor
to all, both Greeks and barbarians, both wise and unwise ; there
fore, also to you.' " Consequently, as much as in me lies, I am
ready to preach the gospel to you that are at Eome also,"
16. " For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ." Another
proof of the same consequent, drawn from the disparate — If I were
ashamed of the gospel, I would refuse to preach it ; but I am not
ashamed of it. Therefore, as far as in me is, I am ready to preach it.
Thus far the preface and first part of the Epistle. Next in order
comes that isagoge by which, as has been said, he prepares the
minds of the Eomans for the reception of the gospel, if by any
means a prosperous journey may at length be granted to him by
the will of God, that he may come and preach the gospel to them.
This isagoge consists of two parts : The first, extending as far as
Chap. XII., is a commendation of the gospel; the second, reaching
[* By an enumeration of the parties (to whom he was indebted.)]

8 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
thence to the 15th verse of Chap. XV., is an exhortation to a life
worthy of the gospel.
The substance of the first part is a definition of the gospel.
" The gospel," says Paul, " is the power of God unto salva
tion to every one that believeth ;" a definition consisting of
three parts, viz., (1.) The genus — "it is the power of God;" (2.)
The end for the specific difference — "unto salvation;" (3.) The
subject — which is, " every one that believeth the gospel."
The gospel is said to be " the power of God" by a metonymy of
the adjunct for the subject, or, if you prefer it, of the instrumental
cause for the effect, which is Christ communicated in the gospel,
and received by faith ; for He is, properly speaking, " the power
and wisdom of God" unto salvation to those who believe, as the
apostle teaches, 1 Cor. i. 24. The gospel is called " the power of
God," because it is the sole instrument of communicating to us
Christ, in whom God acts powerfully, " reconciling the world unto
himself" in Him, and " not imputing unto them their trespasses,"
of which reconciliation and free remission of sins, the gospel, which
was " committed to" Paul, is the instrument and " word." (2 Cor.
v. 16, 19.)
" Unto salvation." The gospel is said to be " unto salvation,"
and the knowledge of God, in Christ, by its means, to shew the
difference between the gospel and the works of creation, because,
as the apostle speaks in the 20th verse of this same chapter, " from
the creation of the world,"* and " by the things that He has
created," which also are the power of God, " the invisible things
of God being understood, are clearly seen." The creation ofthe
world, therefore, is the power of God, whereby He himself becomes
known, just as by the gospel, but with this difference, that from the
gospel He becomes known " unto salvation," whereas, from crea
tion, He becomes known, not to salvation, but to leave men " with
out excuse," while God judges them ; and this difference the apostle
notices in 1 Cor. i. 21. Secondly, as the law is opposed to the

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE EOMANS. 9
gospel, so the gospel is said to be the power of God " unto salva
tion," to distinguish it from the " ministration" of the law, since,
although the latter is, indeed, the ministration of God, and " glo
rious," it is, at the same time, " the ministration of death," and
that whereby not salvation, — which can only be discovered from
the gospel, — but sin becomes known ; (see Eom. iii. 20 ; and 2 Cor.
iii. 6.) Thirdly, the gospel is said to be the power of God " unto
salvation," to draw away the minds of the Eomans from all their
idolatrous worship, in which, as the ministration of life and felicity,
they had formerly trusted, as the Samaritans in the arts of Simon ;
the apostle, therefore, wishes to intimate, that all that labour of
theirs with which they wearied themselves, in the worship of idols,
was fruitless, inasmuch as salvation, could become known from the
gospel only — •" To the Jew first, then also to the Greek." The
apostle explains the subject of the salvation of the gospel by an
enumeration of its parts, and the adjunct of the order of the parts.
That salvation was common both to Jews and Gentiles, but was
first of all offered to the Jews, as the first-born of God, and after
wards transferred (as the apostle speaks, Acts xiii. 46) to the Gen
tiles, here denominated " Greeks."
17. " For through it is God's righteousness revealed from faith
to faith." The apostle proceeds to establish the proposition which
he has just enunciated, — that the gospel is the power of God " unto
salvation," — and the sole argument which he employs for this pur
pose is drawn from the effect of the gospel, or of Christ announced
in the gospel, namely, ' God's righteousness,' the same which is
the proximate cause of salvation. The argument runs thus : —
' Whatever reveals God's righteousness is itself the power of
God unto salvation ;
' But God's righteousness is revealed by the gospel ;
' Therefore, the gospel itself is, to men, the power of God unto
salvation.' By "righteousness," I here understand that righteousness by
which men are righteous before God, which is called " God's right-

10 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
eousness," and not ' man's,' because it is the gift of God> not the
merit of man : So that the sense of the proposition is — ' that that
is the power of God unto salvation by which is revealed that " free
gift of God," (as our Lord speaks, John iv. 10,) 'whereby being "
justified, we are made partakers of God's salvation.' To this the
apostle subjoins the assumption in the text : " For through it,"
that is, ' through the gospel,' " God's righteousness," or ' the free
gift of God, by which, being justified, we are made partakers of
God's salvation,' " is revealed." This assumption he proves by
two arguments, both from testimony. The first is that of the
Church, both of ancient and modern times ; for so I understand
the words, " from faith to faith :" this namely was the belief of
the ancient Church — ' that righteousness was revealed by the gos
pel as made known in the promises ;' and the same continues to
be the belief of the modern Church, viz. : — ' that the righteous
ness of God is revealed in the gospel now more fully made known.'
That this is the true interpretation, appears from Acts xv. 10, 11,
— " Why tempt ye God," says Peter, " by putting a yoke on the
neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers, (that is ' the
ancient Church') nor we (Christ being now made known) have
been able to bear ; since we believe that through the grace of the
Lord Jesus, we (the modern and Evangelical Church,) shall be
saved even as they, (the Church of the fathers ;") Peter, therefore,
says, — ' that it was the common belief both of the ancient Church,
and after them of our's under the gospel, that God's righteousness
has been revealed by the gospel.' To this agrees what Paul says,
Gal. ii. 15, 16, — "we who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of .
the Gentiles," that is, 'who are -the ancient Church, and have
the promises,' " knowing that a man is not justified from the works
ofthe law, but from the faith of Jesus Christ, even we," namely,
' the ancient Church,' says Paul, "have believed on Jesus Christ,
that we might be justified from the faith of Christ." So I take it
the apostle speaks in this place, as if he had said,—' that God's
righteousness is revealed by the gospel, is not a modern doctrine
unheard of by our fathers, but is from faith to faith, that is, hav-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 11
ing been believed both in former and recent times, is supported by
their united testimony.'
Although the apostle makes frequent use of this argument from
•the practice and testimony of the ancient Church, to avoid giving
offence to his hearers, yet because it might appear weak, as was
said by our Lord, (John v. 34,) " I receive not honour from men,"
he subjoins another argument and testimony taken from the pro
phet Habakkuk, chap. ii. ver. 4 ; " The righteous from faith shall
live." For if he who is justified from the faith in the gospel has
life, then it follows that God's righteousness is revealed through
the gospel ; or, to speak more plainly, faith embraces the gospel,
consequently, he who is righteous before God of faith, is justified
by that righteousness which is revealed in the gospel ; and as the
prophet affirms, that upon that righteousness are conferred life and
salvation, he affirms, at the same time, that God's righteousness is
revealed from the gospel unto salvation.
18. "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all
ungodliness." Thus far the apostle has proved his definition of
the gospel, and deduced therefrom his position, that the righteous
ness by which we are righteous before God, and to which belong
salvation and eternal life, is from the faith of the gospel ; as this,
however, would be questioned alike by Jews and Gentiles, both
striving after righteousness from works, the one from the works of
the law, the other from those of nature, the apostle makes it the
subject of dispute, and discusses it in order. This discussion he
makes twofold, agreeably to the testimony of the prophet which
he has just cited ; for in that testimony of Habakkuk two things
are affirmed : the one is, that that righteousness by which man is
justified before God is through the faith of the go&pel, or through
faith in Christ according to the gospel ; the other, that life belongs
to all those and those only who are righteous of the faith of the
gospel, or who are in Christ Jesus, having his righteousness, which
is enjoyed through the faith of the gospel. According to this di
vision of the evangelical doctrine of the prophet, the apostle divides

12 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
his discussion into two parts, the first of which is on righteousness,
continued from this verse as far as chap. viii. ; the second, on Jife,
from chap., viii. to chap. xii. Each of these has its own construc
tive, and destructive reasoning or refutation, by the one of which the '
apostle first establishes the truth, and then by the other, removes
objections against it.
He commences the constructive reasoning of the first part here,
and pursues it to the 20th verse of chap, v.; the rest of that chapter
and the two following are devoted to the refutation. As regards
the constructive reasoning, he first proves that righteousness is by
faith, as far as chap. v. ; he then illustrates it by its effects, from
the beginning of that chap, to the 12th ver. ; verses 12 to 20 be
ing occupied by the conclusion, which is variously amplified.
The proof consists of three arguments. The first is taken from
the disparates of that of which he is speaking, viz., the law of Mo
ses, which was the boast of the Jews, and the law of nature, in
which the philosophers and wise men among the Gentiles gloried.
The-apostle joins these together, as equally opposed to the gospel,
and reasons thus : —
' Either man is justified before God from the works of the law,
or from faith ;
' But he is not justified from the works of the law :
' Therefore he is justified from faith.'
This argument he prosecutes from this place to the commence
ment of chap. iv. ; and first of all proves the assumption,* for he
takes the profession t for granted ; the sole argument in proof of
the assumption being drawn from the adjunct of the common guilt
with which all are chargeable :
' All men (both Jews and Gentiles) are chargeable with " all
ungodliness and unrighteousness" (i. e. with the transgression of
both tables of the law) ;
' Therefore no man, whether he be Jew or Gentile, shall be
justified from the works of the law (either the law of Moses or the
law of nature).' [* Or minor premiss.] [f Or major premiss.]

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 13
The antecedent is proved, first in common, then by parts.
The common argument is drawn from the effect of ungodliness
and unrighteousness, which is — ' the wrath of God displayed from
heaven in his judgments :'
' The wrath of God is revealed from heaven, or has been dis
played in his judgments against all ungodliness and unrighteous
ness of men whosoever they be ;
' Therefore all men are chargeable with ungodliness and un
righteousness.' The antecedent of this enthymeme is contained inthe first part
of the 18th verse : — " As those who hold the truth in unrighteous
ness." In this, the second part of the verse, we have the conse
quent of the last enthymeme,— ' therefore all men are chargeable
with ungodliness and unrighteousness :' and that is amplified by
reasoning from the greater to the less, — ' even those possessing
the light of godliness and righteousness ;' for " the truth" here
spoken of is that light and knowledge of one's duty towards God
and man which is possessed by means of the law, whether written
or unwritten ; and to " hold" this " in unrighteousness," is, pos
sessing this, nevertheless to be ungodly and unrighteous, and
transgressors of duty contrary to it.
Thus far the common proof of the antecedent, and that all men
" hold the truth in unrighteousness," or, which is the same thing,
are chargeable with all ungodliness and unrighteousness. He next
proves the same thing, in order, by parts : first, in regard to the
Gen tilesr that they hold the truth in unrighteousness, from the nine
teenth verse of the first, to the sixth verse of the second chapter ;
then, making a transition concerning the Jews also, as far as the
twentieth verse of chapter ii.
19. " Because that which may be known concerning God is
manifest in them." -( Of the first part of the proof there are two
branches, for the apostle first proves the argument of amplifica
tion, namely that the Gentiles possessed the truth, as far as verse
twenty-one ;' then that they held it in unrighteousness, in the

14 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
verses that follow. Their possession ofthe truth is proved by an
argument drawn from its efficient cause :
God has made manifest his truth to the Gentiles :
Therefore the Gentiles have possessed the knowledge of the
truth of God ; or, " that which may be known concerning God is
manifest in them."
Both members of this argument are contained in the nineteenth
verse ; but by Hysterosis * the consequent stands first, and the
antecedent comes after it : only we must observe, in regard
to the words themselves, that the expression to yvworov rov ®sov,
signifies the knowledge of God and of his truth, as far as man,
not as now depraved, but with his nature still unimpaired, is cap
able of it ; for since God is infinite he cannot be known by face,
that is perfectly, except by himself. Although, therefore, the
Gentiles, depraved as man now is, cannot know to ymarov rov
&$ov, viz., that which man, had he not fallen, could have known,
yet God has made manifest that which may be known concerning
himself by man, even in the Gentiles themselves, i. e., among them,
(Ps. xix. 1-5.) Hence in 1 Cor. i. 21, that manifestation is called
the " wisdom of God," of which the apostle here says, that the
knowledge of it remained to some extent even among the Gen
tiles, and after the fall. The apostle, therefore, affirms these two
things : — first, that God had manifested himself in his " wisdom"
to the Gentiles, and had communicated the knowledge of himself,
so that it might be accessible to and attainable by man ; secondly,
that even the Gentiles, sensual f and depraved as they were, pos
sessed some portion of this knowledge.
20. " For since the creation of the world, the invisible things
of him are perceived." He proves the last-mentioned antece
dent, by an argument drawn from the subjects of the manifesto
tion: God is both known by creation, J even "his invisible things,"
" from the things which he has created, and that ever since they
[* Inversion, putting the last first, and the first last.] f ^x'*''-
X Tw~ Krltrit.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 15
were created ; Therefore God has made manifest that which may
be made known concerning himself, " To wit, both his eternal
power and Godhead," — where " the invisible things of God " are
illustrated by an induction of examples. " For this end that they
may be without excuse." The apostle here illustrates his last ar-*
gutnent, viz., " the manifestation of God by the things which he
has created," from its end and use : — ' The natural knowledge of
God among the Gentiles, although insufficient for salvation, was yet
enough to render them inexcusable.'
21. " Because that whilst they knew God, yet they glori
fied him not as God." Here follows the second branch of the
first part of the proof — that the Gentiles, possessing the truth,
or the knowledge of God, yet held it in unrighteousness. Of
this branch there are two subdivisions, the first relating to all
the Gentiles, of whatever state and condition, in common ; the se
cond to the wise men among them considered by themselves. The
former is contained in the rest of this chapter : the latter in the
beginning of the next. The proof of the former, whereby all the
Gentiles are convicted of holding the truth in unrighteousness, is
taken from the conduct of the Gentiles themselves, and this two
fold; first because they had left undone the things which they
ought to have done; next, because they had done those things
which they ought not to have done. Hence the apostle in this
subdivision convicts the Gentiles of two classes of sins, namely,
sins of omission and sins of commission. Two sins of omission are
enumerated: the first is that they did not glorify God whilst they
knew him ; the second that they did not thank God for his good
ness to them. " But became vain in their reasonings." Here
follow the sins of commission, two species of which are enu
merated—internal and external. Of the internal he specifies three.
The first is vanity — " they became vain." By vanity I understand
a going astray from the true God, and from the knowledge of him,
yet with a show of knowledge and intelligence. This vanity is il
lustrated from its instrumental cause, viz., their reasonings; to which

16 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
the apostle referring, chap, viiii. ver. 7, says, that " the wisdom of
flesh is enmity against God;" that is, as he here speaks, the rea
soning ofthe carnal mind renders vain, and leads away from God.
and from the knowledge of him.' " And their foolish heart was
darkened ;" the second internal sin, resulting from that previous
vanity of mind, viz., the extinction of the light which God has
furnished, and darkness consequently succeeding to the knowledge
of the truth.
22. " Whilst professing themselves to be wise they became fools."
The third internal sin is the vain glory * whereby they continued
satisfied with themselves in their darkness and folly, as if it had
been wisdom.
23. " For they changed the glory of the incorruptible God into
an image made like to corruptible man." Thus far the internal
sins ofthe Gentiles ; next come the external, and these two-fold:
First we have their deeds of ungodliness against the first table of
the law — " for they changed the glory of the incorruptible God
into an image made like to the corruptible creature," which is ex
plained by an induction of particulars, viz., ' man, bird, four-footed
beast, and creeping thing.' Consequently, this, their first exter
nal sin, is idolatry.
24. " Wherefore God abandoned them to the lusts of their own
hearts." Next comes their unrighteousness and transgression
against the second table, of which the causes are first pointed out,
and then the parts enumerated. The causes are two, viz., the
proximate, and remote or primary cause. The proximate is —
' their abandonment by God, as a most just judge, whereby he
gives them up to the lusts of their own hearts unto uncleanness,
so as to dishonour their own bodies between themselves ;' this
cause being illustrated by its end, which is — 'the visitino- oftheir

o

* Ksva5o|-i«.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 17
ungodliness with its just recompense,' as the apostle afterwards
speaks, (verse 27.)
25. " As those who changed the truth of God into a lie." The
other and primary cause, or the reason for which God, as a most
just judge, had abandoned them to their own affections, was their
own previous sin — " they changed the truth of God into a lie,"
this, as has been already said, being one of their internal sins ; " and
worshipped and served created things to the neglect of the Crea
tor," which, as before explained, was their external idolatry. " Who
is blessed for ever, Amen !" To represent in a more aggravating
light the idolatry of the Gentiles, the apostle describes God the
creator — the worship due to whom, the Gentiles had transferred
to other objects — by His eternal blessedness ; and he does so de
signedly, in order to shew the Gentiles that, ruinous to themselves
as their idolatry would prove, it neither had detracted, nor could
detract any thing from God ; which he confirms by signifying his
own approbation, expressed by the word " Amen !"
26. " For which cause (I say) God abandoned them to vile af
fections." This is the consequent of the enthymeme, whereby he
deduces the proximate cause of the unrighteousness of the Gen
tiles from the primary, which was their own sin — partly external,
and partly internal ; and so the apostle has thus far been shewing
the causes of the unrighteousness of the Gentiles, and of that
transgression of the second table, for which they were remarkable,
namely, first, their own ungodliness, and, next, the wrath of God
stirred up to take vengeance, whereby they were abandoned to
their own affections, which led to indulgence in every thing that
was vile. Next come the parts of this unrighteousness, the first
of which is that abominable and unnatural fornication, — " For
both their women changed their natural * use into that which is
against nature." This is first explained by distributing the sub
jects of it. It was the crime of the women — " both their women
* Haga tyvfftv.
B

18 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
changed their natural use into that which is against nature ;" it
was the crime of the men—" and the men burned in their lust
one toward another." Secondly, it is illustrated by its equal* : this
vile and unnatural fornication was the equal recompense of their
error— that is, of their idolatry and spiritual adultery.
28. " And even as they did not think proper to retain God in
their knowledge, so, &c." He passes on to an enumeration of the
other parts of their unrighteousness, after again stating the causes
of it, which are set forth under a comparison of likeness.
29. Being filled with all unrighteousness — the enumeration it
self consisting of many parts.
32. " Who, after they knew the judgments of God." He here
concludes the first subdivision of his proof concerning the Gentiles,
namely, that the Gentiles, in general, (knowing the judgment ol
God, which the apostle explains in a parenthesis, — ' that they who
did such things' against the law of God ' were worthy of death,')
' both did the same themselves,' which he illustrates from the
greater, ' and not only so, but also took the part of others who did
these things ;' that is, they held this judgment of God, and the
knowledge of the truth, in unrighteousness, as affirmed at the
outset.

CHAPTEE II.
Thus far it has been proved concerning the Gentiles in general,
both that they possessed the truth, and that, possessing it, they
held it unrighteousness. With this chapter commences the second
and special subdivision of the proof, which relates to the philoso
phers of the Gentiles, considered by themselves, whom the apostle,
in 1 Cor. i. 20, denominates " the wise men and disputers of the
* i. e., Appropriate or due.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 19
world;" and again, in 1 Cor. xi. 8, "the princes of this world."
The apostle charges these persons — who boasted oftheir knowledge
of God, and vaunted themselves as the teachers of others, and the
reprovers of unrighteousness and ungodliness in others — with
being themselves guilty of ungodliness and unrighteousness, and
also with holding the knowledge of the truth in unrighteousness.
Of this subdivision the proposition is, " Oh, man ! whosoever
thou art that judgest (another)," in which words the apostle de
scribes the censorious and moral philosophers among the Gentiles,
by their effecting, judging, and accusing others of sin, in order
that they themselves might be esteemed the more holy. " (Even)
thou (thyself) art inexcusable ;" that is, ' thy knowledge of the
truth of God has its own end in thy just condemnation,' or, ' so
as to render thee inexcusable when God judgeth thee,' as the
apostle has before said ; chap. i. 20.
1. " Wherefore thou art inexcusable, oh man ! whosoever thou
art, that judgest others/' The first argument in support of his
proposition is deduced from the foregone conclusion, by which the
apostle has concluded, that the Gentiles in general, knowing the
judgment of God, yet did things contrary thereto ; and therefore,
that proposition is enunciated illatively, and as a sort of secondary
conclusion — " Wherefore thou art inexcusable," &c. ; " for, in the
act of judging another thou condemnest thyself." The argument
runs thus : —
Whosoever condemns himself in the act of judging another is
inexcusable :
" (But) thou, O man," says the apostle, addressing the Gentile
philosophers individually, " in the act of judging another, con
demnest thyself;"
" Therefore thou art inexcusable." The proposition is awanting ;
but the other two parts of the syllogism are given in the verse,
only that the assumption, by hysterosis, is placed after the conclu
sion, " Thou that judgest another doest the same things." He
proves the assumption by an argument drawn from the effects of
B 2

20- LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
him who thus judged another, which effects are set forth under a
comparison of equality — He who does the same things for which'
he judges another, in the act of judging another, condemns himself ;i
' But thou,' says the apostle to each of the Gentile philosophers,:
' that judgest another doest the same things for which thou judgest
another ;
' Therefore, in the act of judging another thou condemnest thy
self.' The assumption is expressed in the words just quoted, which.
form the last clause of this verse ; but, by hysterosis, the proposi
tion, with its proof, is given in the two following verses ; the proof
in the second, and the proposition itself therefrom deduced in the,
third. 2. " But we know that the judgment of God is according to.
truth." The arguments of the proof are two. The first is taken
from the adjunct of the judgment of God : — " The judgment of
God is according to truth," which the apostle confirms by our own:
testimony, that is, by the testimony even of natural men (<pvo-ixSv-
kv&guituv) themselves ; "We know." To be " according to truth":
here signifies, to be without partiality.*
God judges " according to truth," or he is impartialf in hia
judgment ; ' Therefore whoever judges another, while he does the
same things himself, is equally inexcusable with him whom he.
judges.' " Against those who commit such things ;" the second argu
ment ofthe proof, drawn from the object of the judgment of God:
The object ofthe judgment of God, and the guilty J in his sight,
are those who commit such things," i. e. things unlawful,§ who
soever they be, whether reprovers or reproved ; therefore those
who, while judging others, commit the same things themselves,
are equally guilty with those whom they judge.
3. " And thinkest thou this, O man !" &c. We have here the

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 21
consequent of each ofthe preceding enthymemes, which is also the
proposition of the second syllogism submitted to the judgment of
these wise men themselves : — " (Thou) who judgest them that do
such things, and doest the game, thou shalt not escape the judg
ment of God," or, ' in judging them thou condemnest thyself ;'
which, says Paul, ' I submit to thine own judgment, that thou
mayest say what thou thinkest of it.'
4. " Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness, and forbear
ance, and long-suffering." The apostle here makes a transition to
the second argument, by which he proves, that the wise men
among the Gentiles were likewise inexcusable before God, by
. proleptically anticipating the objections which they would be
ready to start : — ' God has hitherto borne with me, and I have
had experience of his goodness ; therefore I will make amends
to him by reproving others, . and although I do the same things
myself I shall escape his judgment.' To this the apostle re
plies :— ' Nay ! thou who doest the same things, for which thou
judgest another, thou art just so much the more liable to the judgr-
ment of God, that hitherto God has been good to thee. , The
apostle reasons from the effect of his having so long experienced
the long-suffering of God, which effect is his despising God's
long-suffering and goodness ; this is the first argument of the re
ply : — ' Thou despiseth the long-suffering of God ; therefore God's
long-suffering renders thee so much the more inexcusable.'* " Not
knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance ;"
this is the second argument of the reply, drawn from the end of
God's goodness to the wicked, which is illustrated by their own
ignorance of it. The goodness of God towards the wicked should
lead them to repentance ; or which is the same thing,-^-' He is
good to thee,' says the apostle, ' that he may afford thee time and
move thee to repent ; therefore as thou dost not repent, thou art
inexcusable, and shalt not escape his judgment.' The apostle
therefore replies to the objection by denying the consequence, —
* ' Avaz-oXo-ywrev,

22 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
' It is true God has been good to thee, but it does not follow from
that that thou shalt escape his judgment ;' and this negation of the
consequence he proves by two arguments ; the one taken from
the conduct of the wicked man — " thou despisest the goodness of
God ;" the other from the end of God's goodness, which is the
wicked man's " repentance."
5. " But according to thy hardness, and heart incapable of re
pentance ;" — the second argument by which he proves that the wise
men among the Gentiles were inexcusable, * and would not escape
the judgment of God. The argument is taken from the adjuncts
of God's benefits, and the time afforded them for repentance, which
they despised ; or it may be said to be drawn from the effects
partly of God in bestowing his benefits and affording time for re
pentance, and partly of themselves in despising these benefits and
not repenting. ' Every one to whom God is good and affords time
for repentance, treasures up to himself wrath against the day of
wrath if he does not repent ; But God in his goodness,' says the
apostle to each of the philosophers of the Gentiles, ' affords thee
time for repentance, and thou dost not repent : Therefore " thou
treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath." '
The assumption is doubly illustrated. First, by the greater —
' not only dost thou not repent, but what is more, thou canst not
repent,' as is afterwards said concerning "the flesh," chap. viii. 7;
that " it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be,"
Secondly, by the cause of this inability (aduyaju/a) to repent,
namely, the hardness of heart contracted by long habit in sinning
against the conscience, which the apostle, Eph. iv. 19, denominates
insensibility (a^cckyrjeia) : this insensibility, as may be seen by
referring to the passage, is the effect of " walking in the vanity
of their mind,"f and is, in its turn, the cause of that licentiousness
(a/iky not), by which they " work all uncleanness with greediness" ;
that is, it arises, as we have said, from sinning against the con
science, and holds so firmly in sin, that the sinner cannot grieve
'Am-reKaynrav. f Tou a-igirarsiV h fiaraiirnri rou vols.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 23
for his sin unto repentance. " Thou treasurest up unto thyself
wrath against the day of wrath." The conclusion is also illustrat
ed by the greater, and by the adjunct of the time : by the greater
' not only shalt thou not escape wrath and judgment, but through
thine impenitence and contempt of God's forbearance thou trea
surest up wrath unto thyself ; by the adjunct of the time — " the
day of wrath," defined as " the day of the revelation of the just
judgment of God," that is, as Peter calls it, " the day of the Lord,"
and of the brightness of his coming, on which his judgment against
those who now securely despise his forbearance will be revealed to all.
6. " Who will render to every man according to his deeds."
Here commences a digression in which the apostle vindicates the
justice of the judgment of God, and stops the mouths of all who,
as is usual on such occasions, utter complaints against their judge,
be they Jews or Gentiles. For, in the preceding part of the chap
ter, the apostle has close pressed the wise men among the Gentiles,
and brought them in guilty step by step, by a sort of climax ; the
first step was, — " Thou art inexcusable, Oh man !" ; the second —
" Thou shalt not escape the judgment of God" ; the third — " Thou
treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath," that is,
not merely wrath and judgment, but a treasure of judgment is in
store for thee: the Gentile philosopher, perceiving that he is
amenable to such penalties, begins to murmur against that judg
ment, as unjust, in which complaint he is joined by the Jew, the
hearer of the law : the apostle therefore, in this digression, stops
the mouths of both, and at the same time that he shuts them up
under judgment vindicates the justice of that judgment. The vin
dication contains two arguments. The first of these is taken from
a comparison of equality between the deed and the reward or
punishment attached to the deed : Whenever the reward or punish
ment rendered to a man is according to his deed, that is, equal
to it, that judgment is just ;
But God in his judgment renders to every man according to his
deeds : —

24 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
Therefore the judgment of God is just.
The assumption is contained in the text, and is doubly enuncia
ted. First, by an abridged comparison, which is indicated by the
expression, " According to" — " God will render to every man ac-.
cording to his deeds."
7. " To them who by patient continuance in well-doing." Se
condly, by an extended comparison, in which there is a distribu
tion, both of the deeds, and of their consequences ; the latter are
divided into rewards and punishments, and its own appropriate
consequence is annexed to every man's deed. The deeds are
either good or evil. The good deeds are defined by their end and
adjunct : the adjunct is — perseverance ; the end — " glory, honour
and immortality." To these deeds, says the apostle, God, who is
just, and the judge of the world, awards " eternal life."
8. " But unto them that are contentious and do not obey the
truth." Then there are evil deeds, of which the apostle here enu
merates two species. The first of these is " contention," by which
I understand all that reasoning by which the Gentiles, ' whilst
they boasted that they were wise, became fools,' as he formerly
said, " And that do not obey the truth." The second species of
evil deeds is the effect of the contentions or various discussions of
the philosophers which is here represented as twofold. The first
is a sin of omission — " they do not obey the truth," that is, as he
said before, " knowing God, they yet glorify him not as God."
" But obey unrighteousness" — the second effect of their conten
tions and disputings, which is a sin of commission, the commission,
namely, of " all unrighteousness," with which he formerly said
that the Gentiles were " filled," and which he traced to their re
fusing to obey the truth, chap. i. 28, 29. To these will be rendered
" indignation and wrath," the equal and appropriate punishment
which, by the judgment of God, is rendered to evil deeds. The
apostle therefore explains his abridged comparison  " God will
render to every man according to his deeds" — in this way :  ' God

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 25
awards eternal life to him who does well if he persevere, but he is
wroth with, and in his wrath awards death to all that do evil, such
as are even you wise men among the Gentiles, contending and
becoming vain in your contentions : for the apostle in this place
purposely comprises evil deeds under the heads of evil contention
and its effects, that he may bring home the charge to the Gentile
philosophers, all whose discussions concerning God and duty, and
the supreme good, amounted to nothing more than an evil conten
tion. 9. " Tribulation and anguish against every soul of man that
doeth evil." Next follows the second argument by which the apostle
vindicates the justice of the judgment of God, which is taken from
the adjunct of its impartiality :* Whatever judgment is impartialf
that is, " according to truth," as he formerly said, and without re
spect of persons is just :
But " there is no respect of persons with God ;"
Therefore the judgment of God is just. The assumption is first
proved in verses 9 and 10, in which the Apostle shews that both
in punishing unrighteousness and rewarding good deeds God is
the same both to Jews and Gentiles. The argument is conse
quently inductive, the first part of the induction being contained
in this verse : — God is the same both to Jews and Gentiles in
exercising judgment, or — ' affliction and anguish shall be upon
- every soul that doeth evil whether Jew or Gentile.'
10. " But glory, honour, and peace to every man that worketh
good," — the second part of the induction : — God is the same to
both Jews and Gentiles in rewarding righteousness. The distinc
tion, however, made between these two classes, by the order in
which they are named, is deserving of attention, namely, that the
Jew is both first in judgment, when he does evil, on account of
his ingratitude, as it is said : — ' It shall be more tolerable for So-
* ' A-jc^nru-jroXYi-^m. t ' A^-gotronrsXnifTov.

26 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
dom and Gomorrha, than for those that despise the gospel;' and
first also in grace, on account of their election, as the apostle
speaks, and because they are the natural branches of the olive-tree.
11. "For there is no respect of persons with God." This is the
assumption — the judgment of God is impartial.
12. " As many as have sinned without law, shall also perish with
out law," — a second argument in proof of the assumption from the
destruction of all sinners alike (which is the effect of the just judg
ment of God), whether they have sinned with or without the
written law.
13. " For not the hearers of the law," — a prolepsis, in which he
anticipates the objections of the Jews against the last argument
for the assumption. ' We hear the law,' say the Jews, ' therefore
we shall not be judged by the law.' The apostle replies, that it
does not follow, and that it is the sophism of assigning that as a
cause which is no cause ; for that it is not the hearing of the law
but the doing of it that justifies ; consequently, even those who
sin in the law, that is, who sin while they have and hear the law,
shall yet be judged by the law.
14. " For when the Gentiles who have not the law, do by nature
the things which are of the law,"— a second prolepsis, by which
he anticipates the objections of the Gentiles against the last argu
ment for the assumption :—' Where the law is not,' say they,
' there is no transgression of the law.'
' But we have not the law ; therefore there is in us no trans
gression of the law. Consequently, since we cannot sin without
the law, neither can we perish without the law, contrary,' they
might say to the apostle, ' to what you affirm.'
The proposition is that of the apostle, chap. iv. 15. They seem
to suppose that he grants them the assumption also, when he
speaks of them as being "without the law;" but the apostle re-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 27
plies that, although they are without the written law, yet they
are not altogether without law, and that they, therefore, assume
what is not true. Accordingly, he here proves, that although the
Gentiles do not possess the written law, yet they are not without
law. The arguments by which he establishes his proposition are
two. The first is : —
Those who are a law unto themselves are not without law :
The Gentiles are a law unto themselves :
Therefore they are not without law.
The assumption is thus proved :—
Those who, having not the written law, do by nature the things
which are of the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto
themselves :
But the Gentiles, having not the written law, do by nature the
things which are of the law :
Wherefore they are a law unto themselves.
The assumption of the latter syllogism is first given, and then
the conclusion in the words — " These having not the law, are a
law unto themselves."
15. " As those who shew the work of the law written on their
hearts," — the second argument by which the apostle proves, that
the Gentiles are not without law : —
Those, on whose hearts the work of the law is written, are not
without law :
But the work of the law is written on the hearts of the Gentiles :
" Their conscience at the same time bearing witness ; " — the as
sumption is proved by an induction of the parts of the work of the
law written on their hearts : the parts are two ; the one — ' the
testimony of conscience ; ' the other — * the mutual accusing and
excusing of their thoughts.'
Thus far the objections, first of the Jews, and then of the Gen
tiles, against his last argument, and the equity of the destruction
of sinners o/both classes alike, have been removed.

28 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
16. " In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men."
This destruction of Jewish and Gentile sinners alike, he illus
trates by the adjunct of the time, which is described by its sub
ject : it is—" the day on which God shall judge." This judgment
of God is amplified, first by its subject, set forth by an implied
comparison of majority — ' God will judge, not merely the open,
but the secret sins of men.' " According to my gospel." Secondly,
this judgment of God is illustrated by its efficient causes : both
the principal, which is Jesus Christ ; and the instrumental, which
is the gospel that Paul preached.
And here it is to be observed, that, although he has said that
sinners will perish, either by the law of nature, if they have sinned
without the law, or by the written law, if they have sinned under
the law ; yet he says that that just judgment of God will be ac
cording to the gospel ; because, of a truth, the Lord is just, and his
judgment is just, in both condemning and acquitting by the gospel
alone. For by the law it will be impossible for any one to be
justly acquitted, whether it be the written law or the law of na
ture, as the apostle is afterwards about to show ; whereas by the
gospel, both the condemnation of unbelievers and the acquittal of
believers will be just : since, in addition to the other sins of which
the former are convicted by the law, they have despised the grace
of the gospel ; and because the latter possess, through the gospel,
the righteousness of Christ, which is all-sufficient for their acquit
tal. With regard, therefore, to what the apostle has said in verses
7 and 10, — ' that eternal life, glory, honour and peace will be
given to him that worketh good,' — he does not thereby intimate
that it is possible for any one to be justified by the law on the
ground of his own works ; but by shewing, both to Jews and
Gentiles, that the sole condition of justification by the law is, that
they keep it perfectly, and work well in all things, — a condition
which both must be conscious was not theirs, — he wishes to urge
them to betake themselves to Christ, that they may be justified
from the gospel.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 29
17, " Behold thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law."
Thus far the first part of the proof in which he has established,
both concerning the Gentiles in general, and concerning their wise
men in particular, that they hold the truth of God in unrighteous
ness, and has vindicated, in passing, against the complaints both
of Jew and Gentiles, the justice of the judgment of God to which
he has made the Gentiles liable. Next comes the second part of
the proof, viz. : that even the Jews themselves, who possess the
truth in the written law, held that truth in unrighteousness ; the
whole of which discussion is proleptical, and consists in a refuta
tion of the Jews glorying in their privileges over the Gentiles.
The first prolepsis occupies the remainder of the chapter, and is
divided into two sections ; the former of which, extending to verse
21, contains an enumeration of the prerogatives of the Jews, and
the latter, the subjoined reply of the apostle.
Three prerogatives of the Jews are here enumerated. First,
they glory in the name of ' Jew.' Secondly, they glory in God
and in his law, because, forsooth, unlike other nations, each of
which had its own idols and false god, they alone worshipped the
true God, and were possessed of the law delivered to them by
himself. These two prerogatives are comprised in the 17 th verse.
18. " And knowest his will." The third prerogative is con
tained in this and the two following verses, — ' they glory in the
knowledge which they had obtained from the law.' This the
apostle variously amplifies in accordance with their own ideas :
first, by its object — because it is the knowledge of the will of God,,
and of those things that are at variance with that will ; then by
its effects — by means of it, truly, the Jews are the guides of
the blind, give light to them that sit in darkness, and are the
teachers of the foolish and of babes.'
21. " Thou, therefore, who teachest another, teachest thou not
thyself ? " The apostle here replies to this threefold glorying of
the Jews ; butby hysterosis, he begins with the last, viz., their

30 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
glorying in their knowledge. This he shews to be vain, by
reasoning from the less to the greater :— ' thou dost not even
teach thyself: ' Therefore thy parade of thy knowledge is worth
less.' " Thou that preachest that a man should not steal, thou steal-
est." He proves the antecedent from the conduct of the Jews,
and by an induction of the violated law : —
' Thou that preachest and teachest that another should not steal,
should not commit sacrilege,' (from the eighth commandment) ;
' should not commit' adultery,' (from the seventh) ; ' should abhor,
idols,' (from the first and second commandments) ; 'art thyself guilty
of stealing, of adultery, and of sacrilege : '
' Thou, therefore, that gloriest in being a teacher of others, dost
not so much as teach thyself.'
23. " Thou that gloriest in the law, through transgression of
the law, dishonourest thou God ? "
He next replies to the second prerogative, and shews their
boasting in God and in the law to be vain, from their own conduct
viz., their transgression of the third commandment ; for by trans
gressing the whole law they brought disgrace upon the law and upon
God, that is, exposed at the same time both God and his law to be
blasphemed by others, which was tantamount to blaspheming
the name of God, and violating the third commandment them
selves. Hence the apostle supplies us with two notable things for
the right understanding of the third commandment : first, that he
who give's occasion to others to blaspheme is guilty of blasphemy
himself; and, secondly, that an occasion is given to the ungodly
to blaspheme by the transgression of any one of the command
ments, and, consequently, whatever be the commandment trans
gressed, that the transgression of it is also a violation of the third
commandment ; see 2 Sam. xii. 14.
24. " For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles
because of you;" — he proves the foregoing act of the Jews in

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 31
dishonouring God through their transgression of the law, from the
testimony of the prophets ; Isaiah iii. 5 ; Ezek. xxxvi. 23.
25. " For circumcision verily profiteth if thou keep the law."
We have here a prolepsis by which the apostle anticipates the
objections of the Jews against his last accusation : —
' We are circumcised, and keep all the ceremonies of the law ; "
(for so I take it, circumcision is here to be understood by synec
doche of the species for the genus, as the apostle seems to inti
mate, Gal. v. 2.) ;
' Therefore we do not dishonour God.'
The apostle replies that it does not follow, and that they reason
from that which is no cause, as if it were a cause ; for that God
is glorified, not by circumcision and the external signs of service,
but by a godly life, and the keeping of the moral law, of which
circumcision is the sacrament.* Consequently, that circumcision
profits the circumcised for glorying in God and glorifying the
name of God among the Gentiles, only hypothetically and condi
tionally, viz., if they themselves keep the law, which is the true
cause. " But if thou be a transgressor of the law, thy circum
cision is made uncircumcision." He here proves his own reply,
and the conditional use of circumcision, from what equally follows
on the contrary supposition : —
' If thou be a transgressor of the law, thy circumcision becomes
uncircumcision, and is nothing worth ;
' Therefore, contrariwise, circumcision profits only if thou keep
the law.'
26. " If the uncircumcision, therefore, keep the ordinances of
the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision ? "
From his last reply the apostle deduces a double inference and
a twofold secondary conclusion. Of these the first is — ' that
uncircumcision keeping the law is reckoned for or is equivalent to
* Or pledge ; i. e, to which one becomes pledged in consequence of submitting to
the ordinance of circumcision.

32 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
circumcision;' for if the whole advantage* of circumcision de
pends upon the keeping of the law, it foUows that the uncircum-,
cision which keeps the law has the same advantage with circum
cision. 27. " And shall not the uncircumcision, which is by nature, if
it keep the law, judge thee, who, through the letter and circum
cision, art a transgressor of the law?" This is the second infer
ence : — ' Uncircumcision keeping the law will judge circumcision,'
i. e. ' will be an argument for judgment against the circumcision
of those that transgress the law ; ' for if the advantage of circum
cision be the keeping of the law, the uncircumcision which has the
advantage attaching to circumcision is better than the circumci
sion which is without the keeping of the law. Which is the ad
vantage of the law.
28. " For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly." The apostle
now answers the first boast of the Jews, viz., their glorying in the
surname of Jew, and shows that this is no true cause for glorying :.
and thus, throughout the whole of his reply, the apostle proves;
that these Jews reasoned falsely from what was no cause, and de
ceived themselves. -This third answer is borrowed from the de
finition of a Jew, and consists of two parts, an arsisf and a thesis.^
For in the first part, which is contained in the 28th verse, he
shews who is not a Jew, viz., one who is a Jew outwardly, that is,
by surname, (as he has said above), or by the letter, (as he after
wards speaks) ; or, which is the same thing, all are not Jews who.
are the children of Judah by carnal descent : So chap. ix. 6.
" Nor is that circumcision, which is circumcision outwardly," i. e.
" in the flesh." He here illustrates the arsis from the like which
has just before been demonstrated ; as the external sacrament of
circumcision, and the cutting off of the foreskin, is not that true
circumcision in which one may glory, (as has just been demon-
* Or superiority. f A negation. % An affirmation.

epistle of paul to the romans. 33
strated), so to be a Jew outwardly is not to be a real Jew, nor
can that properly be made a subject of glorying.
29. "But he is a Jew who is one inwardly;" — this is the
thesis, " and circumcision is that of the heart :" — he illustrates
the thesis from the like, as he had formerly done in the case of the
arsis. " (That is) in the spirit not in the letter." He here de
fines what it is to be a Jew inwardly by its formal cause, and the
adjunct of the praise connected therewith ; each being expressed
by contrasting it with something distinct from it. ' To be a Jew
inwardly, is to be a spiritual Jew, or a Jew in the spirit, and not
in the letter.' The apostle here opposes " the letter" to "the
spirit :" consequently as by " the spirit" is denoted the internal
grace of faith and sanctification ; so by " the letter^ we are to
understand whatever is external and visible to every one, whether
it be natural descent or the common profession [of religion], and
participation in its external services. Therefore by the shewing
of the apostle it is the spirit and internal grace, not any thing ex
ternal, by which he who is truly a Jew is what he is, viz., " a
Jew." " Whose praise is not from men, but from God." This is
the second part of the definition, and the adjunct of the praise or
commendation enjoyed by him who is truly a Jew, which is ex
plained by contrast from its efficient cause, — ' The praise of him
who is truly a Jew, is not from men, but from God.'

CHAPTEE m.
1. " What advantage then hath the Jew, or what is the benefit
of circumcision ?" This is the second objection of the Jews, sug
gested by the last reply of the apostle, in which he has refuted
the prerogatives enumerated by the Jews, and set them aside, so
as to place the Jews on the same level with the Gentiles, conclud
ing both under sin and death. Hence the Jews rejoin, — ' Accord-
c

34 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
ing to your opinion, therefore, Paul, there is no advantage in being
a Jew, nor in circumcision, and the law of Moses ;' for so, by'
synecdoche of the part for the whole, circumcision is put for the
entire Mosaic law. Since the Jews urge this negation from the
foregoing refutation in an interrogative form, as involving a
most manifest absurdity, the sense is,—' Unless you admit the
privileges wliich we have specified, we do not know what is
the advantage of being a Jew rather than a Gentile, or of
having the law of Moses more than of wanting it ; tell us if you
know of any.'
2. " Much in every way" — a hypophora* or the subjoined reply
in which the Apostle, rejecting as worthless those prerogatives in
which the Jews gloried, shews that there remains to the Jew great
advantage in everyway. "For there is this chiefly, that unto
them were committed the oracles of God." By an instance t or
particular example, he here confirms his reply, and removes the
universal negation of the Jews. They said that if the prerogatives
enumerated were not admitted as such, then the Jew had none :
The apostle maintains, on the contrary, that besides these there
was another superior to these, and the chief one, namely — that unto
them were committed the oracles of God ; that is, as he afterwards
explains, chap. ix. 4, that their's were the promises, and ac
cording to the promises, the adoption, the glory, the covenant, the
constitution of the law, and the service. The apostle, therefore,
withdraws the Jews from glorying in the flesh and in external
privileges that he may base both their glorying in themselves and
in their external privileges upon the prerogative of grace through
the promises ; which promises he here denominates " the oracles
of God," and as he speaks in 1 Cor. i. 31 — quoting from Jeremiah
— " he that glorieth let him glory in the Lord."
3. " For what if some did not believe, shall their unbelief make
* A suggestion in way of reply. f Example urged in way of objection. .

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 35
void the faith of God ?" This is the third objection of the Jews,
also suggested by the foregoing reply ; for they attempt to remove
the prerogative of grace through the promises, that they may re
tain their own, namely, either that the Jew has no advantage, or
that he has those which they have specified ; in a word, the Jews,
by this objection, endeavour to set aside the instance of the
apostle, and reason thus : — ' All did not believe the oracles and
promises of God,' — which the apostle admits in the beginning of
the 3d verse — ' therefore no advantage belongs to the Jew nor to
circumcision.' Their argument, stated at length, would be as
follows : —
' The advantage of being a Jew, and of circumcision, ought to
be universal and common to all.'
But all have not had the oracles and promises of God committed
to them, (the proof of this being — that all did not believe, which,
as has been said, the apostle admits.)
' Therefore, neither is this prerogative common to all, and con
sequently it is no prerogative..' The apostle replies to the proof
ofthe assumption, and shews that it does not follow, because some
do not believe that the oracles of God were not committed to them
according to the word of his promise ; — ' for in that case the un
belief of some would render void the faith of God ; but the latter
cannot be.' The assumption * is comprised in the question and
subjoined answer of the apostle — " Shall their unbelief make void
the faith of God ? the answer is — " far from it :" he denies with
abhorrence that the faith of God can be nullified by the unbelief
of some of the Jews ; whence he draws the conclusion that it does
not follow that the oracles of God were not committed to these
persons, because they themselves did not believe. By this the
apostle teaches us two things ; first, that the oracles of God have
been committed, (that is, the word of the gospel and the signs of
it have been given,) even to hypocrites in the visible Church ;
secondly, that in order to our becoming partakers of grace there is
* Viz., the consequent of this enthymeme, (or minor premise of the preceding hypo
thetical syllogism.) .
C2

36 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
need not only for the exhibition of the oracles of God, but also for
our apprehension of them by faith, which is the work ofthe Holy
Spirit. 4. " Yea let God be true, but every man a liar." The apostle
here amplifies the foregoing assumption by a comparison of ma
jority :— the lying of all men will not render void the faith of God,
since were every man a liar, yet God himself remains true ; much
less therefore can the unbelief of some men render void the faith
of God. " As if is written, That thou mayest be justified in thy
sayings and mayest overcome when thou judgest." He proves
the comparison of majority by the testimony of scripture, and
that twofold: the first part proves that God is true, for he
who is justified in his sayings is true ; the second that man is a
liar, for if the Lord overcomes when he judges, then is man over
come, i. e., he is found a liar and a covenant-breaker when he is
judged. 5. " But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of
God what shall we say ? Is God unjust who inflicteth punishment ?"
Because it appears from the foregoing reply, that the lying and
unbelief of men cannot render void the faith of God, but that the
faith, and truth, and righteousness of God are manifested by the
unbelief, lying and unrighteousness of man, there hence arises a
fourth prolepsis consisting of two parts : The first being contained
in verses 5 and 6, the second in verses 7 and 8. The first part is, —
'If our unrighteousness,' say the Jews, ' commend the righteousness
of God, our lying the truth of God, and our unbelief the faith of God,
it is unjust that the. Lord should punish our unbelief, lying and un
righteousness ; you, Paul, assert the former ; therefore the latter fol
lows." " I speak after the manner of men." We have next a three
fold reply ofthe apostle: first, he excuses himself for having stated an
objection of this kind, and says that it was not started by his own
mind, but by the mind of men, i.e. " sensual men," and " men of
corrupt judgment," as he elsewhere speaks ; whereby he warns

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 37
Christian men to abstain from blasphemous objections against the
truth. 6. " {W from it" — the second part of the reply, in which he
rejects the conclusion with abhorrence. — ' Far be it from me that
I should think or teach that it is unjust in God to punish our
unrighteousness, lying, and unbelief.' " Else how shall God be
the judge of the world ?" — the third part of the reply, containing a
proof of the negative of the proposition from the received and
common testimony concerning God. For the apostle takes for
granted, from the common opinion of all men, especially of the
Jews, who had been taught out of the law, that God wiU be the
judge of the world : and he here enquires how this common testi
mony can be consistent ; intimating that it is impossible it can
be consistent with the blasphemous proposition of the last syllo
gism of the Jews.
7, 8. " For if the truth of God hath redounded by my lying to
his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner ? " This is the
second part of the prolepsis, expressed by a comparison of majo
rity : ' If the truth of God redounds by my lying to his glory,
not only am I not to be condemned as a sinner, but evil is to be
done that good may come ; ' that is — ' I must follow after sin with
the greater zeal, that God may be the more glorified by my un
righteousness.' ' But you, Paul, assert the former : '
' Therefore you affirm the latter also, viz. — that evil is to be
done that good may come.'
The proposition with the conclusion are given in the text ; the
conclusion being amplified by the false and slanderous testimony
of many, and inserted within a parenthesis.
" Whose condemnation is just." To this syllogism, as being
manifestly absurd, the apostle makes no reply, but opposes the
just condemnation of God to those who falsely charged him with
the conclusion.

38 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
9. " What then? We do excel ?" This is the last prolepsis of
the Jews from the preceding discussion of Paul, in which he has
vindicated the faith of God in the promises made to the fathers,
and magnified his grace towards the Jews, who were for the most
part unworthy and unbelieving, whose unbelief however did not
render void, but rather commended the righteousness of God.
From this discussion the Jews at length rise up and claim to
themselves an advantage over the Gentiles, as now established by
the support of Paul himself; as if they had said : — 'What ! does
not your whole reasoning go to shew that we have an advantage,
and that much in every way (as before said) ; and are you not
therefore wrong in comparing us to the Gentiles, and concluding
that we are equally liable to judgment with them ?' "For no way"
— a hypophora, or the subjoined reply of the apostle, in which he
convicts the Jews of sophistry, in arresting his reasoning concern
ing the grace of God communicated to the Jews in the promises,
to their own justification, and that by the laws. The sense of his
words therefore is : — ' although we Jews much excel the Gentiles
in having the oracles of God committed to us, that is, have
the advantage over them in respect of God who has been more
gracious to us, or has imparted greater advantages to us than to
them ; yet as regards justification by the law, and in respect of
ourselves "We in no way" excel or are better than the Gentiles
themselves.' That this is the purport of the reply, is proved by
what immediately follows. The Jews, therefore, have the advan
tage of the Gentiles in respect of grace, which is what the apostle
has argued ; but not in respect of justification by the law, which
is the point in question. For we have before brought the charge
against both Jews and Gentiles that they are all under sin. He
here proves his last reply, or that the Jews in no way have the
advantage over the Gentiles as regards justification by the law.
To prove this he adduces the conclusion previously argued, viz. :
— that all, both Jews and Gentiles, were sinners, and held the
truth of God in unrighteousness, as aforesaid : and the apostle
does this designedly, for as the Jews had abused his last discussion

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 39
to support their own lie, he in like manner uses his own previous
discussion for his purpose of refuting them. His reasoning, there
fore, is to this effect : — ' If Jews and Greeks are equally sinners,
then as regards justification by the law, the Jews have in no way
the advantage over the Greeks :' ' But the former is true,' which
he proves by two arguments. Of these the first is a testimony
borrowed from the previous discussion : — •" we have before brought
the charge," that is, we have charged them, and shewn that they
are liable to the charge.
10. " As it is written, There is none righteous, not even one,"
— the second argument for the assumption, from the testimony of
scripture, continued as far as verse 19. >
19. " But we know that what things soever the law saith, it
saith to them who are in the law." Under the term " law,"
the apostle here includes not only Moses, but also the Psalms and
the Prophets, that is, the whole of the Old Testament ; and he
therefore denominates the testimonies adduced — ' the sayings of
the law.' In these words, therefore, the apostle proves that the
testimonies which he has adduced out of the scriptures relate to
the Jews, and convict them of sin : and, indeed, he does so pro-
leptically, knowing that the Jews would make a different appli
cation of them. The proposition, ' Whatsoever things the law
saith, it saith to all those who are in the law ' — is given in the
text, amplified by the adjunct of the common knowledge of Paul
and the Jews. To this so obvious a proposition the apostle sub
joins the no less manifest assumption : —
' But you Jews are in' or ' under the law :
' Therefore, contrary to what you think, the law utters these
testimonies concerning you.'
The argument is from conjugates ; for the words vou,os and
vo[ukoi, or the equivalent expression, 6i ovr&s b ru vo^S, are
conjugates. " That every mouth may be stopped, and the whole
world become liable to the condemnation of God." He next

40 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
illustrates the foregoing and implied conclusion concerning the
conviction of the Jews by the testimonies adduced out of the
scriptures, from its twofold end : the first is,—' that" every mouth
may be stopped, not among the Gentiles only, but also among the
Jews ;' the second is,—' that the whole world may become liable
to the condemnation of God, the Jews no less than the Greeks.'
For while in the opinion of the Jews, it was beyond dispute that
the Greeks and Gentiles were sinners, they were by no means dis
posed to admit that the same thing was true of themselves ; as
appears from Gal. ii. 15, where 'to be a Jew by nature' is opposed
to ' being a sinner ofthe Gentiles:' the apostle therefore applies
convincing testimonies from the scriptures to the Jews also, that,
they too being self-convicted , and brought in guilty, he may
obtain the universal conclusion, ' that every man, both Jew and
Greek, holds the truth of God in unrighteousness, and,' as he ex
presses it in Gal. iii. 22, ' is shut up under sin by the law.'
20. " Therefore from* the deeds of the law shall no flesh be
justified in his sight." The reasoning in proof of the assumption
of the first syllogism, which has been prosecuted from the 18th
verse of chap. i. to this place, is here brought to a conclusion : —
' the righteousness of man in the sight of God is not from the law,
nor its deeds.' " For through the law is the knowledge of sin."
We have here a new argument for the assumption which has just
been concluded, ' taken from the contrary effect of the law which
is to make known sin and misery :— r-
' Sin and unrighteousness became known by the law :'
'Therefore righteousness and salvation do not become known
from the law, but from the other part of the word, namely, from
the gospel.'
Thus the apostle here assigns to each part of the word its own
and its proper effect : so that it is the office of the law to make
known sin, and to threaten death as the consequence of sin ; but
of the gospel, to make manifest the remission of sins in Christ Je
sus, unto righteousness and eternal life,

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 41
21. " But now, God's righteousness without the law has been
manifested" — a Prolepsis in which he anticipates an objection
suggested by the foregoing conclusion of the assumption. Sensual
and natural men who were disposed to seek righteousness by the
law, might say to the apostle : — "If, as you conclude, no flesh shall
be justified by the works of the law, then you take away from man
all righteousness in the sight of God, so that he can have no righte
ousness before God at all. The apostle replies — ' that the propo
sition is false, and that our keeping of the law is not the sole
ground of righteousness before God ; but that God's righteousness
— namely, that by which man is righteous before God — has been
made manifest without the law.' By the manifestation here
spoken of, the apostle means that full and complete revelation of
righteousness which was made by Christ manifest in the flesh ;
and, accordingly, he illustrates it by the circumstance of the time:
— ' now, for the first time,' says the apostle, ' has it been made
manifest, namely, by the gospel of Jesus Christ.' " Being proved
by the testimony of the law and the prophets" — a second prolepsis
of the Jews, ignorant as they were of the gospel : — ' Whence does
that righteousness of yours appear?' they might say to the apostle)
' or, how can it be proved ?' To this he replies, that although it
is without the law, yet it has the testimony both of the law and
the prophets, and is proved thereby, as he shewed the Bereans,
(Acts xvii. 11.) The testimony of the Law concerning the righte
ousness of faith is this : — ' that all those who have kept the law
are righteous ; ' to which the believer subjoins through faith : —
' although I have broken the law, yet I have kept it in Christ :'
whence the law testifies to the believer that he is righteous through
faith. As regards the prophets, they preached Christ Jesus, and
righteousness through faith on him.
22. " God's righteousness (I say) through faith of Jesus Christ,
unto all, and upon all those who believe." With a view to the
illustration of his two last replies, the apostle here defines that
righteousness of God which he has spoken of as having been made

42 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
manifest without the law, yet proved by the testimony both of the
law, and of the prophets; — 'that righteousness,' says the apostle,
'is God's righteousness through faith of Jesus Christ, unto all,
and upon all those who believe on him.' In this definition, there
is first the genus : — ' that righteousness of which I speak is really
righteousness.' This he asserts against the sensual of his day,
who thought (as do the Papists of our own day after them,) that
all righteousness which is not from the law and our own works, is
imaginary ; in opposition to which the apostle says, that this righte
ousness which is without the law is really righteousness : this is
the genus. Secondly, the characteristic or specific difference —
whereby that righteousness which is without the law is shewn to
be more excellent than that wliich is from the law, if any such
there could be — is drawn from the principal efficient cause, the
subject, and the instrumental efficient cause. The principal effi
cient cause of this righteousness of God, or righteousness by which
we are righteous before God, is — " God ;" wherefore the apostle
calls it God's righteousness : and God effects it, 1st, by giving it,
John iii. 16 ; 2d, by imputing it, Eom. iv. 5 ; 3d, by accepting it
when imputed, Matt. xvii. 5. The subject of it is twofold. The
primary, or subject in which the righteousness alluded to primarily
resides, and that, by keeping the law fully, is — "Jesus Christ;"
for he alone has procured by his obedience that righteousness
whereby we are righteous before God : the secondary is — " all
who believe," who become righteous by the imputation of bis
righteousness ; and, accordingly, the apostle calls this righteous
ness ours, through Jesus Christ, thereby intimating, that the ori
ginal possessor of this righteousness is Jesus Christ, and then, we
through him. The primary subject then of this righteousness is
Christ, who has it by his own keeping of the law ; and after him
believers, who have it by God's imputation, from him. This se
condary subject the apostle expresses by the universal term " all,"
and that twice repeated, in order to set aside the distinction be
tween Jews and Gentiles, as the words immediately following
shew, and prove that the Gentiles were called to a participation in

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 43
the common grace, a thing which the Jews could hardly be induced
to believe. The last particular is, the instrumental cause of this
righteousness, which is faith, agreeing not to Christ the principal,
but to us the subordinate subject. For Christ is righteous, not
by faith, or another justifying him, but by keeping the law per
fectly ; whereas, we, on the contrary, who are secondarily righte
ous, become so, not by keeping the law, but through faith in a
justifying Christ : the faith of Jesus Christ, therefore, is the in
strumental cause of our righteousness. The exhibition of this
righteousness by God, through the preaching of the gospel, and
its reception through the operation of the Holy Spirit, when the
gospel is heard, the apostle denotes by the prepositions "unto"
and "upon;" for all righteousness is exhibited by the preaching
of faith, and the same righteousness is upon all by the reception
of faith, or of the gospel preached : Or these prepositions may be
referred to those acts of God of which we haye spoken ; so that
" unto" — a preposition of motion — may denote the giving and im
puting, and " upon," the accepting of that righteousness. " For
there is no distinction." These words assign the reason for the
use of the universal term " all," and for its being twice repeated,
as has been already remarked.
23. " For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God."
He here proves what he has just affirmed, viz. : — that there is no
distinction between Jews and Gentiles in respect of grace, but that
righteousness is unto all and upon all those who believe, whether
they be Jews or Gentiles, through the faith of Jesus Christ.
The reasoning is from an effect already consummated to its end,
as the apostle himself explains it in Gal. iii. 23 : —
' All, both Jews and Gentiles, have sinned, and come short of
the glory of God, that all of both classes may be justified freely :'
or, as he speaks in the passage referred to, — "the Scripture hath
concluded all under sin, that the promise from faith of Jesus Christ
might be given to those that believe."
' Wherefore, the promise, or free justification through faith, is

44 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
common to all who believe, both Jews and Gentiles, without dis
tinction.' This already consummated effect is the fall into sin, with its
consequences: whence, we may here observe, that according to
the mind of the apostle, the common fall of all men, although in
other respects pernicious, yet in respect of God, has been the me
dium of the accomplishment by Christ of the common salvation of
all who believe.
24. " (That is,) by his grace." He next explains what it is to
be justified freely, viz. : — ' that it is to be justified purely from the
grace of God, without any merit of our own.' " Through the re
demption which is in Jesus Christ." In these words he pursues
his explanation, and defines what it is to be justified by the grace
of God, namely: — 'that it is to be justified through the redemp-
tion which is in Jesus Christ,' so that the redemption which is in
Christ is that grace by which we are justified freely, or justified
by his grace without any merit of our own. Moreover, the apostle
calls this redemption " grace," because, as we have said, it is freely
given, . freely imputed, and freely accepted. We must observe,
however, that according to the apostle, our free justification is
based upon redemption : i.e. we are justified in such a way, that
although in respect of ourselves that justification is free, to the
praise ofthe mercy and grace of God; yet it is at the same time
from the redemption which is through the full satisfaction of Jesus
Christ, to the praise alike of the justice of God.
25. " Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith
in his blood, to declare his righteousness through the remission of
sins that are past." The apostle here proves each of the foregoing
statements, viz. : — ' that justification is free,' and ' that God is
just in justifying us freely,' which together make up the sum of the
gospel— by a description of Jesus Christ. The first part of the
description is his " propitiation,", illustrated by its author, " God,"
— " whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation ; " by which I

EPISTLE OE PAUL TO THE EOMANS. 45
understand the incarnation * of the Son of God, or his manifesta
tion in the flesh. The second part is our reconcihation with God
through his sacrifice in the flesh ; for to be a propitiation is to be
a propitiatory t sacrifice, propitiating God towards us sinners : and
this is amplified by the instrumental cause whereby that sacrifice
becomes ours for reconciliation, which is — " faith in his blood."
The third part of the description is the end of each of the preced
ing — viz., of the incarnation and sacrifice in his flesh — which is
the display of God's righteousness — " to declare his righteousness."
By " God's righteousness " I understand here, as above, in verse
21, that righteousness whereby we are righteous in God's sight,
which the apostle here defines by its form, as he has before de
fined it in verse 22, by its efficient cause and subject. Its form is
" the remission of sins." These sins the apostle describes by their
former reign in the world ; for to be past here signifies that the
world had lived in them, and that they had reigned in the world
before Christ was known : so that the sense of the expression —
" which are past " is — ' in which the world walked,^ and which
reigned in the world before Christ was manifested in the flesh ; '
as the apostle himself explains it in Acts xiv. 16, xvii. 30. What
he says then is :— that the righteousness of all who believe on
Jesus Christ, of the Jews first, and then of the Gentiles, consists
in the remission of such sins as formerly reigned in the world, and
still reign in the unbelieving world ; and the remains of which,
although they do not. reign, because resisted through the Holy
Spirit, are nevertheless still found even in believers themselves, as
long as they continue in the present state. The apostle, therefore,
lays down these two principles : first, that before Christ was mani
fested in the flesh, the Gentiles indulged in all sorts of sins, which
in the passages above referred to he calls their " ways,"  ' God
suffered the Gentiles to walk in their own ways ; ' secondly, that
to those who believe on the blood of Jesus Christ, the remission
of all these sins, great and numerous as they are, is sure, which
remission is our righteousness before the Lord.
* "Eat 'kgXiiTiy. f *IX««"m«».

46 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
26. " From the forbearance of God." This ia a prolepsis, where
in he anticipates an objection, by which the unbelieving, both
among the Jews and among the Gentiles, endeavour to refute both
of the principles which he has laid down, and to conclude that
there were no such sins in the world before Christ was known, as
the apostle here speaks of, and consequently that the righteous
ness of us who believe on Christ does not consist in their remis
sion. Therefore they thus argue : —
' If the sins which are now remitted for righteousness to
those who believe are past, then God, who is a just judge, would,
in times past, have destroyed the world while still walking in
sin; ' The latter, however, is false ; he did not destroy them, but on
the contrary " gave them good things, and filled their hearts with
food and gladness," (as the apostle speaks, Acts xiv. 17) :
' Therefore the former also is false, and the world was neither
unrighteous in times past, as you affirm, nor is now to be justified
by the remission of sins.'
To this the apostle replies — that the proposition is false ; and
that although God, who is a just judge, did not destroy the world,
yet sin reigned in the world without Christ, because God bore
with the world even while sinning, and " endured," as he else
where speaks, with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath framed
for destruction. " To declare, at this time his righteousness."
This last illustration of his reply, and of that forbearance of God
whereby he long endured the sins of the world, is taken from its
end, repeated from the preceding verse : — ' it was not without
design that God bore with the sins of the Gentiles even when sin
reigned in them ; but for this end, viz., that at the time of the
manifestation of Jesus Christ he might show — i. e. make known
to the world — his righteousness through faith in his Christ, or
that righteousness whereby the world, otherwise dead in sins,
might be justified in the sight of God : ' ' because God,' the apostle
means to say, ' was about at this time to exhibit this righteous
ness by the manifestation of Jesus Christ in the flesh, before this

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 47
time he had borne with the Gentiles, great sinners though they
were, in order that that righteousness of his might be manifested
in their posterity.' " That he might be just, and the justifier of
him who is of the faith of Jesus." We have here the fourth and
last part of the description of Jesus Christ, which was begun in
the verse immediately preceding. It is drawn from the remote
end [of his incarnation and sacrifice] which is the consistency and
harmony of the justice and mercy of God in the justification of us
sinners. For unless God were just as well as the justifier of us
sinners in Jesus Christ set forth for a propitiation through faith
in his blood, then neither we ourselves, nor any created being in
our name, could make satisfaction for our sins : but Jesus Christ,
having been set forth by the Father for a propitiation, has so fully
satisfied divine justice for all the sins of all believers, that God,
in justifying us who believe in Jesus, of his own pure grace and
mercy, is himself also most just. One thing should be observed
here, viz., that what the apostle, in these two verses, calls " his
righteousness," is not — ' that by which God is righteous in him
self,' nor — ' that by which he is declared righteous in executing
judgment on wicked sinners,' but — ' that whereby he freely treats
us as righteous,' in other words — ' the righteousness which is free
ly given by him in Christ, who alone has made satisfaction and
earned righteousness (for us.)'
27. " Where is glorying then ? It is excluded. Through what
law ? Of works ? Nay ; but through the law of faith." This is a
winding up and conclusion drawn from the foregoing and already
inferred conclusion of the principal assumption. That conclusion,
as we have said above on verse 20, was—' that no flesh can be
justified from the works of the law : ' from which the apostle now
deduces another conclusion, viz., — ' that all glorying is excluded
through faith.' This he here discusses under the form of a dia
logue, and by contraries ; the substance being — ' that all glorying
in the flesh is excluded, not through the law of works, but through
the law of faith.'

48 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
28. " We conclude, therefore, that a man is justified by faith
without the works of the law." This is the conclusion of the first
syllogism, as has been observed on the 18th verse of chapter 1. —
' Therefore justification is from faith.'
29. "Is he the God of the Jews only? Is he not also of the
Gentiles ? Yes, of the Gentiles also."
This is a working out and explanation of the foregone conclu
sion, from the adjunct of the universality of its subject : for inas
much as he has said that man is justified by faith, he shews that
by " man" he intends the Greek, and whosoever of the Gentiles
is of the faith of Christ, not less than the Jew and the Israelite ;
and this he proves by two arguments". Of these, the first is taken
from the principal efficient cause of that righteousness which is
common to Gentiles and Jews, namely, that God who is the self
same God of both. The apostle, therefore, thus argues: — 'Of
whomsoever God, namely, the one true God of the Israelites, is
the God, to them also belongs God's righteousness ; or all such
are justified by faith without the works of the law.
' But he who is the God of the Jews is also the God of the
Gentiles ;' — which the apostle here proves in a dialogue with the
Jews claiming God as their's alone-—
'Therefore that righteousness of God which is without the
works of the law, and from the faith of Jesus Christ, belongs
equally to Jews and Gentiles.'
30. " Since it is one and the same God who shall justify the
circumcision from faith, and the uncircumcision through faith."
The second argument is taken from the effect of Him who is
the God alike of Jews and Gentiles, which effect is to justify both ;
and the apostle thus reasons: — 'God justifies both "the circum
cision," that is the Jews or Israelites, and " the uncircumcision "
or Gentiles. "
' Therefore God's righteousness belongs to the Gentiles also ;
or both the Jew and the Greek are justified by faith.' In this

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 49
argument the apostle, with a view to confirm his conclusion, adds
the expressions from faith, through faith, as an exposition or ex
planation of the effect of God in justifying Jews and Gentiles, the
justification of both having this in common, that it is effected by
faith. It will be observed that there is a distinction made between
the two cases by the mode of speaking employed ; for the apostle
says that the circumcision, i.e. the Jews, are justified from faith,
but that the Gentiles are justified through faith. This distinction
I conceive is to be explained as follows : — First, the apostle inti
mates to the Jews ' that although they have the law, yet the mat
ter * of righteousness in their case is not the law and the keeping
of it, but that faith,, or Christ apprehended by faith, is the matter
of righteousness before God even to those who possess the law ;'
or, as he expresses it more plainly in Gal. ii. 16 — " we also believe
on Jesus Christ that we may be justified from the faith of Christ,
and not from the works of the law," that is, ' that Christ, not the
law, may be the matter of righteousness to us :' this is the one side
of the distinction. As regards the other, when he says, that the
uncircumcision is justified through faith, he points out the form f
through which righteousness becomes ours, and whereby Christ
himself also is apprehended by faith ; so that the meaning is —
' As Christ, and not the keeping of the law is the matter of right
eousness to the Jews who have the law, so the way to the same
righteousness lies open even to the Gentiles themselves, who have
not had the law, through the same Lord Jesus Christ apprehended
by faith ;' as was foreseen and predicted long before by Noah, when
he blessed Japhet, Gen. ix. The apostle introduces this distinc
tion here that the Jews may not deceive themselves by thinking,
because they have the law and circumcision, that they will be jus
tified from the law and circumcision ; but that, carried beyond
these, they may, through the same faith, lay hold of that right
eousness which is common to them with the Gentiles, who could
not hope for salvation from the law and circumcision, inasmuch as
they had not the law.
* i. e.f Source or ground. f ('. e., Manner or medium.
D

50 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
We shoidd here remark, in passing, the threefold form of expres
sion employed by the apostle in reference to this subject ; for he
says that we are justified " by faith," " from faith," and " through
faith :" of which formulae the difference is, that the first denotes
the instrument; the second the matter; and the third the form of
our justification or righteousness. The term " faith," therefore,
in the first, is used in its proper sense ; but in the other two it is
put by metonymy for ' Jesus Christ ;' for we say that we are jus
tified " through Christ," intimating the form, and that we are jus
tified " in Christ," denoting the matter ; but I do not remember
that the apostle any where says that we are justified by Christ
absolutely, and as the instrument. *
31. " Do we therefore make void the law through faith ?"
This is a prolepsis, in which he anticipates an objection which
might be brought forward by the Jews, charging the conclusion
with detriment, as they formerly did the assumption. The ob
jection is this : —
' If man is justified by faith, the law is rendered useless and abo
lished :
But the latter supposition is absurd.'
" Far from it." The apostle replies to the proposition first, by
repelling it with abhorrence as an impious calumny — ' far be it from
us to abolish the law :' secondly, by reasoning from the greater to
the less — ' not only do we not render useless and abolish the law,
but we shew its use and establish it.' For its use was to lead us
to Christ, as the apostle speaks in Gal. iii. 24 — ' The law was our
child-leader, pointing to Christ.' And it is established in Christ :
first, by its fulfilment in his blood ; for inasmuch as Christ therein
fulfilled the law, he shewed that the law and all its ceremonies were
*That is, that the word ' Christ' is never found in such a connection in the dative
case, which is the ordinary mode of expressing instrumentality in the Greek language,
and which is the manner in which the word ' faith' is used in the first formula. This
statement may appear tobe overthrown by Acts xiii. 39 : Rom. v. 9 ; and Gal.' ii. 17 ¦
but these are only apparent exceptions, the Uteral rendering in these passages' re
spectively, being, ' in him' ' in his blood,' and ' in Christ.'— Transl.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 51
useful "until the .time of reformation:" Secondly, by the regene
ration begun in us here, whereby even here we commence that
obedience to the law which we shall fully yield in a future life ; for
in these two ways, viz., by its use and fulfilment, and the latter
twofold, perfect in Jesus Christ, and begun in us, the righteous
ness of faith and the preaching thereof at length establish the law,
by bringing about its fulfilment. The apostle therefore rejects that
calumny concerning the law being rendered useless through the
righteousness of faith, as directed not against himself, but against
the truth of God. And thus far the first argument for the point
in dispute, or for the righteousness of faith, has been prosecuted ;
as was stated under the 18th verse of chap. i.
CHAPTEE IV.
In this chapter follows the second argument whereby the apostle
proves that man is justified by faith, taken from the case of Abra
ham who was " the father of them that believe," and whose justi
fication was to serve as a precedent in the case, of all who were
afterwards to be justified, and to his whole seed according to the
spirit. The argument runs thus : —
' Abraham was not justified before God from the works of the
law but by faith, and the imputation of the righteousness of faith :
' Therefore righteousness is from faith and not from the works
of the law-'
The proof of the consequence is added : —
' It was written that Abraham was justified by the imputation
of righteousness through faith, says the apostle, for our sakes, to
whom it was afterwards to be imputed ; that is, in order that we
might know that we were in like manner to be justified by the im
putation of the righteousness of faith :
' Therefore, if Abraham was justified by faith and not from the
works of the law, righteousness is from faith and not from the
law.' The antecedent of the argument is discussed from v.
1. to v. 16. ; and the consequent thence to v. 23. The re-
»2

52 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
maining verses are occupied with the proof of the consequence : or
this may be viewed as the general proposition of a complete
syllogism,, if you prefer that form of argument, in this way: —
' The justification of Abraham was recorded as a precedent for
our justification after him ;' or more plainly — ' in whatever man
ner Abraham was justified, in the same manner we, his posterity,
according to the spirit, are also to be justified ;
' But Abraham was not justified by works, but by faith .: ' There
fore so are we also to be justified.'
The assumption occupies the first place, extending, as we have
said, to v. 16 ; next comes the conclusion, thence to v. 23 ; lastly,
the proposition from v. 23. to the end : and these are the three
sections into which the chapter is divided. In the first section,
containing the assumption, there are three sub-divisions : there is
first the first part of the assumption, viz. — ' that Abraham was not
justified by works,' in vv. 1, 2 ; then follows the second part
of the assumption, viz. — ' that Abraham was justified by faith,'
from v. 3 to v. 9 ; whence to v. 16, we are presented with an am
plification of the same second part.
1. " What shall we say therefore that our father Abraham has
found according to the flesh ?" We have in these words the first
part of the assumption — ' According to the flesh, i.e. by his own
works and the keeping of the law, Abraham found nothing as re
garded righteousness in the sight of God.' This the apostle presses
in an interrogative form, that it may be confirmed by the testi
mony, suffrage and concession of the Jews themselves, convinced
by the evidence of the truth ; as if he had said — ' shall we say that
Abraham found righteousness according to the flesh ? I do not say
so; neither can you.'
2. " For if Abraham were justified from works, he hath where
of to glory, but not before God." This is an illustration by con
trast, of the first part of the assumption, in which the apostle pro-
leptically refutes an opinion commonly received among the Jews,

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 53
who perhaps perverted the authority of James in support of it, —
that Abraham was justified by works. The apostle — agreeing
with James, that Abraham was justified by works, and had where
of to glory, namely, because, as James says, he had offered his
son upon the altar — replies, — ' that nevertheless this glorying of
Abraham was not before God, but before men : ' that is — that by
the effect of faith alluded to, his righteousness was proved, nay,
that Abraham thereby outshone all men, and that it was a most
manifest token of his being beloved of God ; but that his justifi
cation before God rested on a very different and much more ex
cellent righteousness than that of his own obedience and works,
from which there is no glorying and no justification to any flesh,
as the apostle speaks above, chap. iii. 30, and Gal. ii. 16.
3. " For what saith the Scripture ? Abraham believed God, and
it was imputed to him for righteousness." This is the second part
of the assumption, and the second subdivision of the first section
of the chapter, viz. — ' that Abraham was justified by faith ; ' which
the apostle proves thus : —
' He to whom faith is imputed for righteousness is justified by faith;
' But Abraham believed God, and it was imputed to him for
righteousness :
' Therefore he was justified by faith.'
The argument is taken from what equally follows in the case of
relative opposites : — ' God imputes or gives righteousness to Abra
ham from faith ; therefore Abraham receives righteousness or is
justified from faith.' The assumption is contained in this verse,
proved by the authority of Scripture and the Divine testimony ;
Gen. xv. 6 ; Ps. cvi. 31.
4. " But to him that worketh the reward is not imputed from
grace, but from debt." He here proves the proposition of the
foregoing syllogism : —
' To him that worketh the reward is from debt ;
' Therefore he to whom faith is imputed for righteousness,

54 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, that
is, he is justified by faith.'
The argument is drawn from what equally follows in the case of
opposites : for ' to work,' or ' to acquire righteousness by works,'
and that < righteousness should be imputed from faith,' or ' given
freely,' are opposites ; and so are—' to be justified from debt,' or
' to receive a reward,' and ' to believe on him that justifieth the
ungodly.' The antecedent of the enthymeme is contained in this
verse, amplified by a contrast : — ' To him that worketh, that is,
to whom righteousness is imputed from works, it is given, not by
grace, but from debt.'
5. " But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that
justifieth the ungodly, his faith is imputed for righteousness."
We have in these words the consequent of the enthymeme, also
amplified by the help of a contrast. It is to be observed that the
attribute or predicate here stands first, and that the subject is put
after it : for instead of saying, as he might have done — ' he to
whom faith is imputed for righteousness worketh not, but believeth
on him that justifieth the ungodly,' (the inference, to wit, being
drawn contrariwise), the apostle, having converted the statement,
expresses himself as if the inference were direct, in contradictories ;
although, according to the mind and scope of the apostle, the in
ference should be contrariwise, from opposites, the order of the
terms only being altered, by transposition, instead of saying, (as
we have already remarked that he might have done) ' he to whom
faith is imputed for righteousness,' &c. It should also be noticed
that the expressions — " the reward is imputed from grace," and
" believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly," or " his faith is
imputed for righteousness," are here synonymous ; as also ' that to
him that worketh the reward is imputed from works,' and that " to
him that worketh the reward is imputed from debt : " but that
' working,' and ' having one's faith imputed for righteousness ; '
also ' imputing from grace,' and imputing from debt,' are oppo
sites.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 55
6. " Even as David also declareth that man blessed unto whom
God imputeth righteousness without works." The second argu
ment for the proposition is from the effect of justification before
God, which is happiness or blessedness :
' Whosoever is blessed, the same is also righteous before God,
and by whatever means he attains blessedness, by the same means
he attains righteousness ;
' But he to whom God imputes righteousness is blessed by faith
without works :
' Therefore he to whom God imputes righteousness is righteous
by faith without works.'
The assumption which is contained in this verse is established
by the testimony of David, which is more fully presented out of
Ps. xxxii. in the two following verses.
9. " Does this declaration of blessedness then apply to the cir
cumcision only, or to the uncircumcision also ? for we say that
faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousness." This is the
third subdivision of the first section of the chapter, and the ampli
fication of the first assumption, from the adjunct of a twofold time :
' Abraham was justified by faith, or faith was imputed to him for
righteousness, first of all in uncircumcision ; and this justification
of faith was subsequently confirmed, being ratified by the sign of
circumcision. This amplification the apostle manages by anacce-
nosis ; * for first of all a question is proposed in the begin
ning of the verse, and then at the close of the same verse
he states the ground of the question, viz., the assumption which
has just been concluded : as if he had said :• — ' since we have al
ready concluded that faith was imputed to Abraham for righteous
ness, or that Abraham was justified and rendered blessed by faith,
the question arises — ' when was that imputation made, was it after
he was circumcised, or while he was still in uncircumcision ? '
10. " How was it then imputed ? When He was in circumci-
* i. e. by consulting with his hearers or readers.

56 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
sion, or in uncircumcision ?" As he had interrupted the question
by interposing the ground of it he repeats it a second time.
" Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision." This is a hypo-
phora, or the subjoined reply, of which there are two parts. Of
these the first consists is a contrast—' faith was imputed to Abra
ham for righteousness, not in circumcision, but in uncircum
cision.' 11. " And he received the sign of circumcision,"— the second
part of the reply, — ' circumcision followed the imputation of right
eousness to Abraham as the sign of a righteousness previously re
ceived.—" A seal of the righteousness of faith." This is a defini
tion of circumcision introduced by the way, upon which we may
observe, that, according to the apostle.; a sign or seal is a kind of
sacrament. " That he might be the father of all that believe in
uncirculncision that righteousness might be imputed to them also."
We have next an illustration of the reply from its ends. First)
from the end of the first part, and that twofold : the one end of
the imputation of righteousness to Abraham in uncircumcision
was — ' that he might be the father of them that believe in uncir
cumcision ;' the other, and ulterior end, — ' that righteousness
might be imputed to them also.'
12. " And the father of circumcision." Secondly, from the end
of the latter part of the reply. ' Abraham, having been justified
in uncircumcision, afterwards received the sign of circumcision
that he might be the father of the circumcised ;' for so the. ap
pellation, circumcision, is here used by metonymy of the adjunct
for the subject. " (To wit) to those who are not only of the cir
cumcision, but who also walk, in the steps of the faith of our father
Abraham, which he had when in uncircumcision." This is an epan-
orthosis, in which the apostle corrects what he has just said, viz.' —
' that Abraham is the father of the circumcised,' by a contrast : —
' Abraham is not the father of all who are circumcised, but of
some,' whom the apostle here describes by a comparison of majo-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 57
made with hands, but who are also circumcised in heart, and walk
in the steps of the faith of Abraham, to wit, that which he had
when in uncircumcision.'
13. " For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world,
came not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through
the righteousness of faith." We have here the reasons of the epa-
northosis : —
' If all who were of the circumcision were also the seed of Abra
ham, and Abraham their father, then the promise to Abraham and
to his seed, that he should be the heir of the world, would have
come through the law and circumcision ;
' But the latter is false :
1 Therefore so is the former.'
The assumption is contained in this verse, illustrated by a con
trast — ' the promise came, not through the law, but through the
righteousness of faith.'
14. " For if those who are of the law be heirs faith is made vain,
and the promise rendered void." He proves the assumption and
the first part of the contrast : —
' If the inheritance were from the law, the promise would be
vainj and faith on the promise would be vain, because we would
not obtain the promise ;
' But the latter is false :
' Therefore the promise is not through the law.'
15. " For the law worketh wrath," — the proof of the proposition
from the effect of the law : — ' The effect of the law is to work for
us the wrath of God ;
' Since therefore the law worketh wrath, if the promise had to be
hoped for through the law our hope and faith in the promise would
be vain:' for the wrath of God and the attainment of the promise
are inconsistent and incompatible the one with the other. " For
where no law is there is no transgression." He proves the ante-

58 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
cedent, viz. — ' that the law worketh wrath,' from another and prior
effect of the law : — ' The law worketh transgression ; Therefore
it worketh wrath also.' The proof of the last antecedent is given
in the text : — ' Where there is no law, there is no transgression :
' Therefore the law worketh transgression.'
It must be observed, however, that both the effects here ascribed
to the law, viz. — the transgression of the law, and the wrath of
God ensuing thereupon, are accidental effects, and owing to the
inability* of our flesh : for if we kept the law, the law would work
neither wrath nor transgression ; but since the law has been made,
and we cannot keep it, it can work nothing else than wrath and
transgression. 16. " Therefore the inheritance is from faith." Here commences
the second section of the chap., containing the conclusion of the
leading syllogism : — ' Therefore we attain the inheritance of the
heavenly kingdom, and consequently are justified — for the inheri
tance presupposes righteousness — from faith, and not from the
works of the law.' " That it may be through grace." He illus
trates the conclusion, viz. ' that our inheritance is from faith,' by
its twofold end. Of these the first is that our inheritance may be
gratuitous, or freely bestowed, which would not be the case if f;he
inheritance were from the works of the law : for whatever any one
attains from the works of the law, as the apostle has already said,
he receives from debt, and consequently it is not gratuitous or
freely bestowed ; work and grace, or grace and debt being diame
trically opposed to each other, as the apostle afterwards shews,
xi. 6. Here let us observe, in passing, that the design of God
from the beginning was to gain glory to himself from grace, or from
the gratuitous salvation of men, and the free bestowal of the inhe
ritance, for which end the apostle here says, the inheritance comes
to men by faith ; so that the sense of the words is :  ' Our righte
ousness and life is through faith, for the accomplishment of the
design of God from eternity, which was that we should be justified
* 'Aivm/tiati.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 59
rity, ' namely, those who are not circumcised by the circumcision
and saved in Christ his son freely, or entirely through his grace,
and not in the works of the law, through original or native righte
ousness.' " That the promise may be stable" — the second and ul
terior end for which the inheritance is through grace : — ' if it were
through the law and its works it would be instable, although not
on the part of God promising, yet on our part to whom the pro
mise is made ; nay more, through weakness and instability it
would be without strength and unable* to be fulfilled, as the
apostle shews, chap. viii. 3 : in order, therefore, that the promise
might be stable, and able to be fulfilled, nor hindered through the
inability t of our flesh, it was the design of God that the promised
inheritance should be through grace to the whole seed. This
establishment and confirmation of the promise he illustrates by its
subject which is the whole seed of Abraham, that is — " not to that
only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of
Abraham." He explains the subject by an induction of its parts,
of which two are here mentioned : the one of the law ; the other
of faith. These are amplified by a comparison of majority, thus :
— ' that the promise may be stable to the seed of Abraham, not
only to that which is of the law, but also to that which is of the
faith of Abraham :' whereby the apostle means to intimate, that
unless the promise were from grace it would be' stable to neither
part of the seed ; not to that which is of faith, because they would
not have the law from which to attain the promise, nor yet to that
which is of the law, because of the weakness of the law. By " the
seed of the law," I here understand — ' believers under the law ;'
and by " the seed of faith" — ' those who from among the Gentiles
are brought to the faith of Abraham,' which is deserving of atten
tion for this reason, lest any one should suppose that any man,
who is not a believer, can be of the spiritual seed of Abraham :
for the whole seed of Abraham is of faith ; but one part of faith
only, viz., the believing Gentiles ; the other of the law also, be
cause of the oracles of the law having been committed to them, as
* 'Aivvxros. t * Ativvafitav.

60 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
the apostle has already said.— "-Who is the father of us all."
This is a prolepsis in which he anticipates an objection of the
Jews glorying in the law, and in Abraham as their father. ' God
gave the law,' the Jews might object, ' to the whole seed of Ab
raham with whom he made the covenant ; how is it then that you
say, in your distribution of the seed, that besides the seed which
is of the law, there is another seed of Abraham to whom the pro
mise is made ?' To this objection the apostle here replies, by as
serting — ' that Abraham is the father of us all, even of those who
believe without the law.'
17. "According as it is written, I have made thee a father of
many nations." The reply is here proved by adducing the divine
testimony from Gen. xvii. 5 ; where a seed is promised to Abraham,
not only from among the Jews, and those who are under the law,
but from among other, yea, even all nations : whence it follows, that
he himself is the father of many, yea, of all nations ; as it is said
in Gen. xii. 3, or, according to the division of Tremellius, the last
verse of chap. xi. " in , thee shall all families of the earth be
blessed." " Before that God whom he believed," — an opening up
and explanation of his preceding reply, from the adjunct of the
manner, — ' Abraham is the father of many nations, not, however,
carnally, and in the flesh, but before God whom he believed, and
in the Spirit.' The apostle, therefore, wishes to teach the Jews
by this reply of his, that Abraham has another posterity, and
another race, than that which they knew of: for they knew of no
other offspring of Abraham than that which was according to the
flesh ; but the apostle here says that there is another before God,
and in spirit, through the faith of Abraham, which, like Isaac, was
born to Abraham by the power ofthe promise of God, as the apostle
speaks more plainly in Gal. iv. 23, &c. ' To be a father before
God,' therefore, here means to be a father by the power of the pro
mise of God, and with respect to God promising : for God promised
to Abraham that many nations would be his seed, and the promise
was made concerning many nations who should be a seed to

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 61
Abraham. In this twofold respect, Abraham was made the father
of many nations, viz., by believing, and by laying hold on the
promise through faith ; so that this seed of many nations from
Abraham, is of the nations by believing, and born to him by the
power of God promising. " Who quickeneth the dead, and calleth
the things that are not as though they were." We have in these
words a description of that God who made promise to Abraham,
and whom Abraham believed from his effects, by which the power
of his promise is shown, and by which he himself is distinguished
from all the false gods in which the Gentiles had believed. The
effects here mentioned are two : the first is ' the quickening of the
dead in sin,' (Eph. ii. 1.) our regeneration being so called by
synecdoche of the part for the whole ; the second is the calling of
the Gentiles, whereby ' those who were not a people,' as Hosea
speaks, ' are called the people of the living God.' The former of
these effects, therefore, is common ; for all, both Jews and Gentiles,
are " dead in sins," as the apostle shows at large in Eph. ii. The
other is peculiar to the Gentiles, according to the explanation of
the apostle, chap. ix. verses 24, 25, 26, of this epistle; where,
quoting from the prophet, he compares the calling of the Gentiles
with the first creation of all things : for just as in it God first called
into existence things that were not, and they were ; so God calls
the Gentiles, who previously were not a people, a*nd, by his call
ing, they become the people of the living God-
18. "Who (viz., Abraham) against hope believed in hope, that
he should become the father of many nations." As in the preced
ing words he has described the God whom Abraham believed, so
in these the apostle describes the faith by which he believed God :
first, from the adjunct of its difficulty — he believed " against
hope ;" secondly, from the adjunct of its firmness — he believed " in
hope ;" thirdly, from its material cause — he believed " that he
should become the father of many nations ;" and he explains the
several parts of the description in the words that follow : " Ac
cording to that which had been said (unto him) so shall thy seed

62 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
be." He begins with the last, namely, the subject matter of his
faith, which is here explained by its efficient cause, viz., the pro
mise of God, adduced from Gen. xv. 5—" So shall thy seed be."
19. " And being by no means weak in faith." The apostle pro
secutes the two remaining parts of the description,. first, by enu
merating the difficulties, and then by explaining the strength of
his faith in overcoming these difficulties. " He considered not his
own body now dead." The difficulties are two. The first is ' the
deadness of his own body.' The apostle employs the term, " dead,"
(uivsxpui/jiwv), to denote the effect next to death, and because his
body, although still endued with Ufe, was yet no better than a
dead body, as regarded the generation of offspring. " When he
was about an hundred years old." In these words he establishes
the first difficulty from the adjunct of the old age of Abraham, and
his time of life unfit for generation. He was a hundred years old,
not, indeed, before the promise was made, but before he obtained
the promise which had been made to him in his seventieth year ;
whence the apostle says, in Gal. iii. 17, that the promise preceded
the law by 430 years. " Nor yet the deadness of Sarah's womb."
The second difficulty was, ' the deadness of Sarah's womb.'
20. " This promise of God he did not dispute through unbelief,
but strengthened himself." Next comes ' the strength of his faith,'
which is explained by three illustrations : — The first illustration is
by a contrast — ' Although such hindrances stood in the way,
Abraham did not dispute against the promise, but strengthened
himself in faith against hindrances and unbelief,' under which con
trast there is concealed a tacit comparison of majority : ' he not
only did not distrust, but did not even dispute the promise through
Unbelief.' " Giving glory to God." The second illustration of the
strength of his faith is taken from its effect : ' believing ao-ainst
hindrances, he glorified God as true ;' and here the apostle teaches
us, in passing, that our giving glory to God increases and diminishes
with our faith on God ; referring to Numb. xx. 12, where God lays

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 63
it to the charge of the unbelief of Moses, that he had not ' sancti
fied' or glorified him before the people of Israel.
21. "And being ftdly persuaded." The third illustration is
drawn from the formal cause of his strong faith, which is 'his
full persuasion,' (yrkqpopopici), ' Abraham was fully persuaded,'
(wrajgoipogjj&is'Vtherefore he was strong in faith. " That what he
had promised he was able also to perform." He explains the full
persuasion * of Abraham by its efficient cause, viz., ' the omnipo
tence of God to perform whatever he promises ;' and this was the
grand cause (aiiriov airiairarov) of his strong faith. Abraham was
strong in faith to believe God, because God was strong to perform
to Abraham whatever he'had promised.
22. " Wherefore also it was imputed to him for righteousness."
The apostle here makes a transition to the third section of the
chapter, by repeating the assumption of the syllogism, which was
argued at large in the first section, and is here deduced as a corol
lary from the strong faith of Abraham, which has just been ex
plained — ' because Abraham believed God, and that firmly, there
fore faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousness,' 23, 24.
" Moreover, it was written not for his sake only, that it was im
puted to him,
" But for the sake of us also, to whom it shall be imputed."
Here commences the third section of the chapter, and the propo
sition of the leading syllogism, or, if you prefer it, the proof of the
leading proposition, amplified by a comparison of majority. ' The
manner of Abraham's justification has been recorded, that it was
by faith, not for his sake only, but for the sake of us also ;' that is,
' it is not merely historical, but also for our imitation and learning,
to teach us that we also are to be justified in the same way in
which Abraham was justified,' which is the proposition of the lead
ing syllogism. The proof is from the end ; " for the sake of us,"
— " namely, to those who believe," — a restriction of the general
* tfXngetpogiav.

64 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
term, " us," as if the apostle had said, ' When I say for the sake of
us, I do not mean either all us men, or all us Jews, but only those
who believe, whether of the Jews, or of any other nation whatever.'
By this restriction, therefore, the apostle both describes those for
whose sake the justification of Abraham has been recorded, by the
adjunct of their faith, and repeats the conclusion of the leading
syllogism — ' that our justification, whether we be Jews or Gentiles,
is by believing.' " On him who raised up Jesus our Lord from
the dead." In these words the apostle explains justifying faith by
its object, and the manner in which it apprehends its object. The
object is ' God,' whom the apostle sets forth by a description from
his effect — ' He raised up Jesus Christ the Lord from the dead.'
The manner of apprehending him is, first, ' to know that he is
mine,' and then ' to cleave to him,' both of which are here indi
cated by the familiar expression of the apostle, "our;" for the
three formulae, " I believe that God is," " I believe God," and " I
believe on God," differ in this way, that the first and second belong
to historical faith, and signify the three following things : — 1st,
' That God is ;' Idly, ' That he is such as he is described in the
word,' (for this is to believe that God is) ; ddly, ' That every word
of God is true,' (for this is to believe God) : but " to believe on
God" belongs to justifying faith, and in addition to the three
things just mentioned, signifies these two besides : — 1st, ' That this
God who is described in the word, and is such as he is therein
described, is mine ;' i. e., ' that he is mine according to all his
attributes in the word,' or ' that he is my God for blessing and
salvation ;' 2dly, That I so rest in this my God, that I cleave to
him with my whole heart. '' To believe on God," therefore, is,
first, ' to believe that God is ;' secondly, ' That he is such as he is
described in the word ;' thirdly, ' That every word of his is true ;'
fourthly, ' that he is my God, and that I am his ;' and lastly, '.that
I rest in him, or cleave to him, with my whole heart :' and this is
the true way of apprehending God.
25. " Who was delivered (to death) because of our offences, and

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 65
raised up for our justification." This is a description of Jesus our
Lord, who was raised up from the dead, from two adjuncts : the
first is — ' the delivering of him to death,' which is put by synec
doche for his whole passion ; the second — ' the raising of him again
from the dead,' wliich, in like manner, is put by synecdoche for his
whole glorification, as it is expressed in the gospel and creed. Each
of these adjuncts of Christ is illustrated, separately, by its end.
His death was — ' because of our sins ;' that is, Christ died, that
by dying he might make full satisfaction for all the sins of us who
believe. His resurrection again was for our justification ; that is,
Christ was raised from the dead that he might be able to apply to
us the ransom, * and redemption price which he procured by his
death : for if he had himself had remained under the power of death,
the ransom procured by his dying would not have availed us for
righteousness and life ; but having died for us, and being alive
again, he applies the price of his death for righteousness and life
to us. In this ' description of Christ there is contained a third
argument in proof of the leading conclusion, viz., our justification by
faith ; to which the apostle makes a transition by the foregoing de
scription of God from his operation, in v. 24. immediately preceding.
This argument is apodictical f and is taken from the first or neces
sary and the proximate cause of our justification and life, viz. — .
' the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.' The syllogism of
this argument, which is made up of reciprocal propositions through
out, is as follows : —
' All who are justified and attain the inheritance, by the death
and resurrection of Jesus Christ, are justified and live, not by
works,. but by faith on him who died and rose again,' or, as the
apostle speaks, ' on him who raised up Christ from the dead ;
But all of us who are partakers of life and righteousness are justi
fied through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ,' (which
assumption is implied in the words of the apostle in the text —
" who was delivered, &c") that is — ' being washed from our sins
through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, we are justi-
* ~Lome.ii- T Demonstrative.

LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE

fied :' whence follows the conclusion — ' that we are justified and
live by faith.'

CHAPTEE V.
1. " Therefore being justified from faith, we have peace towards
God." This chapter may be divided into three sections ; in the
first of which, extending as far as verse 12, we have a com
mendation of justification from faith ; the second, from verse 12
onwards to the 20th contains the conclusion of the foregoing dis
cussion, viz. — that men are justified, not every one by his own
works, but all by a common faith on one who justifies many, namely,
Jesus Christ, the second Adam ; the third section consists of the
last two verses of the chapter, and in it we have the commence
ment of the refutation.
To return to the first section ; the commendation of justifica
tion from faith is taken from its effects, and may be said to con
stitute a fourth argument in support of that doctrine, in this way,
' Whatever is followed by peace with God, restoration into his .
grace, and glorying in the hope of the glory of God, that is the
true justification of man before God : —
' But this peace, restoration and glorying follow, not the justi
fication of the law but the justification of faith : —
' Therefore it is justification from faith by which we are justified
before God.'
The proposition, as being sufficiently obvious, is omitted. The
assumption is given in ver. 1 and 2, and contains the said com
mendation of the righteousness of faith, which is founded upon
three of its effects. Of these that which is second in order is, by
hysterosis, put first ; and that which is first in order occupies the-
second place : since our restoration into grace or our reconciliation
with God is prior to our peace towards God. For "peace to
wards God," as I here understand it, is the whole effect of our

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 67
reconciliation, and the blessed condition of those only who are
reconciled, and born of God : whether therefore it be peace of
conscience, or that freedom of speech * before God which is the
privilege of sonship, or that reconciliation with the creatures, of
which Isaiah speaks in chapter xi. and lxv., I conceive all this, and
the happiness of men therein, to be included under the name of
" peace towards God " in this place. It is called peace " towards
God," inasmuch as the whole of it arises from our peace with God :
for it is because there is peace between us and God that con
science is pacified, that the creatures are at peace with us and
that we have peace in life : and in this sense Christ employs the
term in John xvi. 33, opposing it to all the disquietude which we
may have from the world and in the world. " Through our Lord
Jesus Christ." The apostle illustrates this our peace towards God
by its efficient cause, which is our Lord Jesus Christ : He it is
who procures that peace -for us, and it is through him that we
enjoy it ; as he himself says in the passage before referred to —
" in me ye shall have peace."
2. " Through whom also we have had access by faith into this
grace, whereby we stand." This is the second effect of justifica
tion from faith, but prior in order to our peace with God, as has
been already remarked, viz. : — ' our restoration into grace, or
reconciliation with God : ' for our reconciliation is our restoration
into that grace or free favour with God, from which we fell by
sinning against him ; and this free favour or grace is the founda
tion of that new peace, which flows to us from the mercy of God,
that is, of the blessed condition which our merciful God confers
upon us already reconciled and again received into grace, as the
same apostle teaches us in the commencement of each of his
epistles, comprising all the blessings which he supplicates from
God for us, at one time under " grace, mercy, and peace," at
another time under " grace and peace," viz. ' that peace which
flows from mercy.' This our reconciliation or restoration into
E 2

68 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
grace with our God is here illustrated by its principal efficient
cause, namely — " our Lord Jesus Christ," through whom we have
this access into grace ; by its instrumental efficient cause, viz. —
" faith ;" and finally, by its effect, which is— to " stand" or ' per
severe therein.' From this we may learn, in passing, that the
perseverance of the saints is the proper and inseparable effect of
their reconciliation through Christ; so that having once been re
conciled and received again into grace through our Lord Jesus
Christ, they can never afterwards fall from that grace either
entirely or finally, as our Lord himself teaches us in John xiii. 1,
— " having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them
unto the end." " And glory in hope of the glory of God." The
third effect of justification from faith, or, if you please, and perhaps
more correctly, the second effect of reconciliation, springing from
reconciliation itself and the consciousness of perseverance with
which it is accompanied, is — ' the glorying of the saints.' This
glorying is here illustrated by its proximate causej viz.1 — " the hope
of the glory of God," that is of the glory which is laid up for
the saints, and which is hid with God in Jesus Christ ; of which
glorying you may see an example in chap. viii. ofLthis epistle, verses
33, 34, 35, with its foundation and cause, verse 38. The analysis-
which is here presented of the causes of our blessedness and peace
with God is worthy of our attention : the first is — justification by
faith in Jesus Christ : the second — the reconciliation through
Christ of those who are justified ; hence perseverance, and the-
hope of the glory of God ; and from these peace and gloryino-.
therein. 3. " And not only so, but we even glory in tribulations." He-
next amplifies the glorying of hope by a comparison of majority :•
— ' we glory not only in hope of the glory of God, but even in,
tribulations ; ' that is — the tribulations of the saints and the thino-s
which they suffer, because of their hope, from the world and in the
world, do not diminish their glorying in this hope, but are, as it
were, the instrumental causes of increasing it, or, as others under-

EPISTLE OF PAUL XO THE ROMANS. 69
stand the passage — ' are the subject-matter of glorying the more
intensely :' Of these two explanations, however, I prefer the
former, because in the words immediately following, as well as in
Heb. xii. 11, the production of joy is ascribed to sufferings,
" knowing that tribulation worketh endurance ;
4. " And endurance, experience ; and experience, hope :" The
apostle here gives a reason for the apodosis,* and why we should
glory in tribulations. The argument is presented under the form
of a prosyllogism : —
* Tribulation works hope :
Therefore we ought to glory, not only in hope, but even in
tribulations.' The antecedent is proved : —
' Experience of the divine deliverance works hope ;
' But affliction works experience of the divine deliverance.'
The latter is proved from the causa sine qua now,f or causa per
•accidens :\ —
' The endurance of afflictions works experience of the divine
deliverance' — for how shall any one experience the divine deliver
ance who has not endured afflictions ?
' But tribulation or oppression from the world, and in the world,
works endurance,' which the apostle proves by our own knowledge
and testimony :
¦ As a conclusion from which the antecedent follows,—' that tri
bulation from the world works hope.'
5. " And hope putteth not to shame." By hysterosis, he next
establishes the protasis,§ viz., ' that the hope of the saints pro-r
* Consequent clause of a hypothetical proposition.
t Indispensable condition.
X Accidental cause.
§ The conditional clause of a hypothetical proposition. N.B  The terms protasis
and apodosis are also used in a wider sense, for the first and second members of a
period, whenever these are connected by a conjunction indicating a certain relation
between them.

70 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
duces glorying.' The argument which he adduces is taken from
the disparate,—' hope putteth not to shame ;' or if you please, and
perhaps more correctly, from the immediate contrary of Christian
glorying ; for the* apostle here puts ' glorying' and ' being put to
shame' in direct opposition, so that the negation of the one. in
volves the affirmation of the other. He therefore reasons thus : —
' Christian hope does not put us to shame ;
' Therefore we Christians glory in hope.'
" Because the love of God is shed forth in our hearts." This is
the proof of the antecedent, viz. — ' that our hope does not put us
to shame', deduced from the adjunct of ' the abundance of its cer
tainty, and of a sense of fhe love of God in the gospel,' indicated
by the term " shed forth :"* —
' The love of God is shed forth in our hearts ;
' Therefore our hope does not put us to shame.'
To the same purpose the prophet speaks in Ps. xi. 7 ; and the
apostle himself, further on, when he says, chap. viii. 31, " If
God be for us, who is against us?" By "the love of God" I un
derstood here that affection wherewith God loves and encompasses
us, which is just that grace into which we are restored in our
reconciliation through our Lord Jesus Christ : the same cause
therefore, is here assigned for the Christian not being put to
shame, as has before been assigned for his glorying in hope ; with
this difference, that what is there styled " grace," and here
termed " love" is amplified by the adjunct of its abundance, indi
cated as has been already remarked by the term "shed-forth."
This ' shedding forth' of the love of God I take to be that same
' full persuasion' which we have seen in Abraham, chap. iv. 31;
whence it appears that we must maintain with the apostle that
justifying faith is not head knowledge merely, but also a feeling
' shed forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who is given unto us.'
He illustrates this love of God by the efficient cause of its shed
ding forth, which is—' the Holy Spirit ;' and the Holy Spirit again
is illustrated by the efficient cause of his dwelling within us, viz.
* 'Exxi%urat.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 71
' because he is the gift of God in Christ Jesus.' The apostle here
by teaches us this lesson, that by the same grace and love of God
into which we are restored through Jesus Christ, his Holy Spirit
being given to us works in us both knowledge and feeling, which
the apostle here calls — ' a shedding forth in our hearts.'
6. " For Christ, when we were yet without strength, in his own
time died for the ungodly." We have next the proof of the love
of God, thus shed forth and superabounding, from its effect in
giving up to death for us our Lord Jesus Christ in whom he loves
us, and in whom we are reconciled. This death the apostle here
variously amplifies. First, from the voluntary offer whereby Jesus
Christ gave himself up to death ; as our Lord teaches us, John x.
18, and which the apostle here intimates when he says that " Christ
died," that is — ' was given up to death by the Father, and volun
tarily gave up himself to death.' Secondly, from the adjunct of
the time, and that twofold : first, in respect of ourselves — ' when
we were yet without strength' ; next in respect of himself — ' when
his own time came,' " the ftill time," and " the time predetermin
ed by the father," as the apostle says, Gal. iv. 4. From this ad
junct of the time the apostle would have us learn our inability with
out Christ, and that in the matter of salvation we have no strength,
until new strength is imparted to us through the death of Christ ;
not indeed that we may procure salvation thereby, but that those
for whom salvation has already been procured in Christ may walk
in the way of salvation, and may do so more and more every day
as that strength shall increase. Thirdly, that death is amplified
from its end — " for the ungodly" says the apostle, that is — ' that
he might deliver us from ungodliness and the death due thereunto.'
Or it may be said, and perhaps more correctly, that this third am
plification of the death of Christ is taken from the adjunct of the
ungodliness of us for whom he died : the sense of the words will
then be — ' when Christ died for us we were only ungodly ;' and
the syllogism of the proof will be as follows : —
' The love of God superabounds towards those, or he sheds forth

72 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
his love upon those, for whom, when they were only ungodly, Christ
died; ' But we are those for whom, when they were ungodly, Christ died,
' Wherefore the love of God is shed forth upon us, and his love
towards us superabounds.'
The assumption is contained in this verse being expressed in the
words last quoted.
7. " Scarcely indeed for a righteous man will one die." In place
of the proposition itself we have here the proof of it, by reasoning
from the less to the greater : — ' Scarcely will one die for a righte
ous man ;'
' Therefore his love abounds who dies for an ungodly man.'
" For perhaps some one may dare to die for a good man." This
is an epanorthosis of the foregoing argument from the less, and the
reason why the apostle has added the particle " scarcely" in his
proof of the proposition, viz., because it may happen, although it
can rarely occur, that some one may die for a man who is both
righteous and useful.
8. " But God commendeth his love towards us, in that while we
were yet sinners Christ died for us." This is the conclusion of
the syllogism with a repetition of the assumption : for ' to com
mend the love of God to us' here is — ' to display it shed forth upon
us.' In these words the two following things are affirmed : first
— ' that God has shed forth his love upon us and commended it
above all the affection of all creatures,' which is the conclusion ofthe
preceding syllogism ; secondly — ' that God did this and manifested
his immeasurable love, in that while we were yet sinners Christ
died for us sinners,' which is the assumption of the same syllogism.
9. " Therefore, being justified by his blood, much more shall we
now be saved from wrath through him." This is the second argu
ment by which he proves that hope does not put to shame, taken
from the less : — -

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 73
'Those who, having been formerly unrighteous, are justified
through the blood of Christ, being now justified, shall much more
be saved through that blood from the wrath to come ;
'But we, having been formerly unrighteous, are now justified
through the blood of Christ ;
' Wherefore, much more shall we be saved through the same
blood from the wrath to come.'
The apostle here uses the expressions — ' not to be disappointed
or put to shame by one's hope,' and — ' to be saved from the wrath
to come,' as synonymous : for our preservation from that wrath is
the thing hoped for : and those who obtain it are not put to shame
by their hope.
10. " For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God
through the death of his Son ; much more being reconciled, we,
shall be saved through his life." This is a third argument for the
same, also from the less : —
' Those who, having been formerly enemies, are reconciled to
God through the death of his Son, shall much more be; saved
through his life ;
' But we, having formerly been enemies, have been reconciled
to God through the death of his Son ;
'Much more therefore, now that we are reconciled, shall we be
saved through his resurrection and life.' Here 'reconciliation
through death' as the less, is compared with 'salvation through
life,' as the greater ; in the 3ame way as ' the justification of the
unrighteous,' and 'the salvation of those already justified,' are
compared in the preceding verse.
11. " And not only so, but we also glory in God through our
Lord Jesus Christ." We have here an illustration of the last con
clusion from the greater : it is — ' our glorying in the meantime in
God, as ours by covenant, and in ourselves as his people, until we
attain salvation through the life of his Son.' This glorying is
here illustrated by its efficient cause, viz., 'our Lord Jesus Christ;'

74 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
for as his life works out salvation for us, so it is through him that
we glory in salvation until we attain it. " Through whom we have
now attained the reconciliation." He illustrates this effect of
Christ in working out glorying for us, by a similar previous effect
of the same Lord Jesus Christ, which was — ' to work out recon
ciliation for us.'
12. " Therefore, as through one man sin entered into the world,
and death through sin." We come now to the conclusion of the
point in dispute, and of the principal question which has been dis
cussed from the 18th verse of chap. i. to this place, viz. — that that
righteousness by which man is justified in the sight of God, is
through one man Jesus Christ (the same who is God-man),* appre
hended by faith. This conclusion is here variously amplified, by
a twofold comparison between Christ and Adam ; whence Christ
is called "the second Adam," or, as the apostle speaks in 1st Cor.
xv. 47, " the second man."
The first comparison is one of similarity, which is stated in two
ways : 1st, Explained by its parts : 2d, Abridged. The protasis
of the explained similitude is contained in these words, " through
one man," that is, ' the first man,' or, ' Adam,' " sin and death
entered into the world." The apodosis, which is understood, runs
.thus : — ' So through one man, namely, the second man, or, Jesus
Christ, was righteousness, and life through righteousness came to
the world.' " And so death passed upon all men, in that all have
sinned." An illustration of the protasis from the adjunct of the
universality of sin, and of death because of sin : — ' death has come
upon all men, because all have sinned.' For whether you under
stand this of individual men ofthe race of Adam singly, or. of all
men in Adam jointly, taken either way, it is an universal truth 
' that all have become subject to death, because all have become
subject to sin :' for all sinned and died in Adam, and all since
Adam sin and die, except Christ, the second Adam, who alone
being without sin in himself, died for our sins.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 75
13. "For until the law, sin was in the world." This is a pro
lepsis, whereby he anticipates an objection of the Jews, excusing
sin by carnal reasoning, or, if you prefer it, of the sensual and
natural man acquitting the first age of the world on the ground
of the want of the law, thus : —
' Where there is no law there is no sin ;
' But there was no law in the world until Moses ; for the law
was ordained through Moses :
' Therefore, there was no sin in the world from Adam to Moses ;
and what you teach, viz., — that all have sinned, is not true.' To
this objection, the apostle replies, that there were both law and
sin in the world before Moses : accordingly, he first proves that
there was law, and then that there was sin. He proves that there
was law in the world, because there was sin, and so turns the rea
soning of the objectors against themselves, thus : — ' Where there
is sin, there is law ;
'But there was sin in the world before Moses and the law or
dained by him : >
' Therefore, there was also law before the law which was ordained
by Moses.'
The assumption is given first. " But it is considered that there
is no sin where there is no law." This is the proof of the proposi
tion, viz. — ' that where there is sin, there is law.' The argument
is taken from what equally follows in the case of relative opposites ;
for if it is considered that there is no sin where there is no law, it
follows, that where there is sin, there is also law, because, of a truth,
" sin is the transgression of the law."
14. "But death reigned from Adam until Moses." He here
proves the assumption of the last syllogism, viz. — ' that there was
sin in the world before the time of Moses.' The argument is drawn
from the effect and wages of sin, which are death : —
' There was death from Adam to Moses :
' Therefore there was also sin.'
For as there is no sin where there is no law, so there is no death

76 LOGICAL .ANALYSIS OF THE
where there is no sin. Wherefore, if all from Adam to Moses
were under death, all from Adam to Moses were also under sin.
Here it is worthy of remark that the apostle does not simply say
that ' there was death' but that " death reigned from Adam to
Moses ;" he thereby intimates that the prevalence of death in the
world attracted observation because all died, but that the preva
lence of sin in men was less noticed until the law was ordained
anew by Moses ; but that after the law was ordained, the reign of
death ceased, and the reign of sin began, because the power of
sin was observed by men, and because it was a just thing with
God that they, should die. The same thing is taught by the
apostle in chap. vii. 9 of this epistle : — " Without the law sin
was dead," i.e. ' was not seen to reign,' " and I was alive," or ' I
seemed to myself trorthy of life ; so that it was from the tyranny
and reign of death that I died :' " But when the commandment
came," that is ' after the law was ordained,' " sin revived," or ' the
reign of sin attracted my observation,' " and I died," or ' I seemed
in my own judgment worthy of death ;' so* that after the law had
been ordained through Moses, it was not death but sin that
tyrannized and reigned. Hence also the apostle elsewhere says
that the law slew him until having become dead to the law, Christ
raised him again, to live unto God, under the reign of grace or
" the kingdom of God and of heaven." The apostle thus divides
the duration of the world into three reigns : the reign of death from
Adam to Moses ; the reign of sin from the law to -Christ, as he
speaks, chap. vi. 12 ; and the reign of grace from Christ for
ever, which in Eev. xii. 10, is called the kingdom of God and the
power of his Christ. "Even over them who have not sinned after
the likeness of Adam's transgression." He goes on to illustrate the
assumption of the last syllogism, viz., ' that death had reigned from
Adam to Moses,' by a comparison of majority : — 'death reigned not
only over those who sinned actually, as did Adam, but even over
those who could not sin in like manner, on account of their age,
as infants unconscious of the law.' By this the apostle would
teach us that the law, the transgression of which is sin, reaches

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 77
farther than to the actions, and that corruption of nature itself is
a transgression of it : otherwise it would be unjust that infants
who cannot sin actually should die. " Who is a type of him that
was to come," that is — ' Adam was a type of Christ,' only, how
ever, in the respect already mentioned, that as sin and death come
through Adam, so do righteousness and eternal life come through
Jesus Christ : and this is the abridged similitude, and the second
way of stating the comparison.
15. " But not as the offence, so also (is) that which (Goo0 freely
bestows." The second comparison by which the apostle illustrates
the leading conclusion is one of dissimilarity, and is twofold. The
first dissimilitude is between the fall and grace — ' not as the fall
so also is that which God freely bestows.' By "the fall," he
means the first actual sin of Adam : " grace," or " that which God
freely bestows," is explained by the apostle himself in the wotds
immediately following to be the donation or " gift of God," (as
Christ speaks, John iv.) whereby, through the grace of God, the
one man Jesus Christ is given to us and unto death on our account.
" For if by the fall ofthe one many be dead, much more the grace of
God, and for that is' (as appears from what has already been remark
ed — that this grace of God is explained by the words that follow,
therefore, I take the particle " and" here to signify 'that is') the gift
by grace which is of the one man Jesus Christ hath abounded unto
many." This is the proofof the foregoing dissimilitude from a com
parison of inequality between the fall and grace, or Jesus Christ
given by grace : —
' Grace is much more effectual to constitute many righteous than
was the fall to involve them in sin ;
' Therefore not as the fall, so also is grace.'
16. " For not as that which entered through one that sinned
(so is) the benefit." The second dissimilitude is between the
effects of the fall and of grace, which are twofold : the first ; and
those arising out of the first. The first effects are guilt and the

78 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
remission of sins. The apostle calls the guilt— "that which en
tered through one that sinned," and the remission — " the benefit,
or, as he afterwards speaks— 'that which God freely bestows
through that One who made satisfaction for sin.' From this we
should observe that according to the mind of the apostle, as that
one man Jesus Christ is the free gift of God, and that which God
freely bestows, so also is the remission of sins, and whatever God
confers on us in Christ, a free gift, so far as we are concerned and
in respect to 'us, although in respect to Christ it is a reward.
" For the guilt indeed is from one (offence) unto condemnation ;
but that which (God) freely bestows is from many offences unto
justification." We have next the proof of the second dissimilitude,
which like the effects (as already remarked) is twofold. The first
proof is : — ' The guilt is from one fall or sin, but the remission is
of many, yea, of all sins, in the case of those who believe : —
' Therefore not as the guilt or that which entered through one
that sinned, so is the remission or benefit which God freely be
stows in Christ.'
Each side of the comparison is amplified by its end : the end of
the guilt is ' condemnation ;' but of the benefit from many sins, or
the remission of sins — ' our justification ;' for our sins are remitted
in order that we may be justified.
17. " For if by one offence death reigned through one, much
more those who receive the abundance of grace, and the gift of
righteousness, shall reign in Ufe through one, Christ Jesus." This
is the second proof of the second dissimilitude, from the secondary
effects of the fall and of grace, which are ' death,' and ' eternal
life' or ' reigning with Christ in life eternal.' This argument like
the former is from a comparison of minority : —
' If through one fall death reigned through one, or through the
fall of one man, much more those who receive superabounding
grace shall reign in life through one, Jesus Christ :
' But the former is manifest ;
' Therefore so is the latter.'

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 79
' Wherefore not as that which entered through one that sinned,
so also is the benefit.'
18. " Therefore, as through one offence guilt came upon all men
to condemnation, so through one righteousness the benefit hath
abounded unto all men unto justification of life." This is the
summing up, wherein, after having proleptically introduced a com
parison of dissimilarity, he returns to a comparison of similarity
between Christ and Adam, and that twofold, each being fully ex
plained by its parts. In the first of these similitudes he compares
in similar respects the transgression,* or unlawful deed of Adam,
and his first actual sin, with the righteousness f of Christ, and his
full satisfaction of the law : for so I understand the term hmuiafiot,
here, as ' the righteous deed of Christ, whereby he not only met
the requirements of the law, but also fiilly satisfied the law for the
transgressions of us who believe on him-' This righteousness of
Christ he compares with the sin and first transgression of Adam
in the similarity of their like effects : — ' As by the fall guilt came
upon all men, so by the righteousness of Christ the benefit of the
remission of sins has abounded unto all ;' the similarity of these
effects being — ' that as that guilt was to condemnation, so that
benefit of the righteousness of Christ was to the justification
(si; hxdiuaiv) of those who are in him.'
19. " For as through the disobedience of one man many were
constituted sinners, so through the obedience of one shall many be
constituted righteous." This is the second similitude between
Christ and Adam, whose disobedience is compared, with the obe
dience of Jesus Christ in their respective effects : — ' through the
disobedience of Adam many were constituted sinners, so through
the obedience of Christ shall many be constituted righteous.' The
passage may be thus explained ; or, if you prefer it, it may be
said that from verse 12 to this place we have a fifth argument for
the righteousness of faith, from a comparison of similarity with
* tlagaorraifiia. t Aixaiafta-

80 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
Adam, given in verses 12, 13, 14, this similitude being made up
of various comparisons of minority, in which are shewn : — the
greater efficacy of grace for the remission of sins than of the ori
ginal fall for guilt, in verse 15 ; again of remission for justification,
than of that guilt for condemnation, in verse 16 ; and, lastly, of
justification for the reign of life, than of condemnation from the
guilt of that fall for the reign of death, verse 17 ; and from these
various comparisons of minority the similitude is again deduced in
two parts, in verses 18 and 19.
20. " Moreover the law entered that the offence might be aug
mented." This may be said to be an illustration of the last apo
dosis, from the greater, in this way : — ' by the entrance of the
law, the fall and disobedience of one, namely, of Adam, was aug
mented ; yet, through the obedience of one, grace superahounded
that many might be constituted righteous. I prefer, however, to
view it as the commencement of the destructive reasoning, and re
futation of objections against the truth which has been already
established by the apostle from the 18th verse of chapter i. up to
this place. As, therefore, we have had a course of constructive
reasoning by which the doctrine of righteousness through faith
has been established, so we have next the destructive reasoning
by which the objections against the truth already established are
refuted. The objections of those arguing for the law against
faith are various. The first objection is concerning the use of the
law, and is suggested by the last conclusion : —
' If the righteousness of many is through the obedience of oner
the law, which was prior to the gospel, was ordained to no pur
pose; ' But the latter is not true :
' Therefore righteousness is not through the obedience of one,
nor the inheritance through faith on the promise, as has been
affirmed.' The apostle replies to the proposition of the objection in the
words before us ; and his reply consists of two parts. The first

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 81
part is, — ' that the Mosaic law,' for it is that which is here in
question, ' was not prior to the promise and this righteousness
through the obedience of one ; but that it entered besides
(Tct^sitrjjkh) and came after the promise of God concerning right
eousness through faith ;' for so the apostle himself explains it in
Gal. iii. 17, where he shews that the law was posterior to the pro
mise by 430 years. The second part of the reply is — ' that the
use of the law entering besides was, that the fall might be aug
mented ; or that sin, which entered into the world through the
disobedience of one, might increase :' whence it follows, that
neither is righteousness through the law, nor yet was the law or
dained to no purpose and without its use, since it was ordained,
after the promise ofthe gospel, not to take away, but to augment
sin. This use of the law, you will understand as accidental, and
with respect to us who are carnal and under sin, to such a degree
that not only are we unable to keep the law, but sin and that first
transgression of one, taking advantage of the law, is augmented ;
and thus the world, which came under sin by the fall of one many
sins still more, and multiplies transgression by reason of the law
entering. How is it that sin is augmented by the entrance of the
law? In three ways. 1. By knowledge; for sin, which before
the law entered, lay hid from view as if dead, and with respect to
our ignorance of it had no existence, as soon as the law enters
becomes known, is seen to exist, and perceived to live within us,
so that we die. 2. Sin is augmented in consequence of the law
entering, by our contempt of the law ; for he who sins knowingly
against the law, sins more heinously, inasmuch as to the sinful act
he unites contempt of the known law : hence our Lord says —
' that the servant who knows his Lord's will and yet transgresses,
is to be beaten by his Lord with many stripes,' as being a greater
sinner, on account of his contempt for that will which he knew.
3. Sin is augmented by the entrance of the law, because our cor
rupt nature, being curbed by the law, rushes with greater precipi
tation and more readily into sin ; as it is said — " We strive after
F

82 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
that which is forbidden."* " But where sin was augmented there
grace did superabound." This is an epanorthosis for the consola
tion of believers : — ' that although, by the entrance of the law, sin
is augmented, they are not to be cast down on that account, be
cause sin, augmented though it be by the entrance of the law,
shall not prevail over grace, which superabounds the more that sin
is augmented and abounds.'
21. " That as sin hath reigned unto death, so also might grace
reign through righteousness unto eternal hfe through Jesus Christ
our Lord." He illustrates this superabundance of grace by its
end, viz. — ' the reign of grace,' which the apostle here variously
amplifies. 1. He amplifies it by. comparing it with ' the reign of
sin,' illustrated by its end, which is ' death.' 2. By the adjunct
of the manner — " through righteousness," which you must under
stand to mean ' the righteousness of faith,' or ' that righteousness
whereby we are justified ;' for, as the apostle has previously said,
' God commendeth his love toward us, and the reign of grace in
this, that Christ suffered for the unrighteous in order that they
might be justified.' 3. This reign of grace is illustrated by its
end, which is ' eternal life.' 4. Jesus Christ is pointed out as the
efficient cause, both of this eternal life and of the reign of grace
itself. Observe here again what I formerly shewed concerning
the three reigns into which the duration of the world is divided ;
for, besides ' the reign of death' of wliich he has spoken before,
the apostle here makes mention of ' the reign of sin,' and ' the
reign of grace.'

CHAPTEE VI.
1. " What shall we say then ? Shall we continue in sin that
grace may be augmented the more ?" This is a prolepsis, by which
* Nitimur in vetitum [semper, cupimusque negata]  Ovid.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 83
an objection arising from the preceding epanorthosis is antici
pated : —
' If grace superabounds where sin is augmented, we must con
tinue in sin that grace may thence the more abound ;
' But you, Paul, assert, that where sin is augmented grace
superabounds :
' Therefore we who believe on Christ must continue in sin that
grace may thence be augmented the more.'
This conclusion, as being manifestly absurd, the opponents do
not venture to draw, and, therefore, instead of stating it directly,
they put it in the form of a question, insinuating both that the
conclusion follows from the apostle's teaching, and that the doc
trine of the righteousness of f^ith leaves us at full liberty to in
dulge in every vice.
2. " Far from it." To this question the apostle returns a two
fold reply. First, he repudiates the conclusion of the objectors,
as impious : — ' far be it from us who believe in Christ to continue
in sin; and far be it from me to say or to teach this, or that it
should be capable of being deduced from what I teach.' " How shall
we, that are dead unto ain, live any longer therein." This is the
apostle's second reply to the question, whereby he proves that the
believer on Christ must not continue in sin. The first argument is
from privative opposites : —
' Those who are dead to sin should not live in sin ;
' But we are dead to sin :
' Therefore we should not live in sin.'
The assumption and conclusion are contained in the words
quoted. Upon these words observe first, that ' to live in sin' and
' to continue in sin ' are synonymous, and that ' to die unto sin ' is
the opposite of both. Observe again that the sin here in question
is the remaining corruption of our nature after Christ is known and
the new life is begun : for those who are born again are only par
tially regenerated during the present life, so that the remains of
original corruption — which the apostle, in Gal. v. 17, denominates
f 2

84 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
" the flesh " in opposition to " the spirit" — survive in them even
till death. The question concerning this remnant of the flesh is —
' should we continue in it, or live therein ?' That is — ' ought a
Christian man to indulge in the works of the flesh, or those sins
which proceed from. remaining corruption, in order that the grace
of God may be the more illustriously displayed by their remission
in Christ ? ' The answer of the apostle is ' by no means : for we
are dead to the flesh through Jesus Christ, that we should not walk
in the works thereof.'
3. " Know ye not that so many of us as have been baptised into
Jesus Christ, have been baptised into his death ? " He here proves
the assumption immediately preceding, viz. — ' that we are dead
unto sin :' — ' As many as have been baptised into the death of
Christ are dead to sin ;
' But as many as have been baptised into Christ, have been bap
tised into his death :
' Therefore all who have been baptised into Christ and believe
on him, are dead to sin.'
The assumption is given in the text, and for the proof of it the
apostle appeals to the consciousness of the Eomans themselves : —
" Know ye not ? " as if he had said — " you cannot but know that.'
' To be baptised into Jesus Christ' here is — ' to be washed by
baptism for a sign or public profession and protestation before the
world that we have become partakers of Christ and of his grace
through faith.' ' To be baptised unto his death,' again, is — ' to
profess by baptism, or the reception of baptism, that we are dead
with him, by participation in his death ;' that is — ' that through
the spirit of God procured for us by Christ's death, our old man,
or the corruption of our nature, has been crucified with Jesus
Christ :' whence we may see that all who have been baptised into
the death of Christ are also dead to sin, since their old man has
been crucified with Christ.
4. " Therefore we are buried along with him, through baptism,.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 85
into death." This is the conclusion of the last, as it was also the
assumption of the leading syllogism, viz. — ' that we are dead to
sin.' This death is ' illustrated by its principal efficient cause,
Jesus Christ, and by his death — ' we are buried with him into
death,' i. e.} ' buried by the power and efficacy of his death ;' be
cause, as has been stated, the Holy Spirit, who mortifies us to sin,
with Christ, is procured for us by the death of Christ. Then by
its instrumental cause — " through baptism ;" for baptism, just as
the whole ministration of the word and sacraments, is not only a
sign, but, through the operation of the Holy Spirit, is the instru
ment to believers of producing mortification in them. It must be
remarked, however, that the apostle does not say — we are ' dead,'
but " buried" with him ; wh.er.eby he would teach us that we are
dead to sin in such a way, that we ought to die more and more
every day : for burial is the continued progress of death begun.
" That like as Christ was raised up from the dead to the glory of
the Father, so we also should walk in a new life." This is a third
illustration of our burial with Christ, taken from its end, which end
is ' to walk in a new life;' that is, as the apostle speaks in Eph. iv.
1, — ' to walk worthy of the calling wherewith we are called,' or —
' to live in a manner worthy of the gospel.' This, the end of our
spiritual burial, is here illustrated by a similitude : — As Christ was
raised up from the dead to the glory of the Father : so we, having
been buried to sin and raised again to newness of life, ought to
-walk in that new life.' Our first resurrection, or resurrection to a
new life, is here compared by the apostle to the resurrection of
Christ, not on account of their similarity merely, but because the
resurrection of Christ is the efficient cause of our resurrection to a
new life ; inasmuch as Christ when he rose again, and ascended to
heaven, sent down the Spirit by whom we are renewed, as he pro
mised to do, John xvi. Notice again here, that our spiritual mor
tification, or that mortification whereby we become dead to sin, has
reference to our walk in a new life ; whence it follows that besides
the mortification of sin, which goes before and resembles burial,
there is another part of our regeneration, viz., the raising again or

86 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
quickening of us to a new life. Observe here, thirdly, that our new
life is not a life of idleness ; for the apostle says that we must
" walk in this new life." And, in the fourth place, observe that
this walk is the glory of the Christian in that life ; for as the
apostle compares our new life to the resurrection of Christ, so he
compares this our walking in a new life to the glory of the Father,
to which Christ ascended.
5. " For if being planted, we have been joined with him in con
formity to his death, we shall also be joined with him in conformity
to his resurrection." He here proves the proposition of the lead
ing syllogism, viz. — ' that those who are dead to sin should not con
tinue in sin.' The syllogism of the apostle is made up throughout
of hypothetical propositions, in this way : —
' If we have been joined with Christ in conformity to his resur
rection, or, which is the same thing, if we have risen again with
Christ, we must not continue in sin ;
' But if we have been joined with him in conformity to his death
or in other words are dead and buried with him (which has been
already proved,) we are also joined with him in conformity to his
resurrection :
' Therefore if we are planted with Christ in conformity to his
death, that is, if we are dead with Christ to sin, we must not con
tinue in sin.'
The argument is deduced from the adjunct of the inseparable-
ness of our quickening through Christ and our mortification
through the same ; which quickening is so contrary to persever
ance in sin that the two are inconsistent, and the one being affirm
ed, the other is necessarily denied.
6. " Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him that
the body of sin may be deprived of strength, that henceforth we
may not serve sin." The assumption of the last syllogism, or the
connection between our quickening and mortification through
Christ, of which we were hearing in the last verse, is here proved

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 87
from the end of our mortification or crucifixion with Christ. This
end is twofold : the first is — ' that the body of sin may be destroy
ed ;' the second — ' that we may no longer serve sin :' " our old
man, says the apostle, is crucified with Christ, that the body of sin
may be destroyed, that henceforth we may not serve sin." The
expression — " old man" is used by the apostle to denote ' our
nature is so far as we are old, and bear the image ofthe first Adam,'
that is in so far as we are corrupt, so that " our old man" is ' our
corrupt nature,' or ' the corruption of our nature ;' and it is de
nominated " the old man " in respect of " the new creature," or the
subsequent sanctification of our nature through Christ the second
Adam, which is styled our " new" and " inward man :" the ex
pression — " body of death" I regard as put for the same thing.
The meaning of the apostle's words therefore is — ' that the cor
ruption of our nature is crucified with Christ, and destroyed.'
Moreover our old man or the body of sin is said to be " crucified
with Christ" in two ways ; first in Christ crucified himself; and
then in ourselves : in him ; because like our other sins, it was im
puted to him and along with "the hand-writing of ordinances
which was contrary to us" was fastened by him to his cross, that
it might not be an obstacle in the way of our life ; and in us, whilst
by his spirit, wliich he procured for us on the cross, he slays our
corruption, that being raised again we may live unto God. Con
cerning the latter mode of crucifying, the apostle appeals to our
own knowledge, as concerning things of which a Christian man
ought not to be ignorant.
7, 8. " For he that is dead is free from sin." This is the pro
position of the leading syllogism : — ' he, therefore, who is dead to
sin, is truly set free from sin, that he may not continue in sin,' or
' under its dominion,' as the apostle afterwards speaks. Or if you
prefer to understand these words of Christ, and kiroQuvwv of him as
dead, or " the first-born of the dead," this will be a third argu
ment for the proposition, from the effect of the death of Christ,
which is — the complete liberation from sin, both of himself as our

88 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
surety, and, in him, of us, for whom he stood surety ; so that the
sense of the words will be : — ' he who is dead, viz., Christ, he who
suffered for sin in his own death and passion is most justly liberated
(SsSiXKiarai) from all sin and guilt and the power of sin ; from
which the apostle deduces the proposition in the words that follow
v. 8. — " If we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also
live with him." In these words you will observe that the apostle
not only speaks of the new life of Christians in the present world,
but also extends the promise of life in Christ, by a comparison of
majority, to the life everlasting in the world to come.
9. " Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no
more ; death (I say) hath no more dominion over him." He goes
on to prove what he has just said, viz., that we, being dead with
Christ, live with him not only here in newness of life, but for ever.
The argument runs this : —
' Those who live to die no more, so that death shall no more
have dominion over them, live not only here in newness of life, but
for ever :
' But we, being dead with Christ, are raised again to die no more :
' Therefore we not only live here, but shall live for ever.'
The assumption is proved in the words quoted : —
' Christ is risen from the dead to die no more, death shall no
more have dominion over him' — which the apostle illustrates by
our own testimony, or by the adjunct of our knowledge :
' Therefore neither shall we, who are risen with him, die any
more.' 10. "For in that he died unto sin, he died once : but in that he
liveth, he liveth unto God." The apostle here proves the forego
ing antecedent, from a comparison of dissimilarity between the
death and life of Jesus Christ : which are compared in respect to
two things, viz., their object and duration : —
' He died unto sin, and he died once : but he lives unto God,
and consequently for ever :

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 89
' Therefore he is risen to die, or to be subjected to the dominion
of death, no more.'
When the apostle here speaks of Christ as ' dying to sin,' we
must not understand him as meaning the same thing as when we
speak of our dying to sin. When we are said to die to sin, it is
presupposed that we have once lived to sin : but Christ, who never
lived to sin, is yet said ' to die to sin,' when by his death and pas
sion he is liberated and set free from liis suretyship for sin ; the
ransom * price due for sin having now been fully paid by his death
and passion. For as we, until liberated through Christ, live to
sin, and are under its dominion ; so the Lord Jesus Christ, until
by his death he discharged the debt which we owed, was under a
load of sin, as our surety : wherefore, although he " knew no sin,"
yet by catachresis,f and in a certain sense, he may be said ' to
have lived to sin,' until set free from that load of sin which he
paid for us ; and ' to have died to sin,' when he paid the price,
and destroyed sin for himself and his people.
11. " So do ye conclude that you yourselves also are dead in
deed unto sin, but alive unto God, through Jesus Christ our
Lord." The proposition having been now established, he repeats
the assumption — ' that we are dead to sin ;' and along with it the
conclusion — that we are alive, no longer unto sin, but unto God :
both of these he leaves us to conclude for ourselves from what has
gone before ; illustrating them, however, by their efficient cause,
viz. — ' Our Lord Jesus Christ,' through whom we both die unto
sin, and live unto God to die no more.
12. " Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body." This
is an inference, and further conclusion deduced from the foregoing
reply to the objection ; in which the apostle lays down a twofold
rule for Christians. The first part of the rule is — ' Let not sin
reign in your body :' by this the apostle would intimate, that
t Using a word in a sense very remote from its proper signification.

90 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
whilst we are in this world, our body is a body of sin and death,
and will not be without sin so long as we continue here ; neverthe
less, he admonishes us not to allow it to reign. " That ye should
obey it," viz., ' sin,' " in the lusts thereof," viz., ' of the body.'
This is an epexegesis,* whereby he explains his rule, and what it
is for sin to reign in our body, viz.—' that the obedience which
we render to sin in fulfilling the lusts of the body, proves the reign
of sin therein ;' as our Lord also teaches us in John viii. 34, when
he says — " Whoso committeth sin is the servant of sin," and the
apostle further on, in verse 16.
13. " Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unright
eousness unto sin ; but yield yourselves unto God, as those that
are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of right
eousness unto God." This is the second part of the rule pre
scribed by the apostle, which is illustrated by a contrast, and by
its efficient cause, namely — ' life from death,' that is — the new life
from death in sin.
14. " For sin shall not have dominion over you." We have
here the reason of the rule prescribed, and why sin should not
reign in Christians : —
' The cause being removed, the effect should be removed :
' But the dominion of sin which is the cause of its reign in the
world, is removed from you :
' Let not sin therefore reign in you.' " For ye are not under
the law, but under grace." This is the proof of the assumption,
from the removal of the dominion of the law, which is the cause of
the dominion of sin :
' All those, over whom sin has dominion, are under the domi
nion of the law ;' or thus : — ' Sin shall not have dominion over any
who are not under the law ;' — because, as the apostle says in 1 Cor.
xv. 56, " the strength of sin is the law ;" for as * there is no sin
* Opening up, or detailed explanation.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 91
where there is no law,' so ' by the coming of the law sin is aug
mented, and when the commandment enters, sin revives, (c. vii. 9.)
also, " by the law is the knowledge of sin," (c. iii. 20.)
' But you are not under the law :
' Therefore, neither has sin dominion over you.'
The assumption is illustrated by a contrast : — " Ye are not un
der the law, but under grace ;" that is — ' ye have been translated
into the kingdom of grace, through Jesus Christ, who has fulfilled
the law.'
15. "What then ? Shall we sin, because we are not under the
law but under grace ?" We have next the anticipation of an ob
jection suggested by the last assumption, to which the apostle re
plies from this place to the end of the chapter ; and that in two
ways. First, by rejecting with abhorrence such an abuse of grace
and freedom from the dominion of the law — " far from it." For
we ought not to transgress the law because the Lord has freed us
from the law ; but inasmuch as he has bestowed upon us grace,
we should endeavour to live unto him who gave us grace ; to take
occasion, therefore, from the removal of the law's dominion, and
the bestowal of grace, to transgress the law, is a detestable abuse
of grace, and unbecoming in those who are its children; the apostle
accordingly expresses his abhorrence at the thought.
16. " Know ye not that to whom ye yield yourselves servants
unto obedience, his servants ye are whom ye obey." This is the
second part of the reply, by which he proves, that we must not
sin because we are under grace and not under the law. The argu
ments are three. The first is taken from the adjunct of the servile
condition of sinners : —
' All who sin are the servants of sin ;
' But you who are under grace, and not under the law, are not
the servants of sin :
' Therefore, you who are not under the law, but under grace
should not sin.'

92 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
The proposition is first of all illustrated by distribution of its
parts, and each part in the distribution by its end: — "to whom
ye yield yourselves servants unto obedience, his servants ye are,
either of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness ;" in
proof of which, he plies them with their own testimony — 'Do you
not know this ?'
17. " But thanks be to God, that ye were the servants of sin ;
but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine into
which ye were delivered."
18. " And being made free from sin, ye have been made over
unto righteousness." The assumption of the syllogism is next
variously amplified : first, from their former condition when under
sin, — " ye were the servants of sin ;" then, from the adjunct of
the change effected in their condition by the Gospel — " ye have
obeyed that form of doctrine into which ye were delivered," (these
two being put in contrast with each other) ; thirdly, from the ad
junct of the giving of thanks for the blessed change which they
had experienced ; and, lastly, it is illustrated ' from the contrary —
" being made free from sin, ye have been made over unto righte
ousness." 19. " I speak after the manner of men, because of the weakness
of your flesh." This is an epanorthosis, in which he corrects the
phraseology which he has just made use of, in saying that those
who are " under grace are made over unto righteousness," since,
on the contrary, they are set at Uberty to serve God ; and he lays
the blame of this catachresis on their weakness, as the occasion of
it ; for, as they would not understand him expressing heavenly
things in the language of heaven, he is compelled, in teaching
them, to employ these similitudes of servitude and Uberty, bor
rowed from the intercourse of men. — " For as ye have yielded
your members servants to uncleanness, and iniquity unto ini
quity, even so now yield your members servants to righteousness

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 93
unto holiness." In these words we have the conclusion of the syl
logism, viz., ' that those who are under grace should not sin,' illus
trated by a comparison of similarity with their previous conduct,
both the protasis and apodosis of which are iUustrated by their
end.

20. " For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from
righteousness." This is the second argument for the reply, from
what equaUy foUows on the contrary supposition — ' When you
were the servants of sin, you were free from righteousness :
' Therefore, now that through grace you are become the servants
of righteousness, be free, and abstain from sin.'
21. " What fruit had ye then in those things of which ye are
now ashamed ? for the end of those things is death." The third
argument by which the apostle proves that the children of grace
must not sin, is taken from the effects or fruits of sin, which are
' disgrace' or ' shame,' and ' death ;' and he reasons thus — •
' Those things from which there is no fruit in the doing of them,
and which are afterwards foUowed by disgrace and death, should
not be done :
' But, oh you who are under grace ! whilst you sinned you had
no fruit from your sins,' — here the apostle appeals to their own
consciousness — " What fruit had ye then ?" — ' and now they are
foUowed by disgrace or shame' — " of which ye are now ashamed"
— 'and death awaits those who persist in them' — "the end of
these things," says the apostle, " is death :"
' Therefore, those who are under grace should not sin.'
22. " But now, being made free from sin, and made over unto
God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end eternal life."
He now illustrates the foregoing assumption by a contrast : —
' WhUst you sinned, you had no fruit, but now, in serving God
you have fruit ; your sins were followed by shame ; but now the
service of God is followed by holiness ; the end of sin is death,

94 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
but of holiness eternal life.' From these things the apostle would
infer, that the chUdren of grace must not only abstain from sin,
but also live holUy : and the argument for this may be said to be
from the contrary effects of contrary causes. The contrary causes
are, ' to live unto sin,' and ' to live unto God :' the effects of the
former, ' ignominy' and ' death :' ofthe latter, ' holiness' or ' glory ;'
for hohness is glory begun, and ' eternal life.' To ' Uve unto holi
ness,' is 'to Uve to the increase and perfection of our sanctification ;'
for the more holily any one conducts himself, the more he increases
and deUghts in holiness, since the Holy Spirit is cherished by holy
conduct ; and the end is eternal Ufe. Hence the apostle thus
reasons : —
' Those things ought to be done which are foUowed by much
fruit, with holiness and eternal life ;
' But, from the obedience which we render to God, there re
sults much fruit, with holiness and eternal life ;
' Therefore, those who are under grace ought to live hoUly and
obey God.'
23. " For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eter
nal life in Jesus Christ our Lord." These two ends, viz., ' death,'
which he has affirmed to be the end of sin, and ' eternal life,' which
he has affirmed to be the end of obedience, the apostle here Ulus-
trates by a comparison of dissimilarity, shewing that, although
eternal life and death are both ends, they are not ends in a simi
lar sense : for that death is the end of sin, as its wages and just
recompense (ccvri^iffdi&v) ; but eternal life the end of our obedi
ence, not as a merit or recompence,* but as a free gift in Jesus
Christ our Lord.
CHAPTEE VII.
1. " Know ye not, brethren, for I speak to those who are skUled
in the law, that the law hath dominion over a man so long as he
* ' Avrifin^iav.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 95
liveth?" The apostle having refuted the objection of the liber
tines, who" sought to abuse Christian liberty as an occasion to the
flesh, returns to the assumption contained in the fourteenth verse
of the last chapter — " but ye are not under the law," and estab-
Ushes it in the first section of this chapter, as far as verse 7. The
syllogism by which he proves it runs thus : —
' Those who are dead to the law are no longer under the law,
or the dominion of the law ;
' But we who are dead and risen with Christ are dead to the
law: ' Therefore we who are dead and risen in Christ, are no longer
under the dominion of the law.'
The proposition of this syUogism is proved in the words cited,
or in the first verse of the chapter : —
' The law has dominion over a man so long as he lives ;
' Therefore, those who are dead to the law are not under the
law and its dominion.'
This proof of the proposition, forasmuch as it is deduced from
the law, the apostle especiaUy adapts to the Jews, as being skiUed
in the law, and appeals to their own consciousness in regard to its
validity — " Know ye not ? " addressing them, however, affection
ately, and as brethren.
2. " For a woman who is subject to a husband is bound by the
law to her husband whUe he liveth ; but if her husband be dead,
she is freed from the law of her husband." He proves the ante
cedent from the law, the particular law which is adduced being
that of marriage ; accordingly he reasons from the law of carnal
marriage to spiritual marriage, and draws his argument from a
comparison of simUarity : —
' A husband has dominion over a woman, who is subject to a
husband, so long as he himself Uves :
' Therefore the law has dominion over us only whUe we live
under the law : '
For although the terms of the simiUtude, so far as it has yet

96 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
gone, are uttered in the apodosis, and our death put for the death
of the law ; yet the similitude from the law holds good, because a
marriage is dissolved by the death of either of the parties. ,
3. " So then, if, while her husband liveth she become another
man's she shall be caUed an adulteress ; but if her husband be deadj
she is free from that law, so that she is no adulteress, though she
become another man's." In these words he proves the protasis —
' that a woman is, subject to her husband only whUe he Uves,' and
reasons from the effect of the law of matrimony, illustrating this
effect by a contrast : —
' She is an adulteress, and is so caUed, if she become another's,
whUe her husband is aUve ; but if her husband be previously dead,
she neither is nor is caUed an adulteress:
' Therefore she is subject to her husband only whUe he lives.'
4. " Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the
law," — which is the assumption of the leading syllogism — " in the
body of Christ." The apostle says ' that we are dead to the law
in the body of Christ' — first, because we die to the law with
Christ; secondly, because Christ died in the body only; and
thirdly, because we are in a manner crucified with the crucified
body of Christ, inasmuch as his crucified body was a ransom for
all : so that by his one death we are aU set free from and dead to
the law and sin. " That ye should become another's." The as
sumption is next iUustrated by its twofold end : the first is — ' that:
we may become another's than the law's, viz., — " his who is risen
from the dead;" the second end is an epexegesis of the first 
" that we should bring forth fruit unto God."
5. " For when we were in the flesh, the sinful affections, which
were through the law, prevailed in our members, to bring forth-
fruit unto death." This is an Ulustration of the latter fruit or
end, from a comparison of simUarity ; of which comparison the
protasis is — ' when we were under the law we brought forth fruit

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 97
unto death. The protasis is iUustrated by its causes : the one is
— ' the flesh,' or ' our corrupt nature ; ' the other — ' the sinful
affections,' or ' motions of sin in our members prevailing through
the provoking of the flesh.'
6. " But now we are free from the law, that being dead wherein
we were held, that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in
the oldness of the letter." We have here the conclusion of the
leading syUogism and apodosis of the last similitude — ' We are not
under the law.' This is iUustrated, 1st, by its cause, which is —
' the mortification of sin, whereby we are held under the dominion
of the law ;' 2dly, by the adjunct of the manner, set forth in a way
of contrast — " in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the
letter." 7. " What shall we say therefore ? Is the law sin ?" Thus far
we have had three objections touching the use of the law, and the
first division of the refutation, from the 20th verse of chap. v. up
to this place. Next comes the second division of the refutation,
relating to the essence of the law, in which the topic discussed is,
— ' whether the law of God be in itself essentially evil and sin —
or rather that sin sinful — and itself the origin of aU sin and death :'
this constitutes the second section of the chapter, and the second
principal objection relating to the law. This objection like the
last is not directly deduced, but instead of stating it in the form
of a conclusion it is turned into a question, — ' Is the law sin ?' by
which, however, it is implied, that the conclusion itself, — ' the law
is sin' — is a consequence from what the apostle has been previously
teaching, — " Far from it." The reply to this second objection
foUows, consisting of three parts. First, he replies by expressing
his abhorrence of such blasphemy, and denying the consequence —
' far be it that so blasphemous an assertion should foUow from my
teaching, as that the law of God is either evU or sin.' For so, I
take it, the expression — " far from it," is here to be understood,
as if he had said—' far be it from us to say ;' for he refers to that
G

98 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
which goes before — " What shall we say therefore ?" — ' Shall we
say that according to your teaching the law is sin ?' " far from it"
answers the apostle. " Nay, I did not know sin, except through the
law." The second part of the reply is a simple negation — ' the
law is not sin ;' which, in these words, the apostle proves from
tbe effect of the law, which is — ' to make sin known.' Under
' the knowledge of sin' I conceive two things to be here included :
— (1.) The difference between it and other things ; (2.) Its. own
essential maUgnity and deformity ; so that ' to know sin' is both
' to know what is sin, and what is not sin,' or ' to distinguish in
things what are, and what are not sins ;' and also ' to know that
sin is in itself evil,' The apostle, therefore, thus argues : — ' That
by which sin becomes known and is known to us, is not itself sin ;
for sin becomes known through the rule of right and wrong, al
though that rule can never be itself sin ;
' But sin becomes known through the law* — which the apostle
here ampUfies by a comparison of majority — ' not only did I know
sin through the law, but, what is more, I did not know sin except
through the law :
' Therefore, the law itself is not sin,' " For I had not known .
lust, except the law had said— -Thou shalt not covet." The as
sumption of this syUogism, and apodosis of the foregoing compari
son, viz. — ' that sin is not known except through the law,' the
apostle proves by an example or specimen, which is — the trans
gression of the tenth commandment, or ' covetousness.' That it
holds good of this sin, the apostle takes for granted, as known by
experience from aU the writings and sayings of aU who have either
written or taught on the subject of sin, by none of whom has it
been said or written of covetousness that it is a sin : and hence,
he thus reasons : —
' Unless the law of God' — i. e. the law received and given by
Moses—' had said, " Thou shalt not covet," I should not have
known from the sayings of others, that covetousness was a sin :
' Therefore, not only is sin known from the law, but it is not
known except through the law.' Sin is here said to be " known,"

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 99
when it is explained and thoroughly taught, so that it may be un
derstood ; of which knowledge, as before remarked, there are two
parts, viz. — ' what it is,' and ' that it is an evil.' Both of these
parts, the natural philosophers and sensual men reached in a mea
sure, but not one of them ever fully explained : as the apostle
shews by this example of covetousness, adduced from the law,
which none of the wise men or philosophers of this world knew to
be either a sin or an evU : for the philosophers knew something of
the inward motions and depraved lusts which James caUs ' the
conceiving of sin ;' but of the impure and covetous fountain of
covetousness, that is — the ruin of our nature, and of the flesh co
veting against the spirit, the philosophers neither possessed nor
imparted any knowledge ; the law of God having first disclosed
this impure fountain to men. Under the name of " lust," there
fore, I here understand, not merely ' those impure motions and in
ternal sins,' of which the sensual man sees little, but also, ' that cor
ruption of our nature which is prior to these motions and the source
of them,' of which man by nature never so much as dreamed.
8. " But sin, taking occasion, wrought in me, through the com
mandment, aU manner of lust." The foregoing conclusion is here
iUustrated by a contrast — ' the law is not sin, but sin itself is sin,
by occasion of the law.' To understand this contrast, know, in
the first place, that the meaning of the above conclusion — ' the law
is not sin,' — is — ' that the law is not the cause of sin,' or ' that the
law does not work or produce sin ;' as appears from the other
member of the contrast, where instead of saying — ' sin is lust,' as
he might have done, . the apostle says — " Sin worketh lust."
Again, you must know, that " sin" in the latter member of the
contrast means — 'both original sin, and that sin sinful, as well
actually in the first man, as naturally and ' inherently from him in
each of his posterity :' for both of these are concerned in the pro
duction of subsequent sins. And, thirdly, Know that the term
" lust" is here used by synecdoche for ' every sin that arises from
original sin." The meaning of the contrast, therefore, is this : —
g2

100 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
' the law of God does not work, or is not the cause of any sin ;
but that which causes and works every sin which arises in men is
the first sin or original sin ;' in other words, ' every sin flows from
original sin, and that by occasion of the law.' How original sin
produces subsequent sins by occasion of the law, has been before
explained under the 20th verse of chap, v., and is explained more
at large by the apostle in what immediately foUows.
9. "For without the law sin (indeed) was dead. Moreover, I
was alive without the law : but when the commandment came, sin
(likewise) revived, and I died ;
10. " And the commandment which (was ordained) for life, was
found to be for death unto me." In these verses, and the 11th, the
apostle proves the latter member of the contrast, viz. — ' that sin,
or every Sort of lust, is produced in us, by sin, through occasion of
the law of God :' for the first member of the foregoing contrast
denied the fact — ' that the law produced sin ;' but the second
affirmed the manner of the fact, viz. — ' that original sin wrought
every sort of sin in us, by taking occasion from the law.' The
apostle proves that the manner is such as he has affirmed, or ' that
sin is produced by sin through occasion of the law,' by an argu
ment drawn from the similar manner of another effect of the same
cause : —
' Original sin works death to me, or slays me, through the com
mandment, or through occasion of the law :
' Therefore original sin works in me every sort of sin through
occasion of the law.'
The trujh of the consequence rests upon this axiom : — that of
two necessary effects which are similarly produced, in whatever
manner the one is produced, the other is produced in the same
manner. ' But every subsequent sin is the necessary effect of
original sin, and death is the necessary effect of both ; also the
dependence of these two effects upon their causes is similar: hence
the apostle thus argues here : —

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 101
' In whatever manner sin sinful works death, in the same manner
it also works in us every sort of lust or subsequent sin :
' But original sin works death to us by taking occasion from the
law :'
' Therefore it also works subsequent sins, or those sins to which
it gives rise, by taking occasion from the law.'
The assumption of this syUogism or antecedent of the above
enthymeme is proved by the apostle in these two verses, and the
foUowing one : the argument by which Ue proves it is taken from
a comparison of dissimUarity between our condition before the law,
and after the law has been exhibited to us, and understood by us ;
and is to the foUowing'effect : —
' Before the commandment came, that is before the law had
been exhibited to me or was known by me, I was aUve, and sin
was dead ; but when the law came, sin revived, and I died :'
' Therefore sins work death in me by occasion of the law.' The
antecedent is contained in verse 9 ; the consequent is given in
verse 11, being iUustrated in the 10th verse, by contrast with the
end of the law, which is ' Ufe ' — ' the law was given for life ; yet
by occasion of the law, which was given for life, death was wrought
to me.'
12. " So that the law (itself) indeed is holy : and the com
mandment holy, and just, and good."
This is the third part of the reply which commenced at verse
7, and in which the apostle meets the objection, touching the law,
that it is sin. To that objection he here replies, in the third place,
by a contrary affirmation, in which he claims for the law — holiness
in precept, righteousness in the practice of its precepts, and good
or happiness for its end ; and asserts that these three things follow
from his teaching, in as much as he has shewn in the foregoing
discussion, that sin does not proceed from the law, but that every
sin arises from sin by occasion of the law, which itself is not sin.
The whole reply of the apostle to the objection may therefore be
summed up as foUows :— ' Far be it that it should follow from mj

102 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
teaching that the law is sin ; for I teach and affirm that it is not
sin, but pure therefrom in precept, practice, and end.'
13. " Is then that which is good become death unto me ?" This
is an urging and prosecution of the second objection regarding the
law — ' that it is essentiaUy and intrinsically evil ; ' or, if you like
better, the second branch of that objection : for as there are two
kinds of evU— culpable evil, which is ' sin,' and penal evil, which
is ' death :' so the objection concerning the law ' that it ia evil,'
consists of two branches — the one, ' that the law is sin,' to which
the apostle has just been replying, the other ' that the law is death,'
which he forthwith proceeds to answer. When it is said ' that the
law is death,' I understand the meaning to be — ' that the law is
the necessary cause of death,' as we have above shewn: for the
objection regarding the law ' that it was sin,' amounted to this —
' that the law was the necessary cause of sin ;' the objection there
fore conveyed in the words before us is- — ' that it foUows, from the
teaching of the apostle, that the law of God ' — by wliich I under
stand ' the law renewed and ordained by Moses ' — ' is the neces
sary cause of death,' just as it was before objected — ' that the law
was the necessary cause of sin.' There is this difference however
between the two objections, that the present is a conclusion, or is
stated in the form of a conclusion. " Is then that which' is good,".
that is — ' the law,' " become death," that is ' the necessary cause
of death ' " unto me ? " whereas the former was proposed in the
manner of a question—" (shaU we say) that the law is sin ? " his
opponents, thus becoming as it were more confident, are also
rendered bolder from the circumstance of the apostle having a
Uttle before admitted that our death is effected ' by occasion of
the law ; ' as if, forsooth, the manner of effecting were itself the
efficient cause. " Far from it." The apostle replies by a contrast
— ' not the law, but sin is become death unto me.' Of this con
trast the first and negative member is not a simple negation, but
is ampUfied with rhetorical warmth, by an expression of abhorrence
at such blasphemy : the force of which is :— ' Far be it either that

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 103
the law shoidd become death to man, or that the doctrine — that
the law is the necessary cause of death, should be capable of being
deduced from my teaching.' " Nay sin is become death unto me."
This is the second member of the contrast ; where by ' sin ' I
understand as before original and sinful sin, as the apostle himself
explains it in this very verse, when he says—" that sin might be
come exceedingly sinful : " for this sinful and original sin produces
every sort of lust, or is the fountain and necessary cause of sub
sequent sins ; and these again, to use the language of James,
" when consummated, bring forth death," and that as its neces
sary cause. The import therefore of the latter member of the
contrast is — ' that original sin, by producing subsequent sins, is
the necessary cause of death to man : ' and this, the apostle says,
is the inference to be deduced from his teaching, and from what
he has just said — ' that sin taking occasion from the command
ment deceived and slew him ; ' so that he has taught, not that
the law, but that sin, by occasion of the law, is become death unto
him. " That sin might be shewn working death unto me through
that wliich is good." He next iUustrates the second member of
the contrast, and shews why he taught that sin was become death
to him by occasion of the law, from its twofold end, the one of
these ends foUowing from the other. The first end is — ' that it
might be manifested and known that so great is the power of evil
in sin that it wrought death, which is evU, to man, through the
commandment which is good.'
"That ain, through the commandment, might become exceedingly
sinftd" — the second end, which ia deduced from the former thus : —
' That which is manifested and known to produce evU out of
good, is manifested to be exceedingly sinful, or exceedingly evil :
' But sin is manifested to produce evil out of good, or to work
death to man through the commandment :
' Therefore, through the commandment, sin is manifested to be
exceedingly sinful or evil.'
The apostle wishes therefore to say here — ' that from his doctrine
the malignity, not of the law, which is without any, but of sin,

104 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
which is excessive, is manifested ; and that the extreme malignity
of sin is manifested by his teaching in this way, because his teach
ing shews that sin produces evU out of good, that is, work for us
both every sort of sin, and, in fine, death, by occasion of the law.
14. " For we know that the law is spiritual ; but I am carnal,
sold so as to be made subject to sin." The apostle here proves
the foregoing reply, and both members of the contrast ; first —
' that the law is not death or the necessary cause of death ; ' then
— ' that original sin is death or the cause of death.' The argu
ment for the former is borrowed from the nature of the law.
' That which is spiritual is not death or the necessary cause of
death.' ' But the law is spiritual : *
' Therefore, the law is not death, or the necessary cause of death.'
The argument for the latter is taken from our own nature, such
as we are now since the faU.
' To those who are carnal, or sold under sin, that sin is death, or
the necessary cause of death ;
' But we, ever since the faU, are carnal, and sold,' — as the apostle
explains it, — ' so as to be made subject to sin :
' Therefore, sin is death to us.'
Or, if you prefer to unite the proofs of the two members of the
contrast, the argument may be said to be drawn from a comparison
of dissimUarity between ourselves and the law, in this way : —
' If the law be spiritual but we carnal, it is not the law, but the
flesh within us which is become death, or the cause of death to us ;
' But the former is true,' — for the apostle here proves it by an
appeal to common experience, — ' we know ;' that is, ' we are taught
by experience that the law is spiritual, but that we are carnal, ex
pressing the latter by synecdoche, in his single person, to avoid
the provoking of the flesh in others ; whence he would conclude,
' that the law is not death to us, but the flesh which is in us, by
occasion of the law,' as he has formerly said ; or ' that the law is
for death to us,' as he spoke in verse 10, ' only by accident, and

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 105
because of the inabUity * of the flesh,' as he afterwards speaks,
chap. viii. 3. The expression, " the law is spiritual," signifies,
' that the law is the word and instrument of the Holy Spirit ' —
the same who is the " Spirit of life," or ' life-giving Spirit ;' whence
it follows, that the law is given for life to us, as was before said,
or that it is the necessary cause of Ufe — to wit, if any one be able
to keep it, as we learn from Gal. iii. 12, and Lev. xviii. 5.
Moreover, by our being " carnal," is meant, ' that we are subject
to the flesh, and servants to sin and corruption ;' for so the apostle
himself explains it, when he defines the carnal man to be him who
is " sold, so as to be made subject to sin."
15. " For what I practise I allow not ; for I do not that which
I would, but what I hate, that I do."
16. " But if I do that which I am unwilling to do, I consent to
the law that it is good." The apostle now proceeds to estabUsh
each part of this experience, and of the foregoing assumption, se
parately, and two several times. Pie first establishes the former^
viz., ' that we know that the law is spiritual,' in verses 15 and 16 ;
next, the latter, viz., ' that we know that we are carnal, or sold un
der sin,' in the 17th, and following verses, as far as verse 22 ; when,
having estabUshed both of these a second time, in verses 22, 23,
the conclusion of the reply — ' therefore sin is become death unto
me' — is at length deduced in the 24th verse. The argument in
proof of the first part, and which is contained in these two verses,
is taken from the effect of the renewed and spiritual man, in so far
as he is renewed and spiritual, of which the apostle here, as for
merly, adduces himself as an example : ' I, being renewed, and in
so far as I am renewed, consent to the law of God that it is good :
' Therefore, I know that the law is spiritual.'
He proves the antecedent from the adjunct of the contrariety
between his own renewed wiU, and those things which he himself

¦Aii

wvafiiotv.

106 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
does contrary to the law : ' If that which I do, contrary to the law,
I am unwUling to do, I consent to the law that it is good ;
'But the former is true.'
The proposition is given in verse 16. The assumption ia proved
in verse 15, from its disparates : — ' What I practise contrary to the
law, I allow ^iot ; what I practise contrary to the law, I would not,'
(the former being the approbation of the judgment ; the latter of
the wiU ; and each being iUustrated by a contrast,) ' but what I
do contrary to the law, I hate :
' Therefore, that which I do contrary to the law, I am unwUling
to do.'
17. " Now then it is no more I who practise it, but sin which
dweUeth in me." He next proves the second part of the foregoing
assumption and experience, viz., ' that we are carnal, and subject
to sin,' from the case, iUustrated by contrast, of the transgressions
into which renewed men faU : —
' What I practise contrary to the law, not I, but sin which is in
me practises :
' Therefore, I am carnal, and subject to sin ;' or, which is the
same thing, " I find (that I am under) this law, that when I would
do good evU is present with me."
The antecedent is contained in the 17th verse ;, the consequent
in verse 21.
18. " For I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, there dweUeth
no good." This is a prolepsis by wliich, in passing, he anticipates
the Objection, ' Does sin then dweU in you, although renewed ?'
The apostle replies by a comparison of majority : — ' Not only does
sin dweU in me, but, what is more, there dweUs no good in me.'
At the same time, however, he inserts, within a parenthesis, this
epanorthosis, ' When I say that sin dweUs in me, I do not mean,
in me, so far as I am renewed, but so far as I am stiU flesh ;' so
that, " in me," is equivalent to, ' in niy flesh.' He proves what
he has said by his own experience — ' I know this.' The apostle

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 107
therefore here teaches us, that the renewed man js a twofold man,
viz., the spirit, by which he consents to the law, and the flesh,
whereby he practises what is contrary to the law ; and that both
of these are perceptible to the Christian, and were known to him
self by experience. " For to wiU is present with me, but I do not
attain to the performance of that which is good." This is a second
proof of indweUing sin, from the adjunct of the inabUity of the
renewed man to do that which is good, which is iUustrated by a
contrast : ' Although I am willing to do what is good, yet what is
good I am unable to perform :
' Therefore, in me (that is, in my flesh,) there dweUeth no good.'
19. " For I do not the good that I would ; but the evU which I
am unwUling to do, that do I."
20. " But if I do that which I am unwiUing to do, it is no more
I that do it, but sin wliich dweUeth in me."
21. "I find therefore (that I am under) this law, that when I
would do good, evU is present with me." Having removed the
objection, he returns to his main purpose, and proves the antece
dent of v. 17 — that not himself, but sin which was in him practised
that which was contrary to the law. The argument is from dis
parates : —
' If I do that which I am unwiUing to do, it is not I that do it,
but sin which is in me ;
' But the evU which I do I am unwUling to do :
' Therefore the evU which I do, it is not I that do, but sin which
is in me.'
The conclusion has been already given in v. 17; the assumption
is contained in v. 19, being Ulustrated by contrast — " I do not the
good that I would, but the evU which I am unwUling to do, that
do I;" the proposition follows in the 20th v. The antecedent
having been thus proved, the consequent is deduced therefrom in
the 21st v., as was before observed under v. 17.

108 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
22. " For I delight in the law of God, 'as to the inward man."
The apostle now proves each part of the experience and assump
tion, brought before us in v. 14, a second time, as we formerly
pointed out in our remarks on the 15th verse. The argument in
proof of the first part of that experience, viz. ' that the law is spi
ritual' is taken from the adjunct bf the deUght of the spirit or in
ward man : —
' That in which the spirit or inward man delights is spiritual,
that is, is given by the Spirit and given for life ;
' But I delight in the law of God as to the spirit and inward
man, that is in so far as I am spiritual and renewed :
' Therefore the law of God is spiritual.'
The assumption only of the syUogism is here given.
23. " But I see another law in my members warring against the
law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin
which is in my members." This is the proof of the second part.
The argument for it is taken from the efficient cause of our servi
tude under sin, which is — ' the law of our members ;' or ' the cor
ruption of our nature : —
The law of my members, or the corruption of my nature, brings
me into captivity to the law of sin ;
' Therefore I am carnal, and sold so as to be made subject to
sin.' The antecedent is given in the texfc Upon these words observe
that by the "law of sin" is to be understood that dominion and power
of sin whereby, as by a law, we are compelled to serve sin.' Of this
dominion and power the apostle has previously spoken in c. vi., v. 12
and 14; where although he denies that the renewed man, and he
who is a child of grace is under that dominion, yet know that as
there are the remains of sin within us, so the remains of that power
— to which the apostle here complains that he was brought into cap
tivity by the law of his members, that is, by the remaining strength
of the corruption of his nature, as if by some law — survive in us
so long as we continue in this world. Both this law, to which he

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 109
is brought into captivity, and the strength of sin by which he is
made captive, the apostle explains by their subject ; both are ' in
our members ;' and by their effect, which is, ' the struggle of the
law of sin against the law of the mind.' By " the law of the mind"
I understand the Spirit, or the power ofthe renovating Spirit in the
new creature ; for so the apostle himself explains it in Gal. v. 17,
where ' the law of the members' is called " the flesh," and ' the law
of the mind' styled "the Spirit;" and where, just as here, he
teaches that theseare contrary and repugnant the one to the other.
By this the apostle would have us learn that as there are in the
Christian, so long as he continues in this world, two men, as we
have before observed on v. 18, viz. — " the flesh" and " the Spirit"
or " mind," or — " the old man" and " the new man" '< new crea
ture" or inward man ;" so between these two there is a perpetual
struggle going on during the whole of our life below ; for the law
of the members carries on war against the law of the mind, as he
here speaks, and " the flesh coveteth against the Spirit," as he says
in the passage cited from Gal. ; and so fierce is the struggle, that,
as the apostle testifies of both sides — ' we cannot do the good that
we would, but the evU that we would not, that we do.'
24. " Oh wretched man that I am ! who shall deliver me from
this body of death ?" Thus far the assumption and comparison of
dissimilarity between ourselves and the law, given in verse 14, has
been proved; whence the apostle here deduces the conclusion of
the syUogism, which forms the reply to the objection of which we
spoke in our remarks on the 13th verse — ' therefore, sin is become
death unto me,' or, which is the same thing — ' my body is a body
of sin, until I be deUvered therefrom.' I take " body " here to be
the opposite of " mind," and as " mind " is used for ' the inward
man,' so I understand " body " as signifying ' the outward man,'
in which the apostle has formerly declared that no good dwells.
The apostle does not content himself with barely drawing this
conclusion, but sets it off with a rhetorical exclamation and ana-
cbenosis — " Oh wretched man that I am who shall deliver me from

110 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
this body of death ?" as if he had said—' this body is a body of
death, and death makes me wretched ; who shall deliver me from
it?' 25. "I give thanks to God, through Jesus Christ our
Lord." This is a hypophora, or the subjoined reply to the anacoe-
nosis — 'God has deUvered me through Jesus Christ our Lord.'
This deliverance through Christ he intimates by the result and
effect of a consciousness of that deliverance being begun, which
effect of our deliverance upon us is — ' our giving thanks : ' for he
cannot but give thanks who is conscious that he has been delivered
from sin through Christ apprehended by faith (as has been for
merly shewn), and from death through the righteousness of Christ
(which is immediately to be proved ; this hypophora being an
epitome and compendium of the constructive reasoning of both
discussions.) " So then I myself with the mind indeed serve the
law of God ; but with the flesh the law of sin." This is the com
mon conclusion of the destructive reasoning whereby the apostle
has repUed to the objections touching the law, from the 20th verse
of chap, v., up to this pla.ce ; and it relates to the commencement
of obedience to the law in the renewed man. Of this obedience
the apostle here proposes himself as an example : for when he here
says — " I myself," this is not to be understood of him in particular,
but the meaning is — ' I, or any one who, like me, has been re
newed by the Spirit of God.' The obedience of such an one he
thus sets forth in his own example by a contrast — ' I serve the law
of God indeed, but I also serve the law of sin ; ' that is—' I so
render obedience to the law, that I also transgress the law, during
the whole of my life below : so that the obedience rendered to
the law is only begun, and but partiaUy begun ; and that obedience
to the law ia partial both in me, and in all who, Uke me, are re
newed. He illustrates each member of the contrast by its cause,
obedience by " the mind," and transgression by " the flesh : for
" the flesh," or, ' the remaining corruption of our nature, as the
apostle has previously argued in chap. vii. 7, and following verses, is

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. Ill
the cause of every sort of lust and sin, that is, of transgression in
the renewed man ; whence it follows that " the mind " or ' spirit '
and ' new creature ' is in Uke manner the cause of begun obedience ;
— ' I, being renewed, serve the law of God, so far as my mind is
concerned, or in so far as I am renewed ; and the mind, or new
creature, wliich is the spirit as opposed to the flesh, and the effect
of the spirit of regeneration, is the cause of that obedience of
mine : this obedience however ia imperfect, for I, the same man
renewed, also transgress [the law of God], and serve the law of
sin ; and the cause of this transgression is the flesh or the stiU
remaining corruption of my nature.' This epitome, as it were, of
the whole discussion regarding the law, the apostle deduces as a
corollary from the foregoing conclusion which was given in verse
24 : ' My body, although I am removed, is, because of the law of
my members, a body of death :
' Therefore, although with my mind I serve the law of God, yet
with my stiU remaining flesh I serve the law of sin, that is sinful
sin, which is contrary to the law of God,'
This one conclusion and corollary of the apostle meets, by infer
ence at least, aU the preceding objections touching the law ; for,
in the first place, it is manifest, from this conclusion, that we ought
to serve the law ordained by God, and that aU we who are renewed
and become new creatures, do serve it with the mind ; whence the
reply to the first objection is at hand — 'that the law js not useless,
nor given by God to no purpose, as was first objected, but that it
serves a twofold purpose ; first, on account of him who is not re
newed, to whom it displays sin, and, by displaying, increases it, as
was formerly said, chap, v., 20 ; for he should serve the law, which
he does not aerve, but, on the contrary, the more he knows of it,
the more he sins and struggles against it known ; secondly, to the
renewed man, to whom, serving the law, it affords light for all
manner of obedience into holiness.' In the next place, it is mani
fest, from this conclusion, that the law of God and the law of sin
are contraries ; for f with the mind," says the apostle, " I serve the
law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin ;" whence there fol-

112 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
lows a reply to the two remaining objections touching the law : —
1st, ' That the law of God is not the law of sin, or sinful sin,' as
was objected, chap. vii. 7 ; 2d, ' That the law of God is not death,'
which was the objection brought forward in chap, vii., 13, for
death is the consequence of sin, but that sinful sin, or inherent
corruption, which is contrary to the law of God, is the cause of
every sin, and of death from sin as has been before repUed.

CHAPTEE VHI.
1. " There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are
in Christ Jesus." From the 18th verse of chapter 1 up to this
place the subject of righteousness has been discussed. Next
comes the discussion concerning Ufe and salvation, as we stated in
our remarks on the same. 18th verse of the first chapter. This
discussion, like the former, consists of two parts : the constructive
reasoning, which is contained in the chapter before us ; and the
destructive, which is given in the following chapters, as far as
chapter xii.
In the constructive reasoning or affirmative part of the discus
sion, the leading conclusion is — ' that there is eternal Ufe and cer
tain salvation to all those, and those only who are righteous
through the faith of Jesus Christ according to the gospel,' or
which is the same thing, and equivalent thereto — that " there is
no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus ; " for life or
salvation and condemnation are so directly opposed to each other,
that either of them being affirmed, the other is denied, and the
contrary. Therefore, although the apostle here reasons affirma
tively concerning life and salvation, yet he states his conclusion in
the form of a negation of the contrary : — ' Therefore there is no
condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus.' By " condem
nation " I understand here — ' the sentence of God, as Judge,
against man, concerning sin and death;' whether that sentence

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 113
be pronounced by man's own conscience during this life, or by
Christ the Lord at his coming : for the apostle, John, makes
mention of both when he says, 1 Ep. Ui. 20 — " If our heart con
demn us, God is greater than our heart ; " intimating that there
is against the sinner a two-fold condemnation, — one of his own
heart or conscience, and another of God who is greater ; and that
the latter is more to be dreaded than the former. Against each
of these, both the stings of conscience in this life, and the fear of
being rejected by the Lord at his coming, the apostle comforts
beUevers by the conclusion before us — that there is no condemna
tion, either of conscience in the present Ufe, or by the Lord at his
coming, against those who are in Christ Jesus. — " Who walk not
after the flesh, but after the Spirit." This is an epanorthosis of
the foregoing conclusion, and a description of those who are in Jesus
Christ from their acting, amplified by a contrast of causes ; their
acting is, — ' that they walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.'
This description and epanorthosis of his assertion the apostle sub
joins on account of hypocrites, and those who have a " dead faith,"
as the apostle James speaks, chap. ii. 17 ; that is — ' who boast
that they are Christ's, and partakers of the redemption that is in
him, whilst they are stiU in sin, and consequently not in Jesus
Christ :' to prevent such from deceiving themselves and others,
the apostle here says — ' that those are not in Christ who do not
walk in the Spirit, and that those only are believers, who, by walk
ing after the Spirit, shew that they are really ingrafted ih Christ ;'
as the Syriac Paraphrast appears to have understood this passage
(See his version).* The apostle deduces his present conclusion,
from the constructive reasoning of the preceding discussion con
cerning the righteousness of faith in this way : — ' To those who
are in Christ Jesus, and who give evidence that they are really in
him by walking after the Spirit, there is no condemnation.' The
proposition which the apostle omits, and which is — ' to those who
are righteous there is no condemnation,' is an undoubted axiom,
*[}.,... v^ }lo»,.0 > mo<-> ..«-\ \rny-, }1, qui non ambulant secundum car-
nem in Christo Jesu.— Ed.~] H

114 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
and beyond controversy on the part either of Jews or Gentiles ;
this, if you think proper, being suppUed, the entire syUogism will
be as foUows : —
' To those who are righteous there is no condemnation' — which
wUl be disputed by none ;
' But those who are in Christ apprehended by faith are right
eous,' as was formerly proved :
' Therefore to those who are in Christ, and who give evidence
of this by walking after the Spirit, there is no condemnation' — as
he here concludes. This is the syUogism of the gospel, and stands
opposed to that of the law which is the following : —
' The condemnation of those who are unrighteous is just ;
' But those who transgress the law are sinners and unrighteous :
' Therefore the condemnation of those who transgress the law is
just.' These syUogisms present the theory and general doctrine both of
the law and ofthe gospel ; but because it is a particular explanaP
tion, and not a general theory which is effectual either for direc
tion by the law, or for consolation and salvation by the gospel, the
apostle, in this discussion concerning life and salvation, descends
from the common theory to a particular appUcation. Of this ap
phcation there are two syllogisms relating to the law, and two to
the gospel : the first relating to the law applies sin, the second,
death ; the first relating to the gospel, righteousness, and the
second, Ufe.
The first legal syUogism runs thus : —
' Whoever transgresseth the law is a sinner and unrighteous '
— which is the assumption of the general syUogism ;
' But I have transgressed the law ' — conscience puts in this
assumption :
' Therefore I am a pinner and unrighteous.'
The second legal syUogism is the foUowing : —
' Whosoever is a sinner and unrighteous, his condemnation is just,
for death is the wages of sin' — this waa the proposition of the
general syUogism ;

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 115
' But I am a sinner and unrighteous ' — here conscience again
supplies the assumption ;
'Therefore my condemnation is just.'
To these* stand opposed two evangehcal syUogisms ; the first of
which is : —
' Those who are in Christ, apprehended through the faith of the
gospel, are righteous' — this the assumption of the general syllo
gism and antecedent of the foregoing enthymeme, has been de
monstrated by the apostle, from chap. i. 18, to chap. v. 20;
* But I am in Jesus Christ' — the testimony of the indwelUng
Spirit and the work of regeneration, in him who is conscious of
it, adding this assumption :
' Therefore I am righteous, and set free from sin.
The second evangehcal syUogism runs thus : —
' To those who are in Christ} apprehended through the faith of
the gospel, there is no condemnation ' — this was the conclusion of
the general syUogism and consequent of the foregoing enthymeme;
' But I am in Christ Jesus ' — which is to be tried by the testi
mony and work of the indweUing Spirit, as has just been said :
' Therefore to me there is no condemnation.'
AU and each of the parts of this last syUogism are discussed by
the apostle in his constructive reasoning concerning Ufe and sal
vation in the chapter before us.
First of aU, we have the proposition, which is the above conclu
sion of the apoatle — " There is no condemnation to those who are
in Jesus Christ, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit ; "
this conclusion, having been stated in the first verse, is estabUsh
ed in the verses that foUow, as far as verse 9 ; whence to verse 31,
the aasumption is discussed ; and the conclusion from that verse
to the end of the chapter.
2. " For the law of the Spirit of life (who is) in Jesus Christ
hath delivered me from the law of sin and of death." As the pro
position itself was twofold, so the proof of it is Ukewise divided
into two branches; for the apostle first proves, in verses 2-,' 3,
h2

116 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
and the beginning of verse 4, ' that there is no condemnation to
those who are in Christ Jesus ;' and then, in the end of verse 4,
and the foUowing verses, as far as verse 9, ' that that freedom
from condemnation belongs to those who are not hypocriticaUy,
butreaUyin Christ;' that is, " who walk not after the 'flesh but
after the Spirit." The argument for the first branch, or that
whereby is proved the certainty of the salvation of those who are
really in Christ Jesus, is drawn from the effect of the gospel, and
of its spiritual ministration, that is, of the gospel rendered effec
tual through the internal operation of the Holy Spirit ; for so I
understand the expression, " the law of the Spirit of Ufe," here, as
opposed to " the letter" of " death," or " the ministration of
condemnation," 2 Cor. iu. 6, 7. For as condemnation, or death,
which is the effect of the letter which " kiUeth," and -deliverance,
or the certainty of salvation, — which is the effect of the law of
the Spirit, or of the gospel, — are contrary to each other, so,
the argument being from opposites, the syUogism runs thus : —
'There is no condemnation to those who have been delivered
by the law of the Spirit of life from the law of sin and of death.
' But the law of the Spirit of life has delivered me, says the
apostle,' and all who with me are in Jesus Christ, from the law of
sin and of death : '
' Therefore there is no condemnation, either to me, or to any
who are in Jesus Christ.'
The assumption is given in the text ; for the understanding of
which, besides what we have just said concerning the law of the
Spirit, three things are necessary to be known. First, then, you
must know that by the Spirit here is meant the Holy Spirit,
whom the apostle describes in these words by his effect, and
subject. He is denominated the Spirit of Ufe, because he not only
is life, but works life in us, especially the life of God and spiritual
or inward life ; therefore he is denominated " the Spirit of life"
from his effect. Then *it is added " in Christ Jesus ;" both
because he is " the Spirit of the Son," and because he is given to
us in Christ the Son of God, (Gal. iv. 6.) These words are added,

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 117
in fine, because this effect of deliverance is in Christ, and not out
of Christ ; for the other gifts of the Spirit of God are perceived
both in the world and out of Christ ; but this gift of deliverance,
and by which one is certain of his own salvation, belongs to the
elect alone, nor is any where perceived, except in the mystical
Christ and the members of his body ; this is the second part of
the description of the Spirit from his subject. Secondly, you must
know that when it is said — " the law of the Spirit hath delivered
me," this is not to be understood, of the effecting of that dehverance-,
for Christ has effected our dehverance by his death ; but the law
of the Spirit, or the spiritual ministration of the gospel, is said to
deUver us in two ways : 1st, Because it announces the dehverance
which Christ has wrought by external preaching ; 2d, Because it
seals the same within us by internal operation: so that. " to
deUver" is here — ' to certify me of my dehverance by the preach
ing of the external ministry, and by the inward operation of the
Spirit,' wliich is caUed ' deUverance' by a metonymy ofthe subject
for the adjunct. The third and last thing which it is necessary
to know here is, what is meant by " the law of sin and of death ;"
under which expreaaion I conceive are included both ' the law of
the members,' which " brings me into captivity to the law of sin"
(see above, chap. vii. 23.) and ' the law ordained by Moses,' which
itself also, accidentaUy, and through the inability of the flesh, as
we are immediately told, is ' the letter that kiUeth' and " the
ministration of death, (see 2 Cor. iii. 6, 7 ; and above, chap. vii. 10.)
3. " For what the law was unable to do, being weak through
the flesh, God, sending his own son in a form Uke to that of flesh
subject to sin, and for sin condemned sin in the flesh.
" That the rights of the law may be fulfilled in us." This is
the proof of the foregoing assumption, from the subject and end of
the gospel ; the subject being set forth in two parts. The first
part of the subject is — ' the mission of the Son in the flesh,' or
' the incarnation of Christ.' This is explained by a similitude ; for
the flesh and humanity of Christ, although not subject to sin, yet ' in

118 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
form was like to flesh subject to sin ; ' so that Christ-man, that is,
Christ in his flesh, was a man in aU respects Uke to ourselves, sin
excepted. The apostle does not deny that it was real flesh in
which the Son of God was sent, but says that it was like to sinful
flesh ; the flesh of Christ, therefore, was real flesh, but in that
flesh there was no sin. The second part of the subject of the gos
pel is, — ' the condemnation of sin in the flesh.' By " the flesh "
here I understand — ' the flesh of Christ,' which, although it was
not subject to sin, yet became subject to condemnation on account
of sin, and in the room of sinful flesh : for as it was the violation
of the law in the flesh by which God was offended ; so it behoved
satisfaction to be made in the flesh. Sinful flesh being unable to
render this satisfaction, ' God,' says the apostle, ' sent his Son in
real flesh, like to that which was sinful, that sin might be con
demned in that which was not sinful, and satisfaction made for
the sin of sinful flesh ; ' where, by ' condemnation,' I understand
— ' the punishment for sin which Christ underwent, and the
abolishing of sin by himself.' This condemnation of sin, or the
punishment by which it is abolished, is explained by its final cause:*
— ' sin was condemned,' that is, ' punishment was inflicted in the
flesh of Christ, and that because we had sinned against God ; ' so
that the final cause* ofthe condemnation of sin in the flesh ofthe
Son of God was our sin. Both this condemnation and the incar
nation of the Son of God are explained by their common efficient
cause : — ' for God,' says the apostle, ' both sent his son in the
flesh, and condemned sin in the flesh of his Son.' Thus far the
subject of the gospel : its end is set forth in these words at the
commencement of verse 4, — " that the rights of the law may be
fulfilled in us (by the condemnation of sin in the flesh of the Son
of God.)" By " the rights of the law " I understand here — •' that
righteousness which the law requires;' which being rendered,. its
rights are rendered to the law, and from which he who shaU en-
even in the least degree violates the law, and detracts from its
rights. Moreover these rights of the law " are fulfilled in us " by
* Or ' cause why.'

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 119
the condemnation of sin in the flesh of Christ, because that con
demnation is imputed to us, as though sin had been condemned in
our own flesh; so that whatever has been detracted from the
rights of the law, by our sin and transgression, is again restored
to the law. By the ' condemnation of sin in Christ,' then, ' and
that on our account,' I understand — ' the abolishing of sin,' —
which the apostle John, 1 Eph. ui. 8, caUs ' the destruction of
the works of the devU,' — ' and that by the satisfaction of Jesus
Christ ; so that our sin being now abolished, the law has nothing
to complain of as regards us who are found in Christ Jesus.' The
import of the words therefore is : — ' The law of the Spirit, or the
spiritual ministration of the gospel proclaims and seals that God,
by sending his own Son in the flesh, has fuUy punished, and by
punishing has so aboUshed aU the sins of us who believe, that the
rights of the law are fulfilled in us ; ' or ' so that the law having
been kept by him, and on our account, we are justified with the
approbation of the law,' as was before said, c. iii. 31. The proof
of the assumption therefore runs thus : — ' That — by which it is
proclaimed that the Son, having been sent in the flesh by the Fa
ther, has condemned sin in the flesh,' that is; ' has aboUshed sin
by paying its price with his death, that the rights of the law may
be fulfiUed in us for whom he died — delivers me, and aU who with
me are in Christ, from the law of sin and of death ;
" But Christ incarnate and dying in the flesh for the condem
nation of sin, and that the rights of the law might be fulfiUed in
us — ia proclaimed by the gospel, or law of the Spirit ;
' Therefore the gospel or law of the Spirit who is in Christ
Jesus, deUvers me from the law of sin and of death.'
The assumption only is given in the text, viz., in ver. 3,
and the beginning of ver. 4, illustrated in ver. 3 by oppos
ing to it its privative opposite, or ' the inabUity* of the law ; '
this inabUity or impotence of the law again, in order that
it may appear to belong to the law by accident, is explained
by its necessary cause, which is ' our flesh,' or ' the corruption of
' A'Svvxp.ict,

120 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
our nature,' on account of which we are unable to keep the law.
" Who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit." The apostle
makes a transition to the second branch of the proof, by repeating
his description of those who are in Christ, which is at the same
time a description of those in whom the rights of the law are ful
fiUed : he accordingly proves in the foUowing verses, as far as ver.
9, that this pardon from condemnation of which he is speaking,.
belongs to those who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit.
The argument by which this is estabUshed is taken from privative
opposites : —
' Death is theirs who walk after the flesh, but Ufe and peace are
theirs who walk after the Spirit.
' Therefore there is no condemnation, or there is freedom from
condemnation to us who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit.'
The consequent of this enthymeme is contained in the words
quoted from the end of ver. 4 ; the antecedent he immediately
proceeds to prove.
5. " For they that are after the flesh are wise as to the things
of the flesh ; but they that are after the Spirit as to the things of
the Spirit.
6. " For the wisdom of the flesh is death ; but the wisdom of
the Spirit is life and peace.'
His argument is taken from the appropriate effects of the flesh
and Spirit, which are — ' the wisdom of the flesh and the wisdom
of the Spirit : ' —
' The wisdom of the flesh is death, but the wisdom of the Spirit
Ufe and peace ;
' But those who are after the flesh are wise as to the things of
the flesh, and those who are after the Spirit as to the things of
the Spirit :
' Therefore death is theirs who are after the flesh, but peace
and life and no condemnation are theirs who are after the Spirit.'
The conclusion, which is at the same time the antecedent of the

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 121
foregoing enthymeme, is postponed to ver.'-8. The other parts of
the syUogism are given in the text ; but, by hysterosis, the as
sumption takes precedence of the proposition, the former being
contained in the fifth and the latter in the sixth verse. I regard
the proposition as tropical and expressed by a metonymy, partly
of the effect for the efficient cause, and partly of the adjunct for
the subject : " the wisdom of the flesh is death," i. e. — ' the effi
cient cause of death ; ' " the wisdom of the Spirit is Ufe and peace,"
i. e. — ' produces the certainty of life and peace ; ' for the wisdom
of the Spirit is the proof and sign which seals the Ufe and peace
which are through Christ, and is therefore a part of that life, and
the beginning of it. It should be observed that in both the pro
position and assumption, ' to be after the flesh,' or ' in the flesh,'
is the cause of ' walking after the flesh ; ' and to be after the
Spirit, or ' in the Spirit,' the cause of walking after the Spirit :
but inasmuch as these causes and their effects are reciprocal, the
apostle here uses both forms of expression — viz. ' to walk after the
flesh,' and ' to be after the flesh ; ' and again ' to walk after the
Spirit,' and ' to be after the Spirit,' — for the same thing.
7. " Because the wisdom of the flesh is enmity against God."
He here proves the first part of the proposition, viz. — ' that the
wisdom of the flesh is death.' The argument by which he proves
it is taken from the effect of fleshly wisdom, viz., ' enmity against
God,' which again is the cause of death : —
' Enmity against God is death, or the cause of death;
' But the wisdom of the flesh is enmity against God, that is the
cause and source of that enmity :
' Therefore the wisdom of the flesh is death.'
" For it is not subject to the law of God, for indeed it cannot
be." In these words he proves the foregoing assumption, viz., ' that
the wisdom of the flesh is enmity against God,' from the disparate
of fleshly wisdom which is — ' to be subject to the law of God :' —
* That which ia not subject to the law of God is enmity against God ;
But the wisdom of the flesh, or the wisdom of man in the flesh

122 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
and corrupt as he now is, is not subject to the law of God — this
assumption being ampUfied by a comparison of minority — ' not only
is the wisdom of man not subject, but it cannot indeed be subject
to the divine law ;' whence the foregoing assumption foUows con
cluded —
' Therefore the wisdom ofthe flesh is enmity against God.'
8. "-Therefore they that are in the flesh cannot please God."
Last of aU comes the conclusion of the second branch of the proof,
viz. — ' that freedom from condemnation belongs not to those who
walk after the flesh.' The terms of the conclusion are however chang
ed ; for ' to be in the flesh' is put instead of ' to walk after the flesh,
the cause, namely, for the effect, as we have before pointed out ;
and likewise ' the displeasure of God' instead of ' the condemna
tion of carnal man,' which is also a metonymy of the cause for the
effect ; for in the anger and displeasure of God, the condemnation
of those who do not please God is certain. This is the way in
which I explain the passage. But it may also be said that there
is in these words a second argument for this second branch of the
proof, (viz. — 'that freedom from condemnation belongs not to
those who walk after the flesh,') the argument being taken from
the disparate of that freedom, thus : —
Freedom from condemnation belongs not to those who do not
please God, or who are under the wrath of God, and are, as the
apostle calls them, " children of wrath ;"
' But those who are in the flesh not only do not please God, but
are not even able to please him' — so this assumption is stated in
the verse before us, ampUfied by a comparison of minority : whence
follows the conclusion —
< Therefore those who are in the flesh, or walk after the flesh, are
to be condemned, nor does the freedom which is here announced
belong to them.'
9. " But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit." Thus far the
proof of the proposition, and the first section of the chapter. Next

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 123
comes the second section, and the assumption of the first and lead
ing syUogism, of which, as of the proposition, there are two parts,
the one being — ' but ye are in Christ Jesus ;' the other — " but ye
are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit," or " walk not after the flesh,
but after the Spirit." Both of these parts are handled in this
second section ofthe chapter ; but, by hyaterosis, the latter occu
pies the first place from ver. 9 to ver. 14, and the former the
second place from ver. 14 to ver. 31. The latter part of the as
sumption, therefore, is contained in this 9th verse, viz. — ' you " who
are at Eome, saints, caUed," whether from among the Jews or
from among the GentUes, you, I say, are not in the flesh ;' that is,
' whosoever of you has " the anointing," as John speaks, and knows
concerning himself that he is not in the flesh but in the Spirit.'
" Since the Spirit of God dweUeth in you." He proceeds to prove
the foregoing assumption, viz. — ' that they are not in the flesh ;'
and the arguments by which he establishes it are two. The first
is taken from the efficient cause of their certainty that they have
been translated out of the flesh into the Spirit, which is — ' the,in-
dweUing of the Spirit,' known to themselves and apprehended by
the spiritual sense ; and the syllogism of the argument runs thus : —
' Those in whom the Spirit of God dweUs are not in the flesh,
but in the Spirit ;
' But the Spirit of God dwells in you :
' Therefore you are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit.
" But if any one have not the Spirit of Christ, he is not his."
He proves the assumption which alone is given in the text, indir
rectly, by what equaUy foUows in the case of contradictories, thus: —
' If any one have not the Spirit of Christ dwelling in him, he is
not Christ's :
' Therefore, you who are Christ's, have the Spirit of Christ dwell
ing in you.'
10. " Moreover, if Christ be in you, the body indeed is dead be
cause of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness" — the
second argument for the assumption from the effect of the in-

124 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
dwelling Spirit which is ' our renewal.' Of this there are two
parts here set forth by the apostle : the first is — ' the mortification
of the body or old man ;' the second—' the quickening of the Spirit
or new creature.' " The body" or ' old man' is said " to be morti
fied," when we die to the. body, the old man, or the flesh ; as on
the other hand, " the Spirit" or ' new creature' is said to be quick
ened, when we live to the Spirit more and more every day: So that
what is here said — that " the body is dead," is nothing else than
what the apostle formerly said in chap. vi. 2 — that " we are dead
unto sin;" and to say — that "the Spirit is life," is the same thing
as to say — that ' we live by the Spirit,' or 'live the Ufe of God.'
Each of these parts, viz. — ' the mortification ofthe body,' and 'the
Ufe of the Spirit,' is explained by its final cause ; * for the Holy
Spirit is the efficient cause of both. But if you ask why the body
is mortified or becomes dead, the apostle repUes — " because of sin;"
that is — ' in order that we may cease to sin,' which cannot take
place so long as the body is alive, or while the corrupt nature pre
vails within us : or if you prefer it, when the apostle here says — -
" because of sin," he may be understood to mean — ' that we die
to the body because of sin ; that is — because of a consciousness or
sense of sin, and a dread of judgment in consequence of sin ; neither
of which we can escape, unless we die to the body and our corrupt
nature. In like manner if you ask why and for what cause the
Holy Spirit makes us to Uve by the Spirit, the apostle replies — " be
cause of righteousness ;" that is — ' inasmuch as we have been re
conciled to God by the righteousness and fuU satisfaction of Christ
the Holy Spirit sanctifies us, or makes us to Uve by the Spirit, for
this purpose, that abstaining from sin we may Uve unto God, to
whom we have been reconcUed.' The argument in proof of the
assumption therefore runs thus : —
' Those are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, to whom the body
is dead that they may serve the flesh no longer in the lusts there
of, and to whom the Spirit is Ufe that they may serve God, having
been reconcUed through the righteousness of Christ ;
* Or ' cause why.'

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 125
' But your body is dead because of sin, and your life is spiritual
because of righteousness :
' Therefore you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit.'
11. " But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the
dead dweU in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall
also quicken your mortal bodies through his Spirit that dweUeth
in you." This is an epanorthosis, whereby, to prevent the saints
from referring what he has said concerning the death of the body,
to the destruction of the body itself and " this earthly tabernacle,"
as he denominates it, 2 Cor. v. 1, especiaUy as it is mortal and
perishable through the corruption of our nature, the apostle in
these words consoles them with the announcement of the resur
rection of that same body, which, through sin, is mortal and
perishable. This resurrection of the body he amplifies by its sub
ject and efficient cause. The subject is—' those in whom dwells
the Spirit of him who raised up Jesus from the dead,' that" is, those
to whom belongs that certainty of salvation and freedom from con
demnation, which the apostle is discussing in this chapter ; for
although the resurrection ofthe body is common to all, yet those only
in whom the Spirit of Ufe dweUs wUl rise again to life and glory : the
apostle, therefore, consoles with the announcement of a future re
surrection those only to whom it wiU be a benefit ; not to mention
that the first resurrection, and its increase day by day, is the
peculiar privilege of those in whom this spirit of life dwells. Thus
far of the subject. A twofold efficient cause is pointed out ; first
in order is — ' God the Father ;' third in order is — ' the Holy
Spirit.' Each of these is defined by his effect — God the Father
raised up Christ the son from the dead ; and the dead in Christ
are raised up with Christ though the Holy Spirit, both in this
world, more and more every day, to a new Ufe, and, at the coming
of the Lord, to eternal life, to each of which resurrections, through
the Holy Spirit, the apostle here alludes. Of both these resur
rections also, God the Father is the author first in order, the Son,
the cause second in order, and, third in order, the Holy Spirit ;

126 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
for as the Father is the first person in the Trinity; the Son the
second, and the Holy Spirit the third ; so the works common to
the three persons, which relate to external objects, and have re
spect to creatures, are performed by the Father, in the Son,
through the Holy Spirit : ' the Father,' says the apostle here,
' raises up the dead in the Son, through the Holy Spirit ;' and the
same thing may be said of aU simUar actiona of the Deity, — God
the Father, as the first person, is the efficient cause first in order,
and all things are performed by him ; the Son of God, as the
second person, is the second efficient cause, and aU things are per
formed in him ; lastly, as the Holy Spirit is the third person in
the Trinity, so he is the efficient cause third in order, and aU
things are performed through him. The Holy Spirit is also here
described by his indweUing in the saints.
12. " So then, brethren, we are not debtors to the flesh, that
we should Uve after the flesh." This is an inference, wherein he
exhorts to a new life or rather dissuades from walking after the
flesh; to enforce which two arguments are here adduced. Of
these the first is taken from the adjunct of those who Uve after the
flesh, which is the disparate to that of aU who have been renewed
through the indweUing Spirit ; this adjunct being the debt or obU
gation, whereby those who are after the flesh, are under obligation
to the fleah as ruUng over them, to Uve after the flesh. The syl
logism of the proof runs thus : —
' AU who Uve after the flesh are debtors to the flesh, that they
should live after the flesh ;
' But we, brethren, are not debtors to the flesh, that we should
Uve after the flesh ;
' Therefore let us ilot Uve after the flesh.'
Only the assumption is given in the text, being inferred from
the foregoing second proof of the assumption [of the leading syUo
gism] thus : —
' The body indeed,' that is — ' the flesh, or our corrupt nature,'
' is dead ; therefore we are not debtors to the flesh, that we should

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 127
live after the flesh, for death dissolves the obUgation ;' just as he
formerly reasoned concerning the law at the first v. of chap. vu.
13. " For if ye Uve after the flesh, ye shaU die." This is the
second argument of dissuasion, taken from the wages of ain, or the
effect of living after the flesh, which effect is the death of those
who Uve after the flesh. The argument runs thus : —
' If you Uve after the flesh, you shaU die :
' Therefore Uve not after the flesh.'
The antecedent is given in the commencement of this 13th v.
" But if ye by the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shaU
Uve.' In these words the antecedent is proved by what equaUy
foUows on the contrary supposition, which is put in contrast with it:
'If, by the Spirit, you mortify the deeds ofthe body you shaU Uve :
' Therefore, if you Uve after the flesh you shaU die.'
14. " For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the
sons of God." Thus far one part of the leading assumption has
been discussed; next, by hysterosis, comes the first part, viz.,
' but ye are in Jesus Christ,' or, ' every one of you is certain that
he is in Christ.' This part is not, indeed, itself expressed here,
but is proved in two distinct members ; for it is first argued, ' that
they are the sons of God ;' then, ' that they are heirs of God, and
joint-heirs with Christ ;' and from these two follows the third,
which is here omitted, viz., ' that they are in Christ ;' since no man
can be a son or heir of God, without being in Christ. He there
fore proves the first of these two members from the inseparable
adjunct of the sons of God, which is, ' to be led or guided by the
Spirit of God ;' and the syUogism by which it is proved runs thus : —
' As many as are led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God,
and consequently are in Jesus Christ ;
' But you are led by the Spirit of God :
' Therefore, you are the sons of God, and consequently in Jesus
Christ.' The proposition alone is expressed in this verse ; the proof of

128, LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
which proposition, along with that of the omitted assumption, are
given in the two following verses, 15 and 16, where each is esta
bUshed by two arguments.
15. "For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again unto
fear, but the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, (i. e.) Fa
ther." The first argument is taken from the nature of the spirit
by which we are led : it is 'the spirit of adoption.' " Adoption,"
moreover, is ' the affiliation or reception into the dignity of sons
of those who formerly were not sons :' " the spirit of adoption,'.'
therefore, is that spirit which seals adoption, or the dignity of sons
of God bestowed in Christ, God's only Son, on those who were by
nature " the children of wrath." This argument is to be adapted
to the proof of the proposition in this way : —
' As many as are led by the spirit of adoption are the sons of
God,' as is obvious from what we have just said concerning
adoption ;
' But the Spirit of God is the spirit of adoption :
' Therefore, as many as are led by the Spirit of God are the sons
of God.'
The assumption is given in this 15th verse, Ulustrated by a con
trast : ' The Spirit of God given to the elect, through the gospel,
is not the spirit of bondage, but the spirit of adoption.' Each
member of this contrast is explained by its effect ; bondage, indeed,
by ' fear,' but adoption by ' an inward cry in the hearts of believers,
whereby' he shows that ' they call upon God as their Abba, or
Father :' . the proposition is thus proved by these words. The
proof of the supposed assumption is tacitly impUed in the words^
" ye have received," in this way : —
' AU those who have received the Spirit of God, or of adoption,
are led by the Spirit of God or of adoption ;
'But you,' says the apostle to the believing Eomans, 'have -re
ceived the Spirit of adoption and of God :
'Therefore, you are led by the Spirit of God,' which was the.
assumption of the foregoing syllogism.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 129
16. " Which same Spirit beareth witness, along with our spirit,
that we are the sons of God." This is the second argument,
whereby, both the proposition, which is expressed in verse 14, and
the assumption, which, as We have remarked on that verse, is un
derstood, are established. This argument is taken from a twofold
testimony : the one divine, being that ofthe indweUing Holy Spirit,
" which Spirit," — viz., ' the Holy Spirit and Spirit of adoption,'
— " beareth witness," says the apostle : the other human^ — being
that of our own spirit, now renewed by the Holy Spirit, — " beareth
witness," says he, " along with our spirit." These Spirits^ there-
fore,^both the Holy Spirit and our spirit, — renewed by him, as
two witnesses, cry within us, and unitedly testify that God is our
Abba, Father, and that we are the sons of God in Christ, the only
begotten Son. Both of these cries or testimonies, as weU that of
the Holy Spirit, as that of our own spirit, renewed by him, I con
ceive to be included in faith ; for the Holy Spirit cries and bears
witness to us that we are the sons of God, by working faith in us,
and sealing us in Jesus Christ ; and our own spirit, renewed by
him, in like manner cries and bears witness to us that we are the
sons of God, by apprehending, by faith, Jesus Christ, and the
grace which, through the Holy Spirit, is revealed in him. From
this twofold inward testimony of the Spirit arises the outward cry
and sacred invoking, whereby the elect call upon God, as their
Father unto righteousness and salvation ; for so the apostle him
self seems to explain his meaning, farther on, when he says, (chap.
xt verses 13, 14,) " Whosoever shaU caU upon the name of the
Lord shall be saved," and, immediately after, " How shaU they
caU upon him on whom they have not believed ?" We see, there
fore* that the invoking or outward cry arises from the inward cry
or faith, and that both are unto salvation.
17. " But if sons, also heirs ; heirs indeed of God, and joint
heirs with Chriat." Thus far the proof of our being sons. He
now proceeds to establish the second member, viz. — ' that we are
heirs of God with Christ,' the argument for which is taken from

130 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
i,ts cause, namely, ' our adoption,' which has been already proved :
' All who are the sons of God are also heirs of God and joint
heirs with Jesus Christ ;
' But you are the sons of God '—as has been already proved :
' Therefore you are also heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ.'
From this, as we formerly said, the apostle infers — ' that we are
in Christ Jesus,' which is the first part of the assumption, as was
remarked on verse 14. " If so be that we suffer with him." This
is an epanorthosis, and the annexed condition of obtaining the in
heritance with Christ, namely — ' our participation with Christ in
his cross, and our holy confirmation with him under the cross :
" That we may be also glorified along with him " — an Ulustration
of the annexed condition from its end.
18. " For I hold that the afflictions of this present time are by
no means equal to the glory which is about to be revealed in us."
The mention of the above condition leads the apostle into a
digression, in which he encourages those who are in Christ, or
who are joint heirs with him, to suffer with Christ. The argu
ments which he employs for this purpose are two : the one taken
from a comparison of inequality between our sufferings and the glory
by which they are foUowed ; the other from the issue or end of
these sufferings, viz. that they work for our good : upon the first
of which arguments the apostle dwells from this 18th verse to verse
28 ; upon the second from verse 28, to verse 31. The first argu
ment is proleptical ; there is therefore, in these words, a prolepsis
whereby he anticipates an objection suggested by the condition of
the inheritance spoken of in the verse immediately preceding : —
'Are we then,' an objector might ask, ' to procure that inheritance.
by our own sufferings, when throughout the whole of the con
structive reasoning of your first discussion, you have established
the contrary, viz.— that the inheritance is from faith through
grace (c. iv. 16), and neither from our own works nor sufferings,
otherwise grace would be no longer grace, (c. xi. 6) ? ' To this
objection the apostle, in these words, thus forcibly replies, in order

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 131
that he may briefly shew — both that the inheritance is not to be
procured by our own sufferings, and yet that for the sake of it we
ought most gladly to suffer anything : so that, in the same breath,
he both overthrows the merit of our sufferings, and encourages us
to suffer. In these words, therefore, he first of aU refutes the
idea of our sufferings being meritorious, by contradicting the
objection — ' I hold that the inheritance is not to be procured by
our own sufferings ; ' the argument for which, taken, as has been
already said, from a comparison of inequality between our suffer
ings and the inheritance or grace to be revealed, runs thus : —
' AU the sufferings of this life are not equal to that inheritance
nor worthy of it :
' Therefore the inheritance is not procured by sufferings.'
The force of the consequence depends upon the self-evident and
obvious axiom — ' that wages cannot be merited unless the work or
suffering shaU have been equal to and worthy of the wages.' This
is impUed in the words of the apostle above, at chap. iv. 4, — " to
him Ishat worketh the reward is imputed from debt," as much as
to say — ' unless the wages be due, and the work equal to and wor^
thy of the reward, the reward is not given for the work ;' and the
same thing may be said of sufferings : our sufferings and works
therefore, merit nothing, nothing is procured by them, unless they
be worthy ( «£/«, as the apostle here speaks) of the reward. To
this, which is the general proposition, and sufficiently obvious,
according to the apostle, he here subjoins the assumption — ' that,
the sufferings of this life are not equal to the inheritance or glory
to be revealed:' whence he teaches us to conclude, as he himself
has done before — ' that the inheritance is from grace, and not from
debt nor procured by our own sufferings.' The idea of our suffer
ings being meritorious having been thus overthrown, the apostle,
nevertheless, encourages us to suffer for the inheritance, and he
does so by the same argument in this way : —
' I hold,' that is, ' every thing having been duly considered, I
conclude, that aU our sufferings in the present life are unequal to,
less than, and unworthy of the glory to be revealed in us, or that
12

132 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
glorious inheritance, our right to which has been estabUshed in
Christ Jesus :
' Therefore as " Jesus Christ, the author and finisher of (our)
faith, for the joy that was set before him, endured the cross, de
spising the shame," (Heb. xii. 2,) ao should we most gladly suffer
anything with him, that we may be also glorified along with him,
and in him become heirs of God.
19. " For the creation watching as it were with thrust-out head
waiteth for the revelation of the sons of God." He proceeds to
prove the antecedent of each of the foregoing enthymemes, and to
shew that the exceUence of the glory to be revealed is greater
beyond all comparison than our sufferings. This he does by three
arguments, or by a threefold testimony : the first is the common
testimony of created things, or of creation, contained in this and
the foUowing verses, as far as verse 23 ; the second is that of men
having the first-fruits of the Spirit, in the 23d and subsequent
verses, as far as verse 26 ; the third is that of the Holy Spirit in
Verses 26, 27 : so that all these three — creation (fl xrifftgj, the re
newed man, and the Holy Spirit through whom he is renewed —
are adduced as witnesses to the excellence of the glory of the sons
of God, and that it exceeds, beyond aU comparison, aU our suffer
ings with Christ here, in hope of hereafter enjoying it in the Ufe
of bliss. The testimonies of each of these witnesses are shewn,
one by one, from the effects of the witnesses themselves. And,
first, the common testimony of creation or created things is shewn
from their effect, which is iUustrated by the adjunct of the mode
of effecting : ' creation waits for the glory to be revealed' — this is
the effect ; and it waits for it ' with thrust-out head,' or ' with in
tense longing' — this is the mode of effecting. The apostle there
fore reasons thus : —
' Creation waits with intense longing for the revelation of the
glory of the sons of God :
' Therefore, according to the testimony of creation, the glory 
to be revealed — of the sons of God is beyond measure excellent.'

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 133
20. " For creation has been made subject to vanity." He here
proves the antecedent, viz. — ' that created things wait with thrust-
out head, or with intense longing, for the glory — to be revealed —
of the sons of God.' The arguments by which he proves it are
two : the first is taken from the adjunct of the present condition
of created things ; the second from the adjunct of the pain and
sorrow or sighs of created things, under their present condition.
As regards the former, namely, the adjunct of the present condi
tion of created things, the apostle shews the truth of the antece
dent from it in this way : —
' Creation, or created things have been made subject to vanity,
in hope of deUverance into the glory of the aons of God :
' Therefore^ creation waits with intense longing for the revela
tion of that glory.'
The antecedent is given in verses 20, 21, where the present con
dition of created things is shewn, being represented as consisting
in two things : first, ' that created things have been made subject
to vanity ;' and, secondly, that they have been made subject in the
hope of deUverance.' As regards the first, under the name of
vanity, I understand here two things : 1st, ' man himself,' to whom
created things have been made subject, and whom they serve, who,
in Ps. lxu. 10, is caUed " vanity," and " vainer than vanity ;" 2d,
' aU the misery of created things on man's account,' which again I
consider as comprised in three particulars. Of these the first is,
— ' the miserable bondage of created things under sinful man ;' the
misery of which bondage is seen in two things : 1st, in their
annoyance and fatigue, which God pities, and against which he
has made provision in the fourth commandment, (Ex. xx. 10);
2dly, in their perversion to a different end from that for which
they were created, and for which they were designed to be ser
viceable to man, (Hos. ii. 8.) The second particular is, the poUu-
tion of created things from the contagion of man's sin, under which
poUution the creature suffers, and under which it groans, untU it
shaU be purified by renewal with fire at the coming of the Lord,
(2 Pet. iii. 10.) The third particular of this misery is, the various

134 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
changes of things, and the manifold judgments of God, which,
along with sinful man, created things, serving man, undergo (Gen.
iii. 17 ; iv. 11, 12.) All these four things, viz. :— man rendered
vain by sin, the miserable bondage of created things under vain
man, their pollution arising from the contagion of his vanity,
and, in fine, the judgment of God, which, along with man,
they undergo — all these things, I say, I consider as included
under the name of this " vanity," to which the world has been
made subject. " Not of its own accord, but on account of him
who hath made it subject." The apostle has thus shewn us
the first part of the condition of creation, viz. — ' its subjection
to vanity.' This he now goes on to iUustrate by its efficient cause,
which he sets forth under a contrast. ' Creation has been made
subject to vanity, not of its own accord;' this is the first member
of the contrast, and that which is said not to be the cause. " But
on account of him who hath made it subject," — this is the second
member of the contrast, and that which is affirmed to be the cause.
Therefore, that which is said not to be the cause of this subjection,'
is the nature itself of created things, which were made free from
vanity, and which, of their own nature, would neither have
obeyed man now fallen, nor have been miserable along with him ;
that again which is affirmed to be the cause, is the appointment of
a long-suffering God, whose pleasure it is, on account of the elect
who are to be caUed, that the world should be serviceable even to
sinners, Matt. v. 45. Or it may be said that this iUustration is
taken from a contrast of ends — " not of its own accord," that is,
' not on its own account,' but " on account of him who hath made"
it subject (to vanity)," i. e., ' for the use of man, who, by bis sin,
has plunged the world under vanity along with himself;' so that
the meaning wiU be : — As the world was created at first for the
use of man, and to be serviceable to bim ; so now that it has been
subjected to vanity, that is, made vain, and subject to corruption
through man's sin, it is yet preserved under this corruption, on
account of the expected renewal of the same man, along with
whom the world itself also shall be renewed, according as it is

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 135
written, 1 Cor. v. 17, — " Old things are passed away, behold all
things have become new ;" and again, 2 Pet. iii. 13, — " We look
for new heavens and a new earth." The apostle therefore says, —
that the world being preserved on account of elect men, groans
under corruption, and is subject to vanity, longing for the liberty
of the elect, that it may be restored to Uberty along with them.'
21. "In hope that itself also shall be restored." This is the second
part ofthe condition of creation, and an epanorthosis of the for
mer — ' Creation has been made subject to vanity, but in hope that
itself also shaU be restored.' Hope is here ascribed to created
things anthropopathically, and after the manner of men to be
saved ; to the latter the hope of deliverance properly belongs, but
also to created things metaphorically, since they shaU participate
with elect men in Christ Jesus in their deliverance. " From the
bondage of corruption." He explains this hoped for deliverance
of creatures from the subject termini* a quo, and ad quem~\ of the
deUverance. The terminus a quo, is "bondage" and "corruption;"
{. e. — ' miserable bondage on account of corruption, and the judg
ment upon corruption ; in both of which created things are par^
takers along with man, while serving man in his sin.' " Into the
liberty of the glory of the sons of God." The terminus ad quern is
"Uberty," which is explained, 1st, by its primary subject, "ofthe
sons of God ;" 2d, by the adjunct of its glory — it is ' glorious
liberty from corruption, and the judgment upon corruption, through
the righteousness of Christ,' which is called " glory," because it is
glorious Uberty, (Phil. Ui. 20, 21.) And, as it primarily belongs
to the sons of God, so, by participation with them in Christ, it
belongs also secondarily to created things.
22. "For we know that the whole creation sigheth together
and travaUeth together, even unto this time." This is the second
argument whereby he proves the antecedent, or that created things
* The extreme points hetwixt which it ranges.
t The extreme point from, which j. and the extreme point to which.

136 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
are waiting for the manifestation of the sons of God, from the pain
and sorrow of created things, consequent, upon their condition
before described ; the excess of this pain being iUustrated by the
similitudes of one sighing audibly, and of one in travail : then by
the adjunct of the time, and its constant duration: 'Created
things sigh, and are like a travaiUng woman, who anxiously longs
for the period of her delivery, even unto the time of the revelation
of the sons of God : ' Therefore, they wait with head thrust out
for that, revelation.'
23. <' And hot only they, but ourselves also, who have the first
fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves, sigh within ourselves."
Thus far we have had the common testimony of created things
concerning the glory — to be revealed — of the sons of God. Next
comes the proof of the second testimony, which is that of renewed
man, or, as the apostle here speaks, ' of man having the first
fruits qf the Spirit ; ' for so the apostle here metaphoricaUy de-i
scribes our regeneration in this Ufe, viz.-^as " the first fruits,"
that is — " the beginning," and, so to speak, ' earliest products of
the Holy Spirit, whose perfection or fuU harvest wUl foUow, in
another Ufe, to aU those who receive the first fruits in this.' This
second testimony to the glory to be revealed is in like manner
proved by the effects of the renewed, wliich are here set forth
under a comparison of majority : —
' Not only other creatures, but even we ourselves who have been
renewed, wait and sigh in hope of the glory that is to be revealed :
' Therefore we ourselves also are witnesses that it is to be, re--
vealed :'
And so he reasons in 2 Cor. v. 1, 2. " Waiting for the adoption,
that is, the redemption of our body." This glory — to be revealed
— ofman having the first fruits ofthe Spirit, the apostle describes
by its formal cause, which is, — ' adoption,' and its subject-matter,
to wit — ' the redemption of our body." By " adoption," I under
stand here ' the fuU revelation concerning us that we are the sous
of God ; ' for although we are already adopted, and the sons of

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 137
God, yet the apostle John, 1st Ep. Ui. 2, says that " it is not yet
manifest what we shaU be : ' our glory therefore remains conceal
ed untU such time as our adoption shaU be revealed. The glory — •
to be repealed — of adoption, wUl be manifested, says the apostle,
in " the redemption of our body ; " where " the body " is put by
synecdoche for ' the whole man : ' he says the redemption of the
body however rather than of the soul, because the redemption of
the soul being already accompUshed when the saints, as regards
their souls, have departed to dwell with the Lord, yet this our
adoption and glory is not yet fully manifested : but as soon as
the redemption of the body shaU have been accomplished by ita
resurrection from the dead, then for the first time shall be fuUy
manifested both the adoption and glory of aU those who are the
sons of God, and who already have the first fruits of the Spirit of
God. To this agree the words of the apostle John, 1st Ep. iii.
2, " we know that when he shaU be manifested, we shaU be Uke
him, because we shall see him as he is."
24. " For we are saved by hope." He proceeds to prove the
last-mentioned effect, viz. — * that those who have the first fruits
of the Spirit wait for the glory to be revealed.' The argument is
taken from the instrumental cause of the salvation or glory to be
revealed, thus : —
' We are saved by hope,' or ' hope is the instrumental cause and
sine qua non of our attaining this glory : '
" Therefore those whs have the first fruits of the Spirit, and are
to be saved, wait for the fuU harvest and glory to be revealed."
"But hope, if it be seen, is not hope." From the foregoing
proof that we are saved by hope, the apostle deduces, after the
manner of a corollary, the principal conclusion of his digression
announced in verse 17, viz., — that we ought to suffer with Christ,
and to wait for the inheritance with patient endurance. The pror
cess of deduction is as foUows :-^
' If we do. not. see the salvation which we hope for, we ought to
wail for it with patient endurance ;

138 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
' But the former is true ; we do not see the salvation which we
wait for :
' Therefore we should wait for it with patient endurance.'
The proposition, which is hypothetical, is given in verse 25.
The assumption, viz. — ' that hope, or the salvation hoped for,
is not seen,' is proved in this 24th verse, thus : —
' Hope,' or the ' hoped for salvation,' for so I take the words to
be here used by metonymy, ' if it be seen, is not hope :
' Therefore hope, or the hoped for salvation is not seen.'
The apostle's argument is drawn from the contradiction of hope,
in the same way as he reasons farther on, chap. xi. 6, concerning
" grace " and " work." The antecedent is proved from the
frustration of the end : —
' If any one hope for that which he sees, his hope will be frus
trated :
' Therefore hope, if it is seen, is not hope :'
And from this the apostle deduces his final conclusion — ' There
fore we should wait for the salvation with patient endurance.'
26. "In like manner, the (Holy) Spirit also helpeth our weak
nesses." We have here the third testimony, namely, that of the
Holy Spirit witnessing in like manner, by his effect, -to the glory
— to be revealed — of the sons of God. The effect of the Holy
Spirit in us, whereby this his testimony is proved, is — ' the help
ing of our weaknesses.' Under the name of " weaknesses," I un
derstand, according to the apostle's own interpretation in the sub
sequent vv. — ' our unfitness both to wait with patient endurance
for the promised inheritance in Jesus Christ, and to invoke the
assistance of God, by which we may be enabled patiently to en
dure and hope for it :' for by mentioning the latter, when he says
— " we know not what to pray for," the apostle presupposes the
former, since we would not ask aid, unless we were weak in our
selves. The argument therefore runs thus : —
' The Holy Spirit himself helpeth our weaknesses, both as re
gards hoping for the glory to be revealed, and suffering in the hope

EPISTLE OF TAUL TO THE ROMANS. 139
of that glory, as well as imploring divine aid, that we may not
fail in hoping or suffering :
' Therefore, by helping our weaknesses, as regards waiting for
the glory, he bears witness to that glory, that it is to be re
vealed.' " For we know not what to pray for as we ought." He goes
on to explain this effect of the Holy Spirit by a contrast, in the
first member of which, as we have already hinted, our weakness
is shewn by synecdoche. " But the Spirit himself intercedeth for
us, with sighs unutterable." This is the second member of the
contrast, wherein is shewn the assistance of the Holy Spirit, who
helps our weaknesses, which assistance is — 'his intercession for
us ;' which again is illustrated by the adjunct of the manner, he
intercedetU — "with sighs unutterable." By this adjunct ofthe
manner of interceding, the apostle would teach us two things.
First, he would teach us that the sighs produced by the Holy
Spirit of God in the sons of God themselves, often supply the
want of utterance and prayer. Secondly, that these sighs of the
Holy Spirit are unutterable, and that for two reasons : either be
cause the inward sense of him who sighs surpasses utterance, so
that it cannot be expressed in words ; or, because the sighs of the
Holy Spirit surpass the sense itself, and, consequently, the utter
ance also, of the individual sighing — as the apostle would intimate
in the following verse, when he says, ' that the meaning of these
sighs is known to God,' as if they often surpassed the comprehen
sion both of angels and men, being understood by God alone.
27. "But he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the
sense of the Spirit." We have here a prolepsis, in which an ob
jection — arising from the foregoing mode of interceding for the
saints, or rather from the aforesaid quality of the sighs wherewith
the Spirit intercedes for the saints — is anticipated thus : —
' Sighs which are not comprehended nor understood, are'useless
to the individuals sighing, and of no avail in helping their weak
nesses ;

140 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
' But if the sighs of the Spirit are unutterable, then they are
not comprehended nor understood :
' Therefore, if these sighs are unutterable, they are of no avail,
and afford no relief to the saints.'
To this objection, the apostle replies by the negation of the as
sumption ; and in the verse before us he adduces this reason for
the negation, viz. — that God understands the sense of his own
Spirit [interceding] on our behalf: wherefore, although these sighs
are unutterable, and surpass, as we have just said, both the sense
and speech of the creature ; yet the apostle would have us know
that they are comprehended by God. In proof of this, two argu
ments are here brought forward. The first is taken from the na
ture of God :
' God is acquainted with * and searcheth our hearts ;
' Therefore, although the sighs are unutterable, yet God knows
what is the sense of his Spirit in these sighs :'
This is therefore a consolation to those who, like the Psalmist,
are so agitated with afflictions, that they cannot fully express
themselves ; but no excuse for such as mock God with an idiom
which they do not understand, and by a designed and studied ig
norance. "Because he intercedeth for the saints agreeably to
God." This is the second argument by which the apostle proves
that the sense of the Spirit in the unutterable sighs of the pious is
not only known to God, but also owned by him ; that is — ' that
these sighs, of the saints, proceeding from his own Spirit, are
grateful and acceptable to him.' The argument is taken from the
adjunct of the intercession by means of these sighs : it is xura
@soj), that is — ' conformable to the wiU of God.' The apostle ac
cordingly thus reasons : —
AU intercession, in whatever manner it is made, whether by
words or sighs, if it be made agreeably to the wiU of God, (xurn
Qsov~) is comprehended by God, yea owned by and acceptable to
him ;
' But this intercession of the Spirit in our behalf,' he subjoins
* KufiinyvuiffTv;.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 141
by way of assumption, ' is conformable to the wiU of God (xotra,
®iov) :
' Therefore, although made only with sighs, and these unutter
able, the Lord knows and accepts it ;'
In which sense the word " know" is used in Ps. i. 6 ; Matt.
vu. 23.
28. " For we know that aU things work together for good to
those that love God." This is the second argument by which the
apostle encourages those who are joint heirs with Christ to suffer
with him, that they may be glorified together with him. As we
have formerly observed in our remarks on verse 18, this second
argument is borrowed from the end or issue of the sufferings to
which the sons of God are subject ; and this end or issue is de
clared to be the same as that of aU those things which happen to
them in this Ufe,- — ' the suffering of them turns out for the good
of those that suffer.' The apostle, therefore, thus reasons : —
' Afflictions, Uke aU other things, work together for good to
those who are joint heirs with Christ :
' Therefore those who are joint heirs with Christ should gladly
suffer with him, that they may get good to themselves, and also
be glorified together with him.'
The antecedent, which is contained in this 28th verse, is esta
blished by the common testimony of the pious,— " We know,"
says the apostle, and ampUfied by a description of those to whom
aU things thus work for good, a description consisting of two
parts. The first part is the effect of faith in them, viz. — ' the
holy love wherewith they love God according to the command
ment of the first table of the law.' " To those (namely) who are
the caUed according to his purpose." This, the second part ofthe
description, is the adjunct Of ' the caUing of God,' whereby they
have been called to grace ; and this ' caUing5 again is illustrated
by its cause and foundation, which is ' the purpose of God.' The
purpose {prgoksiv) of God I here take to be identical with that
which the same apostle in Ephes. i. 2, denominates, — " the bene-

142 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
volent affection of the wiU of God" (Ivdoxfuv rov dskfi(Jbaro$
avrov) ; which, as the apostle seems here to intimate by deducing
the calling from the purpose, is the second foundation of aU the
spiritual benefits which the Lord confers upon us in Christ. For
he first foreknows in Christ ; foreknowledge, accordingly, is the
first foundation in the foUowing 29th verse : then comes this
Ivdoxfa, rov 6iKri(tiarog or purpose (rpodidtg) of God, agreeably to
his foreknowledge ; according to which, as a second foundation,
God predestinates, calls, justifies and glorifies us. All this, as I
have said, is impUed in the mention by the apostle -of that one
benefit ; so that when he says that we are " caUed according to
his purpose," he seems, I say, at the same time, to intimate, that
we are predestinated according to the same purpose, justified ac
cording to the purpose of God, and glorified according to that
purpose ; the more especiaUy since, in the passage in Ephesians
referred to, he says, that God has ' predestinated us according to
this benevolent affection of his will.'
29. " For whom he foreknew he also predestinated to be con
formed to the image of his son, that he may be the first born
among many brethren.
30. " Moreover whom he predestinated, them he also called ;
and whom he caUed, them he also justified ; and whom he jus
tified, them he also glorified." The foregoing antecedent, viz.,
' that aU things work together for good to those who love God,
and are the caUed according to his purpose,' having thus far been
established by the common testimony of the pious, as we have re
marked upon the preceding verse, is again proved by the apostle
in these two verses. The argument whereby he proves it is taken
from the adjunct of the indissoluble connection of the benefits
which are conferred upon us by God, according to his purpose,
with the divine foreknowledge (wgoyviiaii) ; and is stated in the
prosyUogistic form thus : —
' AU things work together for good to those whom God glori-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 143
fies ;' this, which ia the proposition, is obvious, because ' the glory
to be revealed' is the feUcity and supreme good of man, and be
cause aU intermediate things turn out for good to those to whom
this is aUotted as the termination of their troubles : hence the
apostle subjoins the assumption, — ' But God glorifies those who
were foreknown :
' Therefore aU things turn out for good to those who were
foreknown.' The assumption is here the point to be settled, and is proved
from the immediate effect of the foreknowledge of God, or his
purpose agreeably to that foreknowledge : this effect is ' predes
tination,' which is also the more remote cause to men of their
glorification or highest good. The syllogism by which it is proved
runs thus : —
' God glorifies aU who were predestinated to life ;
' But he predestinated aU who were foreknown :
' Therefore whom he foreknew he glorifies ;'
- Which is the assumption of the first syllogism. The assumption
of this last syUogism, ' God predestinated those whom he fore
knew,' is given in the commencement of verse 29, and Ulustrated
in the remainder of the verse by the twofold end of predestination,
viz. : the proximate, which is — ' our conformity to the image of his
Son, first in the cross, and then in the kingdom, — first in patient
endurance, and afterwards in glory ;' and the more remote, which
is, — ' that Jesus Christ may be " the first-born," (•xgairoroxog,) that
is, the first and forerunner, " among many brethren," in each of
the aforesaid particulars, namely, in patient endurance and glory,
in the cross and kingdom.' The assumption of the last syllogism,
viz. — ' that God predestinated those who were foreknown,' being
thus established, the proposition, namely, ' that God glorifies those
who were predestinated,' remains as the point to be settled : this
the apostle proves, in the following words, from the immediate
effect of predestination, which is, — ' our effectual calUng to grace ;'
and he proves it as foUows : —
' God glorifies all whom he calls ;'

144 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
' But God caUs in time, all whom he predestinated before time ;
' Therefore he glorifies aU whom he predestinated ;'
Which is the proposition of the preceding SyUogism. The
assumption of this last syUogism is given by the apostle in the
beginning of verse 30; the proposition, viz., 'that God glorifies
those who are caUed,' remains as the point to be settled : this the
apostle proves from the immediate effect of the Galling, which is
the second benefit of God in time, namely, ' our justification ;' and
he does so in this way : —
' God glorifies all whom he justifies ;
' But he justifies aU whom he calls :
' Therefore he also glorifies aU whom he caUs ;'
Which was the proposition of the syllogism immediately pre
ceding. Each of the premises of this last syllogism is given by
the Apostle in the remainder of the 30th v. ; but, by hysterosis,
the assumption is placed first, in the middle of the verse — ' he jus
tifies those whom he calls ;' and the proposition, consisting of im
mediate terms,* for righteousness is the proximate and imme
diate cause of our glorification with Christ— follows, at the close
of the verse. Wherefore, since the first proposition — ' AU things
turn out for good to those whom God glorifies' — is imtnediate,f as
has been already shewn, and the proof of the first assumption 
' God glorifies those whom he foreknew' — has been reduced to the
proximate and immediate cause, the conclusion — ' all things turn
out for good to those whom God foreknew, and has caUed accord
ing to His purpose'— which was the antecedent of the enthymeme^,
foUows from premises which are both immediate. We see, there
fore, that ' foreknowledge^ and 'predestination' which are eternal
benefits of God, and antecedent to time, are united by an indisso
luble connection, as the apostle here testifies, with ' caUing' which
is a benefit in time ; just as 'caUing' itself is united by an indis-
* Terms between which there is no middle term ; or which do not require to be
compared, by means of a syllogism, with any third term.
t i. e. A proposition whose terms are immediate. (See *.)
| Tlftoyvutfis.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 145
soluble connection with the 'righteousness' and 'glory' that fol-.
low : so that by reason of that indissoluble connection, we have
here a truly golden chain, from any one of the benefits included in
which we may infer the rest, one by one ; and so from all or any
one of them, we may conclude that aU things turn out for good to
the man who is a partaker thereof, as we have just seen the apos
tle doing, when he asserts that — " all things work together for
good to those who are the called according to his purpose."
31. " What shall we say, therefore, to these things ? If God be
for us, who is against us ?" We come now to the third section of
the chapter, and the conclusion of the leading syllogism, which is
first stated generaUy in vv. 31, 32, and then explained by its parte
in the remaining verses to the end of the chapter. The general
conclusion, deduced from what has gone before is this — ' there is
no one against us,' i.e. 'against any of us who are Christ's;' the
deduction being marked by the illative particle " therefore." This
conclusion is embeUished in these two verses by an anacoenosis
embracing two interrogations : the first — " What shaU we say to
these things ?" the second — " Who is against us ?" In each of these
the hypophora or subjoined reply is — ' We must say that there is
no one against us,' or ' we have no cause to fear any one that is
against us ;' which reply, although here omitted, or rather implied
in the second interrogation, is frequently expressed in the Psalms,
as in Ps. cxviii. 6, 7, and many others. The import of this hypo
phora or reply is not — that the pious have no adversaries ; since,
on the contrary, the apostle testifies in Eph. vi. 12, and foUowing
verses, that " we wrestle not (only) against flesh and blood, but
against spiritual wickednesses," compared with which flesh and
blood might be accounted nothing : but the meaning of the con
clusion is — that although the pious have many foes, — the flesh, the
world and the devil — yet none oftheir foes shall prevaU over them
to hurt" them; so that the pious and those that are heirs of God in
Jesus Christ may despise all their foes, and all those that are
against them, as the Psalmist explains it in Ps. cxviii. 6. Two

146 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
arguments are deduced in support of this general conclusion, viz.,
that no adversary shaU prevaU over the saints : the first is that
which occurs so often in the Psalms, drawn from the adjunct of
the presence of God :— ' God is for aU of us who are in Christ
Jesus :
' Therefore no one who is against us,' or ' no adversary ahaU
prevaU over us.'
32. " He who spared not his own son, but deUvered him up for
us all." This is the second argument for the general conclusion,
taken from the act of God in delivering up his son to death for
us ; from which, as the greater, the apostle here reasons, and con
cludes — that aU other things as the less shall be bestowed on us by
God in his son Jesus Christ. The reasoning is to this effect : —
' God delivered up his son for us : Therefore with him he wUl
not only grant us defence against our foes, but wiU give us aU
things in the son, who was delivered up for us.' The antecedent,
which is given in the beginning of this 32d verse, is iUustrated by
a contrast : — ' He spared not his son, but delivered him up to
death for us ;' and by the adjunct of the son, who was deUvered
up — ' he was God's own Son,' that is, ' by birth, and only begot*-
ten,' not his adopted or factitious son, like us who are in Christ
Jesus. " How shaU he not also with him freely bestow upon us
all things ?" The consequent of the enthymeme is amplified by a
twofold comparison of majority, and by the adjunct of the manner.
The first comparison of majority is — ' He who delivered up his
son for us, wiU much more grant us in his son defence against our
foes ;' the second comparison is — That he who gave his son wiU not
only grant us defence against our foes, but over and above that,
wUl give us all things in his son ; the adjunct of the manner of
giving is — ' that he wiU give freely,' or ' that what he gives us he
wiU bestow upon us freely in his son.'
33. "Who shall bring charges against God's elect?" Next
comes the explication of the conclusion by its parts : of these

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 147
three are here enumerated as so many species of opposition, none
of which shaU prevaU against the pious, and those for whom Christ
was deUvered up to death. Those who oppose themselves to, and
are the adversaries of the pious, oppose themselves in three ways,
either by accusing, condemning, or executing. The first species
and part of this opposition, therefore, is, ' accusation,' and is con
tained in verse 33 ; the second, ascending by auxesis,* or by a
climax, is ' condemnation,' in verse 34 ; the third is the ' execu
tion' of the other tyro, both accusation and condemnation, and
consists in our separation from the love of Christ, being contained
in the 35th and following verses. Each of these parts is embel
lished by anacoenosis. The interrogation of the first anacoenosis
is, " Who shaU bring charges against God's elect ?" The hypo
phora of this interrogation, which is omitted, or, as we said, [of ,
the last example of this figure],, implied in the question itself, is
this, ' that no one shaU bring charges against God's elect,' the
import of which, in Uke manner, is not that there is no accuser of
the brethren, or of beUevers, — for the devil\ is so named from this
very effect, and is denominated " the accuser of the brethren," in
Eev. xii. 10, — but the meaning is, ' that although there be many
who accuse God's elect, yet the accusation of none, whether angels
or wicked men, shaU prevaU against the elect.' " It is God that
justifieth." This is the proof of the foregoing reply, ' that no ac
cusation shaU prevail against the elect,' taken from the contrary;
viz., ' the justification of God,' and runs thus : —
' No accusation of any one bringing charges against those whom
God justifies, shall prevaU ;
' But God justifies the elect :
' Therefore no accusation shaU prevail against the elect.'
34. " Who is he that condemneth ?" This is the second part of
the conclusion, and the second species of opposition, embellished
in Uke manner by anacoenosis, and the answer to which is also
* Amplification. -f Greek, o'l&fakos, from &«/3«;u«, ' to accuse.'
k2

148 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
implied in the interrogation, viz., ' No one shall condemn the elect
of God,' or, ' there is therefore no condemnation to me, nor to any^
one who, being in Christ with me through faith, is certain of his
election ;' and in this one part of the conclusion, the genus itself
of the general syllogism,* viz., ' that there is no one against me
who am in Christ, and engrafted into Him through faith' — -is indi
cated by synecdoche. " It is Christ that died; yea, more, who is
also risen again, who is even at the right hand of God." The
arguments for the reply are two. Of these, the first is taken from
the adjunct of the ' humUiation' and ' glory' of Jesus Christ, of
which glory two parts are here enumerated : ' his glorious resur
rection,' and ' his glorious sitting at the right hand of God.' The
argument therefore runs thus : —
' Christ died for the elect'— this is his humiliation — ' to make
an end of their sins, and was glorified for their justification ;' for
he rose again, and sat down at the right hand of God :
' Therefore no one shall be able to condemn the elect,' or,"
' there is no condemnation to the elect ;'
So that those of us who, through faith on Jesus Christ, are cer
tain of the effect of our election, are also, each of us, certain of
future salvation, and that there is to us no condemnation. " Who
also intercedeth for us." The highest step in this climax, and the
second argument, from the effect of Christ dead and glorified, is
' his continual intercession, in heaven, with God for us, by the
virtue of his own merits, as our only advocate ;' for we are not to
suppose that Christ stUl acts as a suppliant with the Father, as in
the days of his flesh, since he is now glorified, and, as the apostle
here testifies, sits at the Father's right hand ; but he now inter
cedes for us, and acts as our advocate, by the perpetual display, in
God's sight, of his own satisfaction, which is ever new, and ever
amply pleads for all the sins of all who are covered with that satis
faction, even with the righteousness of Him who died and rose
again. The apostle therefore thus reasons : —
* See on verses 1. and 31.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 149
' No one shall be able to condemn those for whom Christ inter
cedes and acts as advocate in heaven with the Father ;
' But Christ intercedes and acts as advocate, in heaven with the
Father, for us who are elect, and for each of us :
' Therefore no one shall be able to condemn us who are elect.*
35, " Who shaU separate us from the love of Christ ?" The
third part of the conclusion is in like manner amplified by ana
coenosis, the interrogation of which, contained in verses 35, 36, is
twofold. The first interrogation is generic and general, concerning
every adversary ' Who shaU separate us from the love of Christ ?'
By " love," I understand here, primarily and chiefly, ' that where
with Christ holds us dear ;' secondarily, and by consequence, also
' that wherewith we love Christ our Saviour ;' for although hypo
crites, and those who pretend to the love of Christ, are discovered
in their own time, and separated from the love of Christ, — that is,
are made manifest that they do npt love Christ, — and although
the elect themselves have their faUs, by which, for a season, they
stumble against that love, yet, as by the intercession of Jesus
Christ their faith fails not, (as we read of Peter,) so neither does
the love and affection wherewith they love Christ. The import
of this interrogation, therefore, is, ' Who shaU be able to sever us
from Jesus Christ ? who shall be able to effect either that he
himself should not love the elect, or that those who have been re
deemed by him should not love him in return, from a powerful
sense in themselves of his love ?' " Shall tribulation, or distress,
or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword ?" This
is the second and particular interrogation relating to those things
which, in particular, oppose themselves to the elect, and threaten
to separate them from the love of Christ ; these are the manifold
¦afflictions and evils of this life, of which seven species are here
enumerated. 36. " (As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day
long; we are accounted, as sheep for the slaughter)." We have,

150 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
in these words, the reason why, to the general interrogation, lie
has added a particular one concerning the evils of Ufe, which is
taken from the adjunct of our condition in the present Ufe, viz.,
* that we are subject to aU these evils ;' as if he had spoken or rea
soned thus : —
' In the present life we are subject to tribulation, distress, per
secution, and the other evils enumerated ;
' And therefore I have proposed the question — Whether tribu
lation, distress, persecution, or the other evUs enumerated, ahaU
be able to aeparate us from that love ?'
The apostle proves the antecedent in this parenthesis by the
testimony ofthe Prophet, out of Psalms xliv. 22.
37. " Nay in aU these things we are more than conquerors."
This is the hypophora, or subjoined reply, which, luce the interro
gation itself, is also twofold : one, in which he replies to the gene
ral question, ' Who shall separate us from the love of Christ ?'
another, in which he replies to the question concerning the evils
in particular, ' Shall tribulation, &c. separate us from the love of
Christ ?' but, by hysterosis, the general reply is given after the
particular. In this and the preceding verse, the apostle repUes to
the particular question by a tacit contrast : — ' It is true these things
try to separate us from Christ, but in every such trial we come off
conquerors.' The latter member of the contrast is iUustrated in
two ways. First he iUustrates it by a comparison of majority : — ¦
' We come off, not only conquerors, but more than conquerors ;'
which the apostle asserts on account of the increase within us,
from our afflictions, both of a most delightful sense of the love
wherewith Christ loves us, and of the love wherewith we ourselves
love Him : so that the meaning is — ' The afflictions and evUs of
this Ufe not only do not separate us from Jesus Christ, but unite
us more closely, every day, in mutual love, and daUy work an in
crease both of a most delightful sense of his love toward us, and
of the love therefrom resulting, wherewith we love him in return.'
" Through him that loved us." Secondly, he iUustrates the reply

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 151
and latter member of the contrast by the efficient cause of our vic
tory in every evil and affliction ; for although we are united with
Christ in mutual love more closely every day, by our afflictions,
yet it is not our afflictions which work that increase, but it is
Christ that loves us, who, by his Spirit, both works in us a aense
of his love towards us, and therefrom effects that we should love
him, by sanctifying our afflictions for this end : otherwise, the na
ture of these is, to separate the natural man * from God, as the
Prophet teaches us in Ps. lxxUi. 21, 22, by his experience of the
remains of the flesh within him.
38. " For I am persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels,
nor men, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor
things to come,"
39. " Nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, shaU
be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Jesus
Christ our Lord."
This is the second and general reply answering to the general
interrogation in v. 35 — •' who shaU separate us from the love of
Christ ?' To that question an answer is here returned, and the sub
stance of it is — ' no created thing shaU separate us from the love
of God in Christ.' In these two verses the reply is first proved, and
then variously ampUfied. The argument whereby it is proved is
taken from the adjunct of the persuasion of the apostle—' I am
persuaded that no created thing shaU separate us from the love
of God ; and the apostle here states this persuasion, not as his own
and peculiar to himself, but as an example to others, and as that
in which each professor of the faith, provided he be a genuine pro
fessor, ought, as the apostle here intimates, to imitate him ; so that
the meaning is — ' I am persuaded concerning myself, and after my
example, aU who with me are genuine believers ought to be per
suaded, each concerning himself, that no created thing shaU sepa-
* ivg-ixov 'av6nu<xon.

152 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
rate us from the love of God.' By this the apostle would teach
us, that that is not Christian faith which goes no farther than com
mon knowledge, but that which individually applies the grace
known in common, and embraces it with the fuU persuasion.
(V?^gopog«!f) ofthe apostle. Thus far the proof; next comes the
amplification of the reply, which consists of three parts ; for he
first illustrates created things, concerning which he denies that
they shaU separate us from the love of God ; secondly, he iUus
trates the negation of the separation ; and, thirdly, the love from
which he denies that creatures shaU separate us. As regards the
first, he amplifies created things by an induction of general and
things directly opposed to each other, such as are; either 'death,'
and those evUs which threaten death,' or ' life and those blessings '
which are subservient to life ;' then, ' things present,' or ' things
to come ;' thirdly, ' things high,' or ' things deep ;' in fine, he enu
merates, as the leaders of aU these hosts of foes and things ad
verse to us — ' the fallen angels with their principaUty and power*
over " the darkness of this world," or, as he himself interprets
the expression, ' the children of disobedience and unbelief.' Against
aU these created things and genera of created things, the apostle
glories that they shaU not separate him from Jesus Christ ; and
teaches that those who are genuine beUevers should each copy him
in this glorying. The second amplification is, that of the negation
of the separation, which is amplified by a comparison of minority :
' not only shall created things not separate us, but they shaU not
even be able to separate us from the love of God.' The last illus
tration is that of the love itself, from which the apostle denies that
he can be separated by the attempts or power of any created thing ;
and he iUustrates it by its subject, to wit — ' Jesus Christ,' in whom
God holds us dear, and in whom alone any one of men can love
God.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 153

CHAPTEE IX.
Next comes the destructive reasoning and refutation of those
arguing for the people of the law : For as the former destructive
reasoning, from the 20th ver. of chap. v. to chap, viii., ¦ was a refu
tation of those that argued for the law against faith ; so is the pre
sent destructive reasoning a refutation of those arguing for the
people of the law against grace, wherein the apostle obviates the
offence ofthe gospel arising from the opposition ofthe Jews, who
were the people of God and the visible Church. The following,
therefore, seems to be the form which the objection would take :
' If this, which you announce, were the way of salvation, and
there were no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, then
the Church 0f God, which is the nation of the Jews, would have
embraced this way.' This proposition, the opponents seem to have
founded upon the privUeges of that people, enumerated in verses 4
and 5 following, but especially upon the last-mentioned preroga
tive, whereby Christ is said to have descended from the Jews ;
fbr how should others not reject that Saviour whom ' his own do
not receive ?' So PUate reasoned, John xvUi. 35 ; and so the Gen
tUes, who opposed the gospel, seem here to object to Paul, sub
joining for the assumption : —
' But the nation of the Jews reject this way ;
' Therefore this is not the true way of salvation, nor is there free
dom from condemnation through Christ.'
Or, if you prefer it, the objection may be thus deduced, enthy-
mematically : —
' The J ews, who are the people of God, and the visible Church for
whom the law was ordained, to whom the promises were given, who
are themselves descended from the fathers, and from whom Christ
descended — reject this way of salvation' — as the unbelieving Jews
at Eome afterwards openly objected, (Acts xxviii. 22 :)
' Therefore this way of salvation whioh you announce is not the
true way, nor are those who are in Christ Jesus free from condem
nation.'

154 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
To this objection and offence arising from the opposition of the
Jews, the apostle repUes in these three chapters, ix. x. xi ; and his
reply consists of two parts : for first of all he admits the antece
dent of the enthymeme or assumption of the syllogism, viz. — ' that
the Jews speak against the gospel, and by speaking against it are
the Occasion of offence to the GentUes ;' secondly, he denies the
consequence of the enthymeme, or hypothetical proposition of the
syllogism, namely, — ' that on that account, or because of the
offence of which the Jews are the occasion, the way of salvation
which he had announced is not the true way, or that those who
are engrafted in Christ through faith are not free from condemna
tion.' The first part of the reply, or the granting of the antece
dent, is given in the first five verses ; after which he prosecutes
the second part, viz. — ' that the offence occasioned , by the apos
tate Jews detracts nothing from his gospel.' The apostle does.
not expressly state the first part of his reply, or his confession
concerning the opposition of the Jews, in these first five verses,
but only intimates it by its effect ; which effect of the apostacy of
the Jews who rejected the gospel is the adjunct of the apostle's
grief, or his great sorrow and continual anguish of mind, as he
himself speaks, on account of that apostacy of his people, and their
rejection, of the truth as it is in Christ ; for in this way he both
convicts them of speaking against it, and in the meantime avoids
offending those who thus contradicted, by ingratiating, himself
with them through a display of his grief on. account of their
wickedness. This grief and continual anguish of his he proves -
by two arguments.
1. " I say the truth by Christ ; I lie not." The first argument
of the proof is taken from a twofold testimony. The one is that
of Christ set forth by contraries, — ' I say the truth ; I Ue not ;
Christ is my witness that I have great sorrow on account of the
Jews :' this first testimony, therefore, is equivalent to an oath ;
for to swear is nothing else than to call God to witness that we
speak the truth. " My conscience also bearing me witness."

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 155
The second testimony whereby he proves this, viz. — ' that he is
grieved on account of the Jews who opposed themselves to Christ,
is that of his own conscience. " By the Holy Spirit." Inasmuch
as this latter testimony, namely, that of his own conscience, is
the very point to be determined, and equally obscure with the
conclusion itself, he establishes it by a second oath, and caUs the
indweUing spirit of God to be a witness to his conscience ; for
when the conscience is said to " bear witness in" or " by the Holy
Spirit," the meaning is — ' that the Holy Spirit is a witness to us
that we do not Ue when we adduce the testimony of our own con
science ;' unless you would rather say that the apostle iUustrates
the testimony of his conscience by the efficient cause, both of the
testimony itself and of the grief concerning which conscience bears
witness, in which case the sense wUl be : — ' Conscience is my
witness that I grieve exceedingly on account of the apostate
Jews ; and that which produces within me this grief and the tes
timony of conscience concerning it is not the flesh, but the Spirit
of God dwelling in me.'
2. " That I have great sorrow and continual anguish in my
heart." The consequent of the enthymeme, or his grief, deduced
from the twofold testimony already mentioned, is here amplified
by its subject, — ' it is not in the countenance and external, but
internal, and in the heart.' By this the apostle would indicate
both the sincerity and vehemence of his grief; for grief, which
has its seat in the heart, is both more vehement and always sin
cere, whUst, on the contrary, that which Ues no deeper than the
countenance is nothing better than a pretence.
3. " I could wisli that I myself were anathema from Christ."
The second argument by which he proves the anguish of his heart
on account of the apoatacy of Israel is taken from the adjunct of
his wish or desire, whereby, like Moses under the law, (Exod.
xxxu. 32,) so he himself under the gospel, with holy zeal, prefers
his brethren, or rather the glory of God in the salvation of his

156 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
brethren to himself, so that he wished to become anathema, if by
that means they might be gained over to Christ. The word
" anathema" properly signifies ' a thing laid up, or set apart and
separated ;' and is used in the Word of God both in a good and in
a bad sense. Thus in Lev. xxvii. 28, " every devoted thing"
(Din) is said to be "holy to Jehovah :" and the same thing is
frequently to be met with in other places, as in Numb, xviii. 14,
where the food of the priests, of which it was not lawful for the
unclean to eat, and which was consecrated to Jehovah, is called
" a devoted thing" (avadtpa) ; and in Josh. vi. 20 [17], where the
same epithet is applied to the city Jericho, which was whoUy se
parated to Jehovah from the people, either to be burnt with fire
or to serve Jehovah's uses ; so in Judges xiii. 5, Sampson is
spoken of as " separated (TO) unto God." But we have a most
manifest example of a different acceptation of the term in Josh.
vi. 21, according to the division of TremeUius,* where Joshua
says to the, people, — " keep yourselves from the anathema, lest ye
make yourselves anathema." The people of Israel were sacred to
God and separated from the Gentiles ; and the city Jericho having
been already consecrated to God becomes anathema, and is sepa
rated from the use of the people of Israel ; the people, therefore,
are commanded to beware of every thing in that city, lest if any
one should touch that which was " anathema," ' a thing separated
to Jehovah,' he should render himself with the army of Israel
" anathema" — ' a thing separated,' not to God, but ' from God.'
There is, therefore, an anathema ' to God,' and an anathema 'from
God :' a Nazarite, or one who is consecrated to God, is — avart-
6'i^ivog, ' separated to God ;' and one who is accursed from God
is caUed — uvulkpa, ' separated from God.' The apostle, there
fore, to avoid this ambiguity of the term, says not merely — " I
could wish that I were anathema," but — " I could wish that I
were anathema from Christ :" f this he illustrates from its end, by
adding — " for my brethren," and reasons thus : —
' I could wish that I were anathema from Christ for my breth-
'* V. 18. Eng. vers. t 'a»« Xprnu.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 157
ren,' that is, ' for their restoration to salvation and Christ, from
opposing themselves to the gospel by speaking against it.
' Therefore I have very great sorrow because of that opposition,
whereby they both perish themselves, and are the occasion of
offence to the Gentiles that they should not believe the truth.'
The antecedent is given in the text, amplified by a definition of
those brethren for whom he wishes to become anathema, who are
here described by three adjuncts. For first of all these brethren
are the " relatives" of Paul, and this relationship is illustrated by
its subject-matter : — they are his " relatives," not according to the
spirit, as Timothy and Titus are denominated his " sons ;" for they
would not in that case have furnished matter for grief, but they
are his relatives " apcording to the flesh ;" where by " flesh" I
understand not ' corruption,' as after previously in this epistle,
but ' stock and race,' or ' descent from the same fathers in the
flesh.' From this the apostle leaves us to learn, that although
those who are partakers of salvation in Christ should sorrow for
aU who are hastening to destruction, yet blood-relationship should
increase that sorrow the more if those who are so related to us
rejeet the truth and the salvation which is in Christ.
4. " Who are IsraeUtes." This is the second part of the de
scription of the brethren of Paul, taken from the adjunct of their
designation, which has its origin in the former adjunct, viz. —
' their relationship to him according to the flesh :' — ' I could wish,'
says the apostle, ' to become anathema for my brethren ; and by
my brethren I mean those who, on account of their relationship to
me, according to the flesh, are denominated IsraeUtes, from our
common parent, Jacob or Israel.' " Whose is the adoption, and
the glory, and the covenants, and the constitution of the law, and
the service, and the promises.
5. " Whose are the fathers,, and from whom, as regard the flesh,
is Christ, who is above all, God to be blessed for ever, Amen."
The third part of the description of the brethren of Paul is taken

158 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
from the adjunct of the various prerogatives of the Israelitish
people, by which they were hitherto distinguished above aU the
Gentiles, and on account of which especiaUy the apostle has ex
pressed such a wish ; because his brethren by their abuse of them,
and especially by their rejection of Christ, not only deprived
themselves of the advantages of so great prerogatives, but were
besides a greater stumbUng-block to others in proportion to the
greatness of the privileges which they formerly enjoyed ; for when
apostates have been previously enriched with great gifts and pre
rogatives they occasion great offence, and are a source of great
sorrow to the godly. This the apostle here teaches, both on ac
count of the abuse of the gifts, and because the offence given to
the ungodly was increased by the excellence of the gifts. Of these
prerogatives heretofore peculiar to the Israelites, six are here enu
merated by the apostle. The first is " adoption ;" by which I
understand — ' the election of this people before aU the nations to
be the people of God,' (Deut. x. 15,) and in reference to which,
God caUs the people of Israel his " first-born," (Exod. iv. 22, 23.)
The second prerogative is here styled " the glory ;" under which
title I understand — ' the ark of the covenant,' which in 1 Sam. iv.
22, is caUed " the glory," because it was the visible token of the
presence of God among that people, whereby they were a glorious
people, and excelled every other people on the earth. The third
prerogative is — :' the giving of a threefold law, the moral, the judi
cial, and the ceremonial.' The first of these, or ' the moral law,' the
apostle here denominates — " the covenants," because it contains the
condition ofthe covenant of works, (Gal. iii. 12 ;) and he says, "cove
nants" in the plural, not ' covenant,' because the violation of any
one precept is a violation of the whole condition, (James ii. 10,)
just as if the several precepts of the moral law were so many cove-.
nants or conditions of the covenant of works, all of which, if any
one did not fully perform, he could look for nothing from that cove
nant but the ban and curse ofthe law — " cursed is every one who
hath not continued in all things which are written in the book of
the law to do them," (Gal. iii. 10.) ' The judicial law' is here

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 159
styled-1-" the constitution of the ]&vr"(vo(M>(k<ria) because through
it the IsraeUtish state was constituted by God as its king. The
third or 'ceremonial laV is caUed "the service," (\arptia) or
'ministry,' because in its observance and practice, a great part, not
to say the whole, of the external and typical ministry carried on
among that people consisted. The fourth prerogative of Israel ia
— " the promises," which that people alone of aU the nations pos
sessed, (Eph. u. 12 ;) under the name of which promises, I un
derstand — ' the word of faith and of the covenant of grace,' which
having been promised to Israel " in divers manners," (Heb. i. 1,)
was at length fuUy made manifest in the gospel. The fifth prero
gative is that they were descended from those fathers — -Abraham,
Isaac and Jacob — who were beloved of God, and with whom he
entered into covenant, (Deut. x. 15.) The last and most distin
guished prerogative of this people is — ' that from them was Christ ;"
and this prerogative is amplified by an explanation both of Christ,
and of his descent from Israel. By hysterosis, his descent is first
of aU explained by its subject which is his " flesh," or ' human
nature ;' so that Christ was descended from Israel, not as regarded
his whole person, as these opponents, knowing nothing of his divine
nature, imagined, but in part only, and as regarded his other nature.
The second part of the illustration, or the description of Christ him
self, is taken, first of all, from that nature of his of which the un
believing were ignorant : — he is the one " God," and the same God
with his Father and the Holy Spirit ; secondly, from his glory,
which is explained from the less, by a comparison with that of crea
tures — he is " to be blessed above all ;" thirdly, from the eternity
both of himself and of his glory " for ever," and lastly, from an ex
pression of approbation or a confession of faith on him, which is
here indicated by the particle " Amen."
With this description of Jesus Christ at the close of the 5th
verse, commences the second part of the apostle's reply to the
leading objection, which has been stated under verse 1. The
apostle, therefore, replies in the second place, to that objection, by
denying the consequence of the enthymeme, or proposition of the

160 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
hypothetical syUogism, viz., that the way of righteousness and life
through faith on Jesus Christ which he has announced to them;
should not be rejected by the Gentiles as not the true way, be
cause the Jews reject it, and everywhere speak against Christ.
The negation itself of the consequence is indeed suppressed to
avoid offending the Jews, with that prudence which we have al
ready seen manifested by the apostle in the first part of his reply ;
but four reasons for the negation are adduced by the apostle. Of
these the first is here given at the close of ver. 5 ; the second in
the 6th and succeeding verses, as far as ver. 24 ; the third occupies
the remainder of this chapter; the fourth and last is contained in
the two foUowing chapters, x. xi. The words in which the first
reason of the negation of the consequence are expressed are these
— " from whom, as regards the flesh, is Christ, who is above all,
God to be blessed for ever, Amen ;" whence the apostle thus rea
sons : —
' Jesus Christ, of whom ye say that he was descended from the
Jews, and who is from the Jews according to the flesh, through
whom I announce righteousness and life, is God to be blessed
above all for ever ; to which the elect of God say Amen :
'Therefore, although the Jews reject this way of salvation, it
does not follow that it ought to be rejected as not the true way,
but, on the contrary, as I announce, that there is no condemnation
to those who are in Christ.'
My reason for taking this view of the passage is the uniform
practice of the apostle, who never brings forward descriptions of
Christ unless such as are exceedingly apposite and subservient to
his present purpose : of this we had an example above, in the 25th
ver. of chap, iv., where, in his discussion concerning righteousness
through faith, he in like manner presented us with an apodictic
argument, when defining Christ from his death and glory, or glo
rious resurrection ; so here the apostle thus reasons, in full syUo
gism, if you choose : —
' If Jesus Christ, whom the Jews reject, be " God to be blessed
above aU for ever," and if by believing on him the elect are saved,

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 161
then is faith on him, and consequently himself apprehended by
faith, the true way of righteousness and salvation, in spite of his
rejection by the Jews ;
'But the former is true :
' Therefore, so is also the latter.'
The proposition is self-evident, and such as cannot be contra
dicted, even the Jews themselves being judges, for they crucified
the Lord of glory, because he said that he was the Son of God
(John xix. 7) ; by which deed, although most criminal, they yet
shewed that they would have embraced him themselves, if they
had beUeved his testimony and what the apostle here testifies con
cerning him, viz. — that he is the only-begotten Son of God, and,
consequently, " God to be blessed above aU for ever." The propo
sition, therefore, being omitted as obvious, the assumption is here
given by the apostle at the close of the 5th verse ; whence foUows
the conclusion, which is the second part of the apostle's reply, viz.
— 'that Christ apprehended by faith is righteousness and Ufe to
those who beUeve on him, notwithstanding the rejection of this
way of life by the Jews.'
6. " It is impossible, however, that the word of God hath faUed."
He proceeds now to the second reason for the negation of the con
sequence, which is to the foUowing effect : —
' The true Israelites, those, namely, to whom, according to the
purpose of God, the internal grace of adoption, &c, belong, do
not reject this way of salvation through Jesus Christ :
' Therefore, although those IsraeUtes who are only Israelites ex
ternaUy, reject the salvation which I have announced through
faith in Christ, yet that salvation should not be rejected, nor ought
their rejection of it to be an occasion of offence to any one.'
The antecedent, which ia itself omitted, is thus proved from the
adjunct of the " immutabUity," as the apostle calls it, in Heb. vi.
18, of the word of God :—
* The word of God has not failed :
' Therefore those who are true IsraeUtes, or those to whom ths
L

162 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
promises, with the other prerogatives which we have enumerated};
have been effectually given, do not reject the salvation through
Jesus Christ long before promised, and now fully made manifest.'
The antecedent is given in the commencement of this 6th verse,
amplified by a comparison of minority : — ' the word of God not
only has not faUed, but it cannot be that it has faUed.' The con
sequent is omitted, but, being sufficiently obvious from the ante
cedent, gives rise to three prolepses. " For they are not all Israel
that are of Israel, (as their father)." This is the first prolepsis
and prevention of objection : — ' According to your opinion, there
fore,' the adversaries might object, 'all IsraeUtes are not true
Israelites ; but some are IsraeUtes in truth, others in name only :'
this the opponents assume to be absurd, and consequently reject,
as good for nothing, the foregoing reply of the apostle, founded
upon a distinction between different descriptions of IsraeUtes.
The apostle replies to the objection by denying the assumption}
and maintaining that it is not only not absurd or paradoxical, but,
on the contrary, most certain that all " who are of Israel" as their
father, that is, ' who are descended from Israel according to the
flesh,' are not " Israel," or ' that people of God to whom the en
joyment of the promises belongs.' This reply is contained in the
remainder of the verse ; and although it is only a repetition of
what the apostle had more expUcitly stated concerning the Jews
in the 28th and 29th verses of chap, u., yet inasmuch as it appears
paradoxical and absurd to these opponents, arguing for the people
of the law, that there should be any one " of Israel" who is not
also Israel in truth, he enlarges upon the proof of this reply.
7. "Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they
(therefore) aU children; but in Isaac shall thy seed be called." ,
The argument by which he proves it is taken from an induction of
similar examples, of which there are two. The first is that of the
house of Abraham, from which the apostle reasons, as is usually
done, and ought always to be done in the case of extended
examples, by a threefold process. For, first of all, he deduces

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 163
from the example a general proposition, which is, and is commonly
caUed the proposition of the syUogism ofthe example, the argument
being from species to genus ; proceeding next from this general
proposition, he deduces therefrom, in fuU* syllogism, a conclusion
simUar to the third, or another particular case, the argument being
from genus to species ; and thirdly, proceeding from first to last,
and arguing from the Uke, he infers the one particular case from
the other, e.g. :
' AU those who are " the seed of Abraham," that is, who are
begotten of Abraham according to the flesh, are not also " chUdren,"
or those to whom the covenant made by God with Abraham be
longs; but "in Isaac," says the Lord to Abraham, Gen. xxi. 12,
" shaU thy seed be caUed :"
' Therefore those who are the chUdren of the flesh are not the
chUdren of God, but the children of the promise are reckoned for
the seed.'
The antecedent, set forth under a contrast, is given in thia 7th
verse. 8. " That is, those who are the chUdren of the flesh are not the
children of God, but the chUdren of the promise are reckoned for
the seed." This is the consequent of the enthymeme and proposi
tion of the syUogism of the example, also set forth under a contrast.
By " the children of the flesh " here I understand, — ' those who,'
as it is expressed in John i. 13, " are born of flesh and blood," that
is, ' are born by the power of nature,' as was Ishmael from Hagar
the bondmaid; by "the children of the promise" again, I under
stand — ' those who,' in the language of the passage referred to,
" are born of God," or ' by the power of the promise itself,' as was
Isaac from Sarah, when by nature she was now unfit for conceiv
ing ; and by " the children of God," I consider are meant those
whom the apostle has before affirmed to be Israel in truth, ' those,'
namely, ' to whom adoption, with the other privileges enumerated,
have been given, not by outward ministration merely, but accord
ing to inward grace.' l2

164 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
9. " For this is the word of promise, at this (very) time wiU I
come, and Sarah shaU have a son." He next proves the conse
quence of the foregoing enthymeme, by adducing, from Gen.
xviii. 10, the promise according to which Isaac was born a chUd of
promise, reasoning thus :
' Isaac is a child of promise, as appears from the promise con
cerning his approaching birth,— "At this (very) time wUl I come,
and Sarah shaU have a son :"
' Therefore, if all who are the seed of Abraham are not also
children, but the seed of Abraham is called in Isaac, it foUows
that the chUdren of the flesh are not the children of God, but that
the children of the promise are reckoned for the seed ;'
To this, which is the general proposition, the apostle might have
subjoined the assumption :
' But all who are of Israel, as their father, are not the
children of the promise,' as is plain from the fact of their re
jecting the promise and cleaving to the law or carnal command
ment :
Whence he deduces his reply, as a conclusion similar to the
third, viz. : — ' that all who are of Israel, as their father, are not also
the true Israel, and reckoned for the seed;'
Hence, from first to last, which is the third process in the argu
ment from the example : — ' All who are of Abraham according to
the flesh are not reckoned for the seed, but in Isaac only his seed
is called :
' Therefore neither are all who are of Israel, Israel in truth.'
The assumption of the second syllogism in this threefold process
alone is wanting, being sufficiently obvious, as we have already,
observed, from the apostasy of Israel, and their rejection of the
promise, of which the opponents themselves were aware.
10. "And not only. (he), but also Eebecca, when she had con
ceived by one, even by our father Isaac, (experienced this)." This
is the second example in which the apostle is more concise than in
the former ; for, omitting both of these preliminary processes, as

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 165
weU that from species to genus, as that which proceeds from genus
to species, he thus reasons, as from a parallel case : —
' Both the sons of Isaac and Eebecca were not accounted as the
seed, but only Jacob, who was the younger ;
' Therefore, in like manner, aU who are descended from Jacob
or Israel, according to the flesh, are not also Israel in truth.'
The antecedent is set forth in this 10th verse, ampUfied by com
parisons both of majority and of dissimilarity. The comparison of
majority is, 'that not only Abraham, but also Eebecca, experi
enced this, viz., that all who are seed are not also children.' The
comparison of dissimUarity is, that Abraham from different wives
begot different seed — Ishmael, the child of the flesh, from Hagar
the bondmaid, and Isaac, the child of the promise, from Sarah the
free woman, (Gal. iv.) ; but the same mother, Eebecca, by one
and the same father, Isaac, and at the same conception, conceived
twins, and brought forth different nations — the one, the children
of the promise, and the other the children of the flesh, (Gen. xxv.
23.) 11. " For (the children) being not yet born, and having done
nothing either good or bad, that the purpose of God, according to
(his own) election, might abide firm, not from works, but from him
that caUeth,
12. " It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger."
The antecedent, which was set forth in the verse immediately pre
ceding, is here established by a twofold testimony. The first tes
timony is that of God by Moses, cited from Gen. xxv. 23 : —
" The elder shaU serve the younger :"
' Therefore, aU who are the seed of Isaac and Eebecca are not
also children ; but the one is a chUd, and the other a servant.'
The antecedent is given in the 12th verse, being preceded, in
verse 11, by an amplification of itself, from the adjunct ofthe time
of the divine testimony, which is defined by its subject and dispa
rates, ' God bore this testimony concerning the seed of Isaac and

166 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
Eebecca, the chUdren being not yet born, and having done nothing
either good or bad.' This amplification is contained in the first
part of verse 11. In the remainder of the verse a reason for the
adjunct of the time is given, under the form of a contrast, from its
end, which is, ' that the purpose of God, according to election,
might abide firm, not from the works of the children themselves,
— for, as yetj they had done none, — but from God that calls ;' that
is, ' that the grace shown to Jacob, and hia adoption — ( which, by a
metonymy of the cause for the effect, is here called " the purpose
of God according to election,") when Esau was rejected and Jacob
obtained the blessing — having been foretold, might be seen to de
pend, not upon the works of Jacob, but upon the free and effectual
caUing of God, who, as he freely chose Jacob according to the be
nevolent affection (evdoxfu) of his own wiU, whUst, as yet, he was
doing nothing, — yea, was stUl unborn, — so, in like manner, freely,
called and blessed him, without either the merit or preparation of
works, when now born and applying himself to action ; so that the
preparation of the Papists, and merit of both kinds, whether seen
or foreseen, here falls to the ground.-
13. " According as it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau
have I hated." The second testimony is that of Malachi, ex
pounding Moses, whereby the same antecedent, and the diffe
rent condition of the seed of Eebecca, viz., Jacob and Esau, is
proved. 14. " What shaU we say, therefore ? Is there injustice with God ?"
This is the second prolepsis and prevention of objection on the
part of those who argue for the people of the law. Their objection,
in the present instance, is suggested by the proof of the last ex
ample, in which it has been said, ' that God neither confers grace,
nor rejects " from works," but that grace 18 from " the purpose of
God," according to his own election and calling, and altogether
independent of works ; so that grace makes a distinction between
Jacob and Esau, who are by nature equal, and equaUy undeserving,

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 167
being freely given to Jacob, but not likewise to Esau,' The ob
jection, therefore, runs thus : —
' He who gives unequal things to those who are equal is unjust ;
' But in your opinion,' the opponents might say, ' God gives
unequal things to thoae who are equal ; for he loves Jacob and
hates Esau, both being equal, and equally undeserving :
' What, therefore, shall we say ? Is there unrighteousness with
God ?' The conclusion alone is given in the text, in the com
mencement of verse 14. " Far from it." The apostle first of all
repUes to the conclusion, by expressing hia abhorrence of its im
pious blasphemy, at the close of the same 14th verse.
15. " For he saith to Moses, I wiU shew mercy to whom I shall
have shewn mercy, and I wUl have compassion on whom I shall
have had compassion." He next replies to the proposition — viz.,
' that speaking of God, he is unjust who gives unequal things
to those who are equal, bestows grace upon one, and rejects an
other from grace, both being equaUy undeserving' — by denying it ;
and the reason for the negation is this, ' that God is most free to
determine concerning aU his creatures according to his own will,
which, as it is most free, so it is most just, and, therefore, the rule
of aU justice.' This the apostle here proves by the testimony of
Moses and the Old Testament Scriptures, and that twofold. The
first is concerning grace conferred, in verses 15, 16 ; the second
concerning rejection to judgment, verse 17 ; whence, in verse 18,
he. concludes, that God is free to show mercy or to pardon, accord
ing to his own wUl, and is in both most just. As regards the first,
then, the testimony itself is adduced out of Exod. xxxiii. 19, from
which the apostle proves, that the source of grace conferred is the
wiU of God, which is most free, without respect to our works, and
this he does as foUows : —
' The Lord says to Moses — TOni " I wUl shew grace from mercy
to whom I shaU have shewn grace," that is, ' to whom I shall have
wUled to shew grace,' " and I will have compassion on whom I
shall have had compassion," that is, ¦ on whom I shall have willed

168 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
to have compassion :' ' Therefore to wiU is not of him that wiUeth^
nor to run of him that runneth, but both to wiU and to run are
from God that sheweth mercy.'
The antecedent is given in the 15th verse, which contams the
testimony of God, wherein the two foUowing properties ofthe be
nevolent affection (hvSoxiu) of the wUl of God are set before us :
the first is — ' to be merciful or mercifully affected towards the
wretched ;' the second is — ' from mercy to confer grace upon the
wretched as a remedy for their wretchedness, so that they may be
delivered out of it.' By hysterosis, the order of these is reversed
in the text : for )3n, which stands first, signifies—' to shew grace
from mercy,' and, consequently, is the effect of mercy, as we learn
from the expression, of such frequent recurrence in the Psalms —
TTffT1 ^an, " Be gracious unto me, O Jehovah :" while Dm, which
is put last, is the cause of the former, and means — ' to have com
passion,' or ' to be affected with the mercy of a mother towards
her wretched children.' So the apostle here renders the words of
Moses in the most correct manner, and by the use of the most ap
propriate terms : for eki&v in the Greek idiom is — ' to help or do
good to any one from mercy,' whence iX£7?jKi©a-ywj ' that which is
given to the wretched to reUeve their wretchedness;' while the
other term hixritp&v denotes — ' maternal affection,' and most cor
rectly conveys the force of the original.
16. " So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that
runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy." This is the consequent
of the enthymeme whereby it is concluded — that whatever mercy
or grace is bestowed upon us is of God alone, and in no degree
from ourselves.' All the grace given from mercy is here comprised
by the apostle under two heads, viz. ' to wUl ' and ' to run ;' or as
he speaks in Phil. ii. 13, " to wiU and to do." The conclusion, is
therefore expressed- in terms of the cause and its effects : ' God '
is the sole cause ; ' mercy,' then ' grace conferred from mercy as
a remedy for wretchedness,' are the two effects. The conclusion
is also illustrated by a contrast : — ' both the mercy, and the grace

X.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 169
thence bestowed upon us, are from God, and not from ourselves.'
And the grace itself is explained by a distribution of the whole
into its parts, which are — ' to wUl' and to perform ;' the whole, or
if you prefer it, the genus being — ' the grace of God who shews
mercy, conferred on us wretched,'
17. " For the Scripture saith unto Pharaoh, I have raised thee
up for this very purpose." This is the second testimony, whereby
the apostle proves, from the example of Pharaoh, that the rejection
of the ungodly is in Uke manner subject to the wUl and providence
of God as ita first cause, and that prior, as has been already said of
Esau, to aU the evU deeds of the reprobate. The chain of causes,
therefore, is this: — God, according to his most free and just will,
rejects ; the wicked man, being rejected, acts wickedly ; whence
foUows his most justly merited condemnation. " I have raised
thee up," the Lord says concerning Pharaoh, or ' caused thee to
stand ;' that is, ' I have both preserved thee from the beginning on
purpose for judgment, even from conception that thou mightest be
born, and with the same purpose I have, with much long-suffering,
endured thee stUl acting wickedly, after the many plagues which I
sent : so that, by this one word, it is indicated that Pharaoh was
both made and preserved by God, or according to the most free
wiU of God, as a vessel of wrath. Lest there shoidd appear to be
any injustice in this raising up of Pharaoh, and his preservation
even whUst acting wickedly, inasmuch as it is an effect of God and
proceeded from the wUl of God, this deed of God is Ulustrated
by its twofold end, each unexceptionably good. " That I may
shew my power in thee." The first end is — ' the display of the
power of God both to Pharaoh himself, who was ignorant of it
(Exod. v. 2), and to aU men everywhere, in most justly punish
ing him.' " And that my name may be declared throughout
the whole earth." The second end is — ' the praising of God
and glorifying of his name by aU the inhabitants of the earth,
in consequence of the display of his power in the case of
Pharaoh.'

170 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
18. " Therefore to whom he will he sheweth mercy, and whom
he wUl he hardeneth." This is the common conclusion, deduced
from both testimonies, in this way :—
God testifies to Moses — that he does not wUl to confer grace
upon all Israel, along with Moses himself, Exod. xxxui. 16,
compared with 19 ; for verse 19 contains the answer to the re
quest of Moses in verse 16), but on whom he shaU have
wUled ; and (in Exod. ix. 16) he testifies that Pharaoh has been
raised up by him that he may shew his own power in his punish
ment :
' Therefore to whom he will God shews mercy, and whom he
will he hardens.'
The apostle, therefore, here teaches us that the wiU of God in
itself (Eph. i. 5), and that most free, ia the most just cause and
source of predestination, and indeed both of the election of the
elect unto salvation, and of the rejection of the rejected to condem
nation. 19. " Thou wilt say therefore unto me, Why is he stiU angry ?"
This is the third prolepsis, and anticipation of an objection where
by the adversary perseveres in charging God with injustice, but
on a new ground, viz., because he is angry with, or condemns and
punishes those who are hardened. The objection runs thus : —
' If God hardens whom he wiU, it is unjust that he should be
angry with those who are hardened ;
' But the former is true,' the adversaries object, 'and so you
youraelf conclude :
' Therefore the latter is true also.'
This objection of the adversaries is therefore suggested by the
foregoing conclusion of the apostle, which they take for their as
sumption, " For who can resist his wUl ?" The assumption be
ing manifest, taken as it is out of the apostle's own mouth, the ad
versary proves the proposition of his objection by an argument
drawn from the omnipotence of the will of God, thus :  ' No man
can resist the wiU of God.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 171
' Therefore, if God hardens whom he wiU, he should not be angry
with those who are hardened.'
20. " Nay but, O man! Who art thou that repliest against God ?"
The apostle now proceeds to answer the objection. In this answer
he neither recals his former conclusion, viz., ' that God hardens
whom he wUl,' nor denies \he antecedent of the foregoing enthy
meme, viz., ' that no man can resist the wiU of God ;' and, conse
quently lays down as true these two propositions : first, — .' that
the hardening of the reprobate is according to the wiU of God ;'
and, secondly, — ' that those whom God shaU have wiUedto harden
shaU not be able to resist his will, nor to avoid hardening.' These
two positions having been laid down, he replies to the hypothe
tical proposition [ofthe syUogism], or consequent of the foregoing
enthymeme, not only by denying it as most false, but, besides, by
checking his blasphemous opponent for thus replying against God.
He therefore not only denies as most false, but condemns of blasr
phemy and replying against God, the proposition — ' that if God
hardens whom he wiU, he is unjustly angry with him who is har
dened ;' and proves both the falsehood and the blasphemy in suc
cession ; but, by hysterosis, first the blasphemy, and then the false
hood. " ShaU the thing fashioned say to him that fashioned it, why
hast thou made me thus ?" The argument by which he proves the
charge of blasphemy is taken from the like, or, if you please, from
the greater : —
' Even in human affairs, if the things fashioned shaU say to him
that fashioned it—' why have you formed me in this manner ?' it
wiU manifestly be guUty of replying and blasphemously opposing
itself to the wiU of him that fashioned it. ' But, O man ! whoever
you man be, you are fashioned by God, and are tbe work of his
hands ; he is your creator, and it is by him that you were formed ;
much more therefore do you reply against God, and by so reply
ing are a blasphemer, when you unjustly find fault with that, what
ever it may be, which clearly and manifestly appears to have been
done according to the wiU of God,'

172 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
The apostle, therefore, would here teach us two things : — first,
' that the wiU of God is the rule of aU justice ;' and, secondly, 'that
every creature ought to acquiesce in that will, so that the creature
should acknowledge as just whatever seems to be according to the
wiU of God, nor ask any further reason for it than that it has been
done according to that wiU.'
21. " Hath not the potter power over the clay, out of the same
lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour ?"
Having now shewn the blasphemy of this ' replying,' he goes on
to prove the falsehood also of the hypothetical proposition — ' that
if God hardens whom he will, he is unjustly angry with those who
are hardened ;' and the argument by which he proves it is taken
from the less : —
' The potter, a mere man, has justly power over the clay, out of
the same lump to make one vessel to honour and another to dis
honour, without any stain or charge of injustice.
' But we, the whole human race, are clay, and less than clay, in
the hand of God our creator ; since he created us out of nothing,
whUst the clay is something before it is formed by the potter :
' Much more, therefore, has God our creator power over us men,
out of the same human race, according to his own most free wiU,
to make one a vessel of wrath by hardening him, and another a
vessel of mercy by shewing him mercy : and both without being
at aU stained or charged with injustice.' The assumption is omit
ted by the apostle as obvious ; the proposition is given in this 21st
verse ; the conclusion ampUfied from the greater, is subjoined in
the two following verses, 22, 23 : —
22. " If indeed God, wiUing to shew his wrath, and to make
known his power, hath endured with much long suffering the
vessels of wrath framed for destruction." The ampUfication con
sists of two parts : the first, which is contained in this 22d verse,
respects the wicked and those who are hardened ; the second 
those to whom God shews mercy. The first is to this effect : 

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 173
' God, in order to make known his power — as has been previously
said in reference to Pharaoh — has endured, with much long suffer
ing, the vessels of wrath, that is, of dishonour, although framed for
destruction, and hardened according to the will of God ; and has
long deferred executing judgment upon them, even while acting
wickedly :
' Therefore, although he hardens whom he wiU, yet not only is
he not unjust in being angry with those who are hardened, but is
even merciful and long-suffering towards the wicked themselves,
in long bearing with their wickedness.'
The first amplification therefore is from the greater : — Not only
is God most just in being angry with those who are hardened,
whom nevertheless he hardens of his own will, but he is even merci
ful towards them ;' which he proves from the effect of the mercy
of God, viz. — ' that he long endures them while acting wickedly :'
God is merciful towards those whom he endures, while acting
wickedly, even in enduring them : for that forbearance is from
his mercy :
' But he endures the wicked while acting wickedly with much
long-suffering, and long,' says the apostle here, as our Lord also
had said before, (Matt. v. 45.)
This effect of the mercy of God, namely, — ' his forbearance to
wards the wicked, is amplified, first of all by the manner in which
it is effected — he has endured " with much long-suffering." Se
condly, it is amplified by its subject, which is designated by two
appeUations : for they are first called " vessels of wrath ;" and are
next said to be fitted or framed (xarrigrtaftim') for destruction,"
just as planks in a fabric are framed and mutually fitted to each
other : the former appeUation indicates that hatred which was tes
tified concerning Esau, (Mai. i. 3,) and which is common to aU
the ungodly, since they are all vessels of wrath, and such as God
hates, as we read concerning Esau in the passage referred to ; the
latter appellation indicates the predestination according to that
hatred, whereby, as vessels of wrath, they are destined for destruc
tion, to be effected by its own intermediate causes. The third par-

174 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
ticular by which this long-suffering of God is amplified, is its
final end — God endures the wicked with much long-suffering " to
make known his power :" for this end he raised up and long'
endured Pharaoh ; and for the same end he endures aU the ves
sels of wrath. The apostle, therefore, teaches us — not only that
God would be most just, although he should be angry with
the wicked, and inflict punishment upon them, while yet un
born, and before they had done any evU, as Esau is said to
/ have been then hated ; but besides, that he is now even long-
suffering and merciful towards them, inasmuch as he permits
them to be born, and long endures them whUe acting wickedly
after they are born.
23. " And that he might make known the riches of his glory
towards the vessels of mercy, which he prepared unto glory."
This is the second part of the conclusion with its amplification,
having respect, as has been noticed under the preceding verse, to
the elect, who are here described by three circumstances. First,
they are described by their adjunct — they are " vessels of mercy ;"
Secondly, by the effect of that mercy, which is — ' their prepara
tion before time (vgosroifjuuffis). Moreover, by " mercy," I un
derstand here — that ' love,' of which, in Mai. i. 2, God testifies
that Jacob, although equaUy wretched with his brother Esau, was
the object ; and that is just — ' the purpose * of God, or benevolent
affection (Ivhoxiu) of his wiU,' which belongs to aU the chUdren
of God in common with Jacob : by Tgoeroi[Juaffis again, or ' their
preparation from eternity,' I consider is meant — ' their predestina
tion according to that benevolent affection (evfoxia) of the will
of God.' The proximate end of this preparation, which ia the
third circumstance by which the elect are here described, is 
' their glory,' to be accomplished by its own intermediate causes ;
"which," aays the apostle, viz., 'the vessels of mercy,' "he be
fore prepared," for so the original word signifies, " unto glory."
Such is the description here given of the elect ; and to them this

EPISTLE OP PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 175
second amplification of the conclusion — taken from the final cause
for which God shews mercy to his own, and for which he before
prepared them to glory—has respect: this final cause is— 'the
making known Qyvugmg) of the riches of the glory of God from
mercy ;' which is the ultimate end to which the glory of the elect
is referred, that glory, namely, whereto they were before prepared
according to the purpose of God. From this, the apostle would
have us to observe that God is indeed long-suffering and merciful
to aU, even to those who are vessels of wrath ; but that towards
the elect, and those to whom he shews mercy, he is not only mer
ciful, but " rich in mercy :" whence, throughout the Scriptures,
we find the godly praying that God would be merciful to them,
" according to the multitude of his mercies."
24. " Whom he hath also caUed." Thus far we have had two
arguments in support of the apostle's second reply to that objec
tion, which is the first and leading objection in this second refuta
tion, as was formerly observed in our remarks on the conclusion
of ver. 5. We come now to the third argument for the same, to
which the apostle makes a transition in the commencement of this
verse by a prolepsis, wherein he anticipates an objection arising out
of the preceding amplification in ver. 23 ; in which it has been
said — that those towards whom God makes known the riches of
his glory from mercy, are " vessels of mercy," that is — were be
loved before they existed,' as Jacob was, ' and according to that
love, prepared or predestinated to glory before time :' since both
this love, and the predestination which is according to it, are
hidden and laid up in God, they afford occasion for objecting in
the foUowing way : — ,
' If salvation belong only to those who, according to mercy, have
been predestinated to glory and salvation, for the making known
(jyvaigisw) of the riches of the glory of God, no one can be certain
of his own salvation, and that he shall be a partaker of that glory,
since both this mercy and predestination, as has been said, are
hidden ;

176 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
' But the latter is absurd, viz : — that every one should be un
certain of his own salvation :
' Therefore, the opponents conclude, ' the former must be false,
viz : — that all who shaU be partakers of salvation have been pre
destinated according to mercy.'
To this objection the apostle repUea by denying the hypotheti
cal proposition. The reason for the negation is as foUows : —
' Since aU whom God, according to mercy, has predestinated to
glory, he also effectuaUy caUs in time (for this is the second part
of our preparation for glory, which was begun before time, and
necessarily foUows that preparation, (see chap. viii. 30), and since
this caUing is matter of consciousness to the called ; the chUdren of
God both can and ought therefrom to be certain, both of their
predestination which went before, and of the glory to which they
have been predestinated : —
' Therefore although salvation belongs to none, except those
who have been predestinated according to mercy, yet the apostle
would not have us commence the tracing of our future glory from
our predestination which is hidden in God, but to inquire both
into our salvation and our predestination as its source from our
CaUing, which is matter of consciousness ; just as the apostle Peter
(1st Epis. i, 10,) bids us make our caUing and election sure, from
the fruits of our calling and the exercises of a holy fife, as comingi
more within our knowledge than the calling itself.' *
" Namely us, not only from among the Jews, but also from
among the Gentiles." The apostle iUustrates the caUing of the
predestinated by its subject, amplified by a distribution, which is
set forth by a comparison of majority, thus : — ' we who believe on
Christ are the called of God' — this is the subject of the divine
will ; ' not only from among the Jews, but. also from among the .
Gentiles' — these, viz., the Jews and GentUes are the parts of the
subject set forth by a comparison of majority : and this, as we
have already noticed, is the third reason for the second reply of
the apostle to the leading objection in this refutation. The reason
is to the following effect : — ' The people of God are not, as you

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 177
suppose, those who are Israelites according to the flesh, but we
who believe on Christ and are the called of God, whether from
among the Jews or from among the Gentiles :
' Therefore,' the apostle might say to his opponents, ' although
Israel according to the flesh reject the salvation which I announce,
yet it does not foUow that it is not the true way of salvation, see
ing that the whole people of God, namely, aU the caUed from
among Jews and Gentiles, embrace it.'
25. " As he also saith in Hosea, I wUl call • that my people
which was not my people ; and her beloved, who was not beloved.
26. " And it shaU come to pass, that in the place where it had
been said unto them, Ye are not my people, there shaU they be
caUed the chUdren of the Uving God." He proves the antecedent
part by part, but by hysterosis ; for he proves, that first which
was last in the distribution, viz. — ' the calling of the Gentiles, and
that aU, even from among the Gentiles who believe on Christ, are
the caUed of God, or of the number of his people and true mem
bers of his Church. The argument by which it is estabUshed is
drawn from testimony, and that twofoldr both taken from the pro
phet Hosea, the one from chap. iU. 23 — " I wiU call that my
people which was not my people ; and her beloved, who was not
beloved :" the other from chap. i. 10 : — " And it shall come to
pass, that in the place where it had been said unto them, Ye are
not my people, there shaU they be caUed the children of the living
God." As it is aUowed by the common consent of all that both
these testimonies are to be accomplished in the reign of Christ,
and in the gathering again of the Church under him, so, according
to the interpretation of the apostle, here they are each to be taken
not only of the gathering again of the Israelites who were rejected
in the carrying away by Shalmaneser, but also of the GentUes who
were rejected at the buUding of Babel, remnants, through faith,
from among both of whom are, according to the prediction of the
;prophet, to be gathered again under the reign of Christ,
M

178. LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
27. " Moreover Isaiah crieth concerning Israel, although the
number of the chUdren of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a rem
nant shaU be saved.
28. " For he wiU finish and speed the matter with righteous
ness, since the Lord wUl speedily accomplish the matter upon the
land. 29. " And, as Isaiah has before said, unless the Lord of Hosts
had left us a seed we should have become as Sodom, and should
have been made like unto Gomorrha." He next proves the second
part of the antecedent, namely, — ' the rejection of the multitude
of the Jews ;' that is — ' that not aU who are of Israel, or the
body and multitude of the Jews and Israelitish people", are the
caUed of God, members of his Church and his people; but only
the few, arid the remnant of that people who.were beUevers, and
embraced the faith that is in Christ.' The argument by which
this is proved is, in Uke manner, drawh from a double testimony^
both taken from Isaiah ; the one from chap. x. 22, 23 ; the
other from chap, i. 9. According to the interpretation of the
apostle here, each of these testimonies is to be understood not
only of the rejection of the ten tribes in the days of Hezekiah,
but also of the multitude of the Jews at the coming of the Mes
siah. It is clear also from both, that not the body and multitude
of that people, but a remnant only, are ' the called and people of
God ; and that unless God had left this remnant from his own
mercy, and according to election, as the apostle speaks both here
and elsewhere, it would have been aU over with the whole of that
nation, and ' Israel,' says the prophet, ' would have become as
Sodom and Gomorrha.'
30. " What shaU we say therefore ? That the GentUes who were
not following after righteousness have attained to righteousness,
and that righteousness which is from faith." He now concludes
the antecedent of the foregoing enthymeme, viz. — ' that the called

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 179
of God are those who believe, not only from among the Jews, but
also from among the GentUes ; and the conclusion, like the proof,
consists of twQ parts. In the first he makes reference to the first
part of the proof, and from the testimonies cited out of Hosea,
infers — ' Therefore, the GentUes have apprehended righteousness.'
This conclusion the apostle presses by anacoenosis — ' what shaU we
say ?' He also amplifies it by two considerations. The first is from
the disparate of the GentUes obtaining righteousness : — ' the Gen
tiles who were not foUowing after righteousness have obtained it.'
The second consideration by which it is amplified is a definition
of the righteousness which the GentUes have obtained ; which the
apostle here defines by its genus, it is ' righteousness ;' and by its
instrumental cause, or, if you please — since here, as throughout
the writings of tbis apostle faith, by metonymy of the adjunct for
the subject, may be taken for ' Christ apprehended by faith' — by
its- instrumental cause and subject at the same time ; the right
eousness, therefore, which the GentUes have apprehended is—
' the righteousness of Jesus Christ whom they have apprehended
by faith.'
31. " But that Israel, who were foUowing after the law of right
eousness, have not reached the law of righteousness." This is
the second part of the conclusion concerning the rejection of the
multitude bf the Jews and IsraeUtish people — " Israel," that is
' the body or multitude of that people,' " have not reached the
law of righteousness ;" and it is amplified by a contrast — ' al
though they were foUowing after the law of righteousness, yet
have they not reached the law of righteousness.' By " the law of
righteousness" here I understand — ' the fulfilment of the law,' or
' that righteousness which the law demands ;' for he that fulfils
the law is said to " reach the law."
32. " Wherefore ? because not from faith, but as if from the
works of the law." The reason of the latter part of the conclusion,
and why Israel did not reach the Jaw of righteousness, is taken
M 2

180: LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
from the disparate of Israel, — " (Israel was) not (following after
righteousness) from faith ;" this is amplified by a contrast, — "but
from the works ofthe law ;" and the apostle adds,—" as if (*?> from
the works of the law," because, to those who had performed them
with a view to justification, they were not reaUy the works of the
law, but only the fruits of their own hypocrisy, as our Lord testi
fies in Mat. xxiii., when he accuses the Scribes and Pharisees, who
gloried in such works, of hypocrisy. For no works are works of
law, unless they are altogether conformable to the law ; and such,
according to the testimony of the prophet in Ps. cxlui., can be
found in no flesh, Christ excepted. As the Jews, however, had
sought after righteousness by these fruits of their own hypocrisy,
as if by the works of the law, and not from faith, they did not
reach the law of righteousness, or that righteousness which is ap
proved by the law. The apostle, therefore, would here teach us
three things : 1st, That there are no works of preparation, as the
Papists speak ; for the Gentiles apprehended righteousness whUe
they were not seeking after it ; 2d, That the merit of our own
works avaUs nothing for righteousness ; for while Israel were seek
ing after righteousness from works, they did not attain to it ; 3d,
That those who have apprehended Christ by faith, have in Christ
that righteousness which the law demands ; for Israel did not
reach the law of righteousness, because they were not following
after righteousness from faith, as the Gentiles who believed, nor
after that righteousness which is approved by the law, as the
apostle has above said. "For they stumbled at the stone of
stumbling." We have here the reason of the unbelief of the
Israelites from their effect, — ' they stumbled against Christ.' The
apostle, therefore, reasons thus : — ' Whosoever stumbles against
Christ cannot be seeking after righteousness from faith,' — for ' to
beUeve on Christ,' and 'to stumble against him,' are opposites;
' But the Israelites have stumbled :
'Therefore,' &c.
33. " Aa it is written, Behold I lay in Zion a stone of stumbUng.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 181
and a rock of offence." As, in the preceding verse, he caUed
Jesus Christ, against whom the IsraeUtes stumbled, a " stone of
stumbling ;" so, in. this verse, which is the last of the chapter, he
proves, by the testimony of the ancient Scriptures, that it was
predicted both that Christ would be a stone of stumbling, and that
the Israelites would stumble against him: — "Behold, I lay in
Zion," says the Lord concerning Christ, " a stone of stumbling
and a rock of offence :" ' see ! it is predicted that Christ is to be a
stone of stumbling, and that both to the Israelites and the Jews,
both because the prophet is speaking of them in Is. viii. 14, and
because in Is. xxviu. 16, it is said, that this stone of stumbUng is
to be laid in Zion, which is the visible Church.' Moreover, Jesus
Christ is caUed " a stone of stumbling," not because he occasions
offence or stumbUng to any one ; for, although he is often rejected
even by the buUders, (Ps. cxviii. 22 ; Matt. xxv. 42,) yet is he
that " precious and elect " stone, " which is become the head of the
corner," (Acts iv. 11'; 1 Pet. ii. 6, 7) : but he is caUed "a stone of
stumbUng," because many are stumbled by his cross, and take
offence at him which is not given by him. In order to teach us
this here, the apostle subjoins — "Whosoever beUeveth on him
shaU not be put to shame ; by which words, cited out of the pro
phet, the apostle would have us learn four thing : — 1st, That upon
this stone which the buUders reject, and at which both houses of
Israel stumble, aU who are truly inhabitants of Sion, and genuine
members of the Church of God, must nevertheless believe ; 2d,
That those who believe on him shaU not be disappointed nor put
to shame by their hope, but shah certainly attain that salvation
which they wait for from him ; 3d, That that salvation, although
certain, must yet be waited for patiently in holiness ; and that
'beUevers,' as the prophet speaks, 'must not make haste,' nor
grasp at any means of deUverance accompanied with transgression,
or Ulegitimate ; whence, in the 4th place, it foUows, that it is
this stone of which it is said that it is truly "precious," and
" elected " by God ; and which, consequently, is that ' rock,

182 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
against those built on which through faith the gates of heU shaU
never prevaU.'

CHAPTEE X.
" Brethren, the ardent desire of my heart, and (my) deprecation
to God concerning Israel is, for (their) salvation." Thus far, in
the preceding chapter, we have had three arguments for the
apostle's second reply to the first and leading objection ; we now
come to the fourth and last argument for- the same, which is as
foUows : —
' AU Israel are to be gathered again, and will at length receive
and embrace that righteousness and salvation through Jesus
Christ, which they now reject :
'Therefore, although they now reject the way of salvation
through faith on Jesus Christ, which I announce, yet it does not
follow from this, that it is not the true way.' (See our previous
remarks on the latter part of the 5th verse of chap, ix.)
This argument is taken from the adjunct of the future gathering
again of the IsraeUtes, or, if you choose, their act in at length
receiving the faith. The antecedent of the enthymeme foUows,
long after, in the 26th verse of chap, xi., — " AU Israel shall be
saved ;" on the proof of which antecedent, as about to be a great
mystery in the Christian Church, just as the calUng of the GentUes
had been in the Jewish, the apostle dweUs from the beginning of
chap. x. to the 33d verse of chap. xi. In this proof he makes use
of six arguments. The first of these is taken from the adjunct of
the apostle's deprecation, whereby he deprecates the judgment of
the present apostacy* of Israel, and prays in their behalf that they
may be gathered again for salvation in Christ. The argument
runs thus : — * ' Aqroo-rao-iKS,

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 183
' The judgments of thoae, to deprecate whose judgments, and
pray for whose salvation, God gives an ardent desire to his saints,
are to be removed, and they themselves to become partakers of
the salvation of God ;
' But God gives to me,' says the apostle, ' an ardent desire to
pray and deprecate in behalf of Israel :
' Therefore, the present judgment and apostacy of Israel is to be
removed, and they themselves are at length to become partakers
of the salvation of God.'
The assumption is given in the 1st verse of this chapter, — " the
ardent desire of my heart, and my deprecation to God concerning
Israel is for their salvation," but the proposition is omitted as ob
vious, and as resting for its foundation in the 26th and 27th verses
of chap. vui. — " in Uke manner the Holy Spirit also helpeth our
weaknesses, &c. Hence, it appears that the gift of praying is
from God, just as the grace we ask in our prayers ; and conse
quently, that the grace sought is the reward of the gift of praying,
which is the surest proof that the grace itself wiU be given by the
Lord in his own time, as our Lord himself plainly teaches us in
Matt. vii. 7, and foUowing verses, as far as verse 12.
2. " For I bear witness concerning them that they have a zeal
of God." The reason for the assumption, and why Paul prays for
Israel is here assigned : it is taken from their adjunct, which is —
" zeal of God ;" and this is established by the testimony of the
apostle — " I bear witness concerning them that they have a zeal
of God." " Zeal," moreover, is a human affection compounded of
love and anger ; because when we love what is good, and from our
love for the good which is beloved by us are angry, and from the
greatness of that love inflamed with anger at that, as an evU,
which threatens to injure or deprive us of the good we love, this
anger against what is evil from love of what is good, or love of
what is good kindled by hatred of what is evU, is caUed ' zeal.'
That zeal, then, whereby we are so affected with love towards and
desire after the worship and glory of God, that, from our love for

184 Logical analysis of the
God and his worship, we are angry at, and hate as an eneiny
whatever seems to obstruct that worship and glory, or threatens
to deprive us of God or of his worship, is caUed — " a zeal of God."
The apostle, therefore, here bears witness concerning the Israel
ites, that they loved God and his glory so intensely as to be trans
ported with vehement hatred against any thing which threatened
to deprive them of God, or to prove injurious to his worship.
" But not according to knowledge." He Ulustrates the zeal of
the people of Israel by a contrast — " they haye a zeal of God, but
not according to knowledge." This is not to be understood as if
the Israelites had no understanding, or were absolutely ignorant
of that with the zeal of which they were affected, as the Papists
in the present day build their devotion on ignorance and implicit
faith ; for the Israelites were acquainted with the traditions which
they had received from the fathers, and were affected with zeal in
their conversation, according to these traditions (Matt. xv. 3 ;
Gal. i. 14) : but inasmuch as that conversation was " vain," as the
apostle Peter terms it, (1st Epis. i. 18,) the apostle here calls
their knowledge of these traditions, according to which they Uved,
' ignorance ;' the true knowledge of the worship of God being
founded on the sacred word of God alone. The knowledge, there
fore, which the apostle here denies to Israel, is a knowledge of the
word of God and of his wiU, as revealed in his written word. For
although they possessed that word, (seeing that " to them were
committed the oracles of God,") and God's revealed wUl concern
ing his own worship and the righteousness of man, yet neither the
people, nor their teachers themselves, understood either the word
of God, or his will as therein revealed ; whence Christ in the
Gospel frequently both caUs and convicts them of being* — " blind
guides," who neither, on account of their ignorance, entered them
selves, nor suffered others to enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Thus while Nicodemus, a teacher in Israel, is being instructed by
Christ, he shews that he is ignorant even of the new birth, (sra-
'kiyyivso'iag,) which is the entrance into the kingdom of heaven ;
and the rest of the Pharisees, although they knew from the. word

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 185
that Christ was to be both the son and Lord of David, were yet
ignorant how he could be both his son and his Lord (Matt, xxii :)
so, in this place, the apostle imputes the zeal of the Israelites in
establishing their own righteousness, which is from the works of
the law, to ignorance of the righteousness of God. The apostle,
therefore, here ascribes to the Israelites a zeal of God, but buUt
upon the ignorance of what is commonly called a " crooked" dis
position, that is, not upon God's word, of which, as has been said,
they were ignorant, but upon the traditions of the fathers replete
with errors, which, however, they both knew and foUowed with
zeal. This was Paul's own condition before he was called by
Jesus Christ (Gal. i. 14 ; PhU. iU. 6 ;) and this, Paul testifies in
the passage before us, was the condition of the rest ofthe Israel
ites who stiU spoke against Christ. Such a condition of men, the
apostle here teaches us by his example, is rather an object of
pity than of hatred; and therefore he testifies, that he was
moved by the Spirit of God, from a holy compassion for this
condition, to utter prayers to God in behalf of those who were
affected with such a zeal of God, that, being ignorant of God's
truth, they might be deUvered from the judgment of their
apostacy. 3. " For being ignorant of God's righteousness, and desiring to
estabUsh their own righteousness, they have not been subject to
God's righteousness." He proceeds to prove the latter part of the
contrast, or ' that the zeal of God which the Israelites had was
not according to knowledge.' The arguments by which he proves
it are three : the first in this verse ; the second in verse 5 ; and
the third in verse 13. The first argument is drawn from the sub
ject or object of that zeal which is according to knowledge ; it is
— ' a zeal of God's righteousness ;' of which ' the zeal of the
Israelites,' who have a zeal of God, is the disparate. The apostle,
therefore, thus reasons : —
' That zeal of God which is according to knowledge is subject
to God's righteousness ;

186 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
But the IsraeUtes, having a zeal of God, are not subject to
God's righteousness :
'Wherefore the zeal of God, which the IsraeUtes have is not that
which is according to knowledge.'
The proposition of the syllogism is omitted as obvious. The
assumption is given at the close of verse 3d, iUustrated by its
causes, of which two are adduced in the preceding words ofthe
verse: the first is — 'ignorance of God's righteousness;' the second
— ' desire of their own righteousness :' for it is because they are
ignorant of God's righteousness, and desirous of their own right
eousness, that the Israelites, having a zeal of God, are yet not sub
ject to God's righteousness. Moreover I understand " God's
righteousness " here to be the same as that which has been above
defined, c. iii. 22 ; and ' the subjection' with which we are subject
to this righteousness of God, I expound from the words of the
apostle in 2d Cor. x. 4, to be — ' that whereby aU reasoning and
all loftiness within us which exalts itself against the knowledge of
God is cast down, so that every thought within us is brought into
captivity to the obedience of Jesus Christ : ' whence, on the con
trary, ' not to be subject to God's righteousness' is — ' by one's
own reasoning to exalt one's self against the knowledge of God,
and through trust in one's own righteousness to rebel against
Christ and God's righteousness in him.' With this disobedience
the apostle here charges the IsraeUtes, and traces it, first of aU, to
ignorance of God's righteousness, and then to desire and zeal of
their own righteousness, as its causes ; not speaking of their own
righteousness because they either had or could have any right
eousness of their own, but caUing that their own, after which,
although to no purpose, they strove in their own strength. From
this the apostle would teach us two things : first, that no one can
be subject to God's righteousness who is ignorant of God's right
eousness ; so that, contrary to what the Papists teach, knowledge
is necessary for faith and rendering obedience to Christ : secondly,.
that aU who subject themselves to Christ must renounce their own
righteousness ; so that human merit, or the desire of our own

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 187
righteousness, and Christ, or God's righteousneaa in him, are
thinga inconsistent and such as cannot subsist together.
4. " For Christ is the end ofthe law." He now proves the last
assumption, viz. — that the IsraeUtes do not subject themselves to
God's righteousness ; the argument being drawn from the primary
and principal subject of God's righteousness, which is Jesus
Christ :
* Whoever is subject to God's righteousness is also subject to
Christ Jesus ; '
' But the IsraeUtes have not subjected themselves to Christ :
* Therefore neither are they subject to God's righteousness.'
The assumption is obvious even to the opponents themselves :
but the apostle proves the proposition, namely — ' that whoever is
subject to God's righteousness is also in Christ, or subject to
Christ ; ' and the argument of proof is taken from a description
of Christ in this way : —
' Christ is the end of the law,' or, which is the same thing, ' that
righteousness of God which is approved by the law :
' Therefore whoever is subject to God's righteousness is also
in Christ and subject to him.'
The antecedent is given in the commencement of this 4th verse;
and the consequent is obvious : for since Christ is the end of the
law in two ways — first because the law as ' our child-leader (Gal.
in. 24), leads us to Christ that we may be justified through faith
on him ; ' and secondly, because Christ has fulfiUed the law in our
name, and has become ' our righteousness,' (1 Cor. i. 30) — it fol
lows that whosoever, being subject to God's righteousness, and
having renounced the merit of his own works, subjects aU his own
reasonings and thoughts to him, is also in Christ and subject to
him. " For righteousness to every one that believeth." He next
explains the foregoing description of Christ, wherein he is said to
be " the end of the' law " by its end ; and the end again by its
subject, . Christ is — " the end of the law for righteousness," i: e.,
' that he may impart to us the righteousness which he has pro-

188 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
cured by his own keeping of the law, so that we ourselves, being
clothed therewith, may be righteous in the sight of God ; ' this is
the end : and then this righteousness is said ' to belong to all who
believe, whether Jews or Gentiles ; ' which is the subject of that
righteousness, as before observed on the 22d verse of chapter Ui.
5. " For Moses describeth the righteousness which is from the
law, that he who shaU have done these things shaU live by them."
This is the second argument by which the apostle proves the
latter member of the contrast, viz., ' that the zeal of the IsraeUtes
is not according knowledge.' The argument runs thus : —
' Moses testifies that righteousness from the law is impossible
and unattainable by man ; but that the righteousness of faith is
easy and near at hand :
' Therefore the zeal of the IsraeUtes, which is a zeal of the law,
but not of the righteousness of faith, is not according to knowledge,
but according to ignorance even of Moses himself in whom they
glory.' The antecedent of this enthymeme is proved, part by part, from
a description of both kinds of righteousness ; which description is
taken out of Moses, Lev. xviii. 5 ; Deut. xxx. 12. First of all,
the apostle shews the difficulty and indeed impossibUity of the
righteousness of the law, from a description of the righteousness of
the law in this 5th verse, which is to the foUowing effect : — 'Who
soever has kept these things, namely, the precepts of God, or of
his law, shaU live by them ; ' by which description it is shewn
that there is no righteousness or Ufe from the law, except to those
who keep the law, and that perfectly, so as to continue in aU
things that are written in the book of the law, (Deut. xxvu. 26,;
Hence the apostle thus reasons : —
' There is no righteousness or life from the law, except to those
who keep the law in all respects and perfectly ' — for this descrip
tion of the righteousness of the law is from Moses ; to which the
apostle subjoins the assumption —
' But no man has kept those things which are written in the

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 189
book of the law ' — which even the Jews themselves knew, since
they offered sacrifices for sins on that account, (Gal. ii. 15, 16) :
whence the conclusion —
' Therefore righteousness from the law is impossible and a thing
which cannot be attained.'
6. " But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh thus ; "
Say not in thine heart, who shaU ascend into heaven ? that is, to
bring down Christ from (on high ;)
7. " Or, who shaU descend into the abyss ? that is, to bring
back Christ from the dead."
He next proves the second part of the antecedent, or ' the ease
of the righteousness of faith ; ' the argument by which it is proved
being in like manner taken from the Mosaic description of that
righteousness. That description consists of a contrast ; the first
member or arsis of which is contained in these 6th and 7th verses,
and the second in the commencement of verse 8, and what foUows
thereafter. In the two verses before us, then, the apostle, by ad
ducing the testimony of Moses, releases every one who seeks right
eousness from faith out of a twofold difficulty : he releases him out
of the one when he says — ' let him not think of ascending into
heaven,' verse 6 : the release out of the other is thus expressed —
f there is no need that he should think of descending into the
abyss,' verse 7. Each of these is iUustrated by its end : the
former, or the ascent into heaven, by this end — ' to bring down
Christ ;' the latter, or the descent into the abyss, by this — ' to
bring back Jesus Christ from the dead,' (for as the apostle com
ments upon and explains Moses) : because, forsooth, if it were
necessary that one should ascend into heaven in order that he
might be justified by faith, it would be for this end, viz., that he
might thence bring down Jesus Christ, again to assume our flesh,
and in that flesh to die : or if he had to descend into the abyss,
he would do so, that he might bring Christ back from the dead.
From aU this toil, both of ascending and descending, and at the

190 .LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
same time from the end of each, the apostle shews, out of Moses,
that aU who seek righteousness from faith are reUeved ; since
God, without any exertion on our part, without our either ascend
ing or descending, has done both things for us ; both sent Christ
from heaven in his own time, (Gal. iv. 4), and after Christ had
died for our sins, brought him back and raised him again from the
dead, that we might be justified through faith on him. To render
this plain, I observe, that by ' the bringing down of Christ out of
heaven' here, I understand — ' the mission of the Son to assume
our flesh, and his death in the flesh for the remission of our sins,'
(chap. iv. last verse) : again, by 'the bringing back of Christ
from the dead,' I understand — ' his resurrection, and all his subse
quent glory, for our justification,' as it is said in the passage just
quoted. Moreover both of these, both the descent of Christ, and
his rising again from the dead, are necessary to the righteousness
of faith ; just as the perfect keeping of the law is necessary to the
righteousness of the-law1: but the apostle shews out of Moses that
they differ in this— that he who seeks righteousness from faith is
reUeved from these difficulties, so that he has neither to bring
Christ down from heaven, nor to bring him back from the dead ;
whilst, on the other hand, the whole difficulty of righteousness
from the law faUs upon him who seeks that righteousness, so that
he must either of his own strength keep the law without fail, or
he can have no righteousness from the law. That difficulty there
fore which remains to those who seek righteousness from the law
is removed from those who seek righteousness from faith ; . for
God, wholly of his own mercy, and without any exertion on their
part, has removed out of their way all the difficulty of that right
eousness, since he himself, without any exertion of theirs, both
sent Christ from heaven and brought him back from the dead.
8. " But what saith it ? The word is near thee, in thy mouth
and in thy heart." This is the second member of the contrast and
thesis, or affirmative description of the righteousness of faith,
which is this — ' that whosoever has the word in his mouth and in

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 191
his heart, is righteous, and being justified by faith shall live.' This
description is presented by the apostle in the form of a dialogue :
for he first of aU asks what Moses says concerning the righteous
ness of faith, i.e., in what manner and in what words he describes
that righteousness ; then, as it were with the consent of his op
ponents, he subjoina the reply — that Moses says concerning the
righteousness of faith, to you who seek righteousness by faith that
" the word is near thee, in thy mouth and in thy heart," as much
as to say — ' if you have the word in your mouth and in your heart,
you are righteous by faith, and shaU live, shall live by faith.' The
apostle, therefore, thus proves the latter part of the antecedent : —
' If Jesus Christ, being sent from heaven by the Father, both died
for us and rose again from the dead, freely and without exertion on
our part, so that every one who has the word in his heart and in his
mouth, being justified throughhim, shaU be saved, it foUows, that the
righteousness of faith is not like the righteousness of the law, im
possible, but freely obtained by, and !lear at hand to those that
seek it' — this, which is the proposition, is omitted as obvious :
' But the former is true' — this, which i3 the assumption, ij given
in these three verses, (6th, 7th, 8th :)
Whence foUows the conclusion — ' that the latter is true, and that
the righteousness of faith is near at hand to, and freely obtained by
aU who believe, and who seek righteousness and life from faith.
In this way we may coUect the argument of the passage ; or, if
you prefer it, the arsis or first member of the contrast being omit
ted, more concisely, thus :—
' If every one is justified by faith who has the word in his mouth
and in his heart, righteousness is near at hand and easy through
grace ; ' But the former is true : ' Therefore the latter is true.'
" That is, the word of faith which we preach." He next explains
the latter member of the contrast, or the affirmative description of
the righteousness of faith ; which description consists of two parts :
for, first of all, in the remainder of the verse he shews what is this
" word" of which Moses speaks ; and then in verse 9, what it is
to have this word in our mouth and in our heart. As regards the

192 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
former, the " word" is described by its subject and instrumental
cause : its subject is— 'faith on Christ apprehended by faith/ (un
less you prefer to take " faith" in its proper acceptation, and to
consider the description as drawn from the effect ofthe word;) its
instrumental causes are — 'the apostles of Christ by whom it ia
preached :' ' this word,' says the apostle, ' of which Moses speaks,.
is the word of faith which we, the apostles, preach.' The apostle
thus anticipates an objection which the adversaries might be ready
to bring forward, viz. — ' that, in the passage quoted from Deut.
(c. xxx. 12, 13,) Moses is speaking of the word of the law, but not
of the gospel, or word of faith ;' to whom the apostle replies by
asaerting the negative opposite — that it is the gospel and word of
faith, and not the word of the law of which Moses is speaking.
And so, before the apostle, the prophet Jeremiah has interpreted
Moses in c. xxxi. 31, &c, where he shews that this word to be
written on the heart, of which Moses speaks, is the word of the
new covenant or gospel to be revealed in the last days, but not of
the law or covenant of work which the Israelites broke, and which
word was formerly " written on stones," but not " on the fleshly
tables of the heart."
9. " (Namely) that if thou shall confess with thy mouth the
Lord Jesus, and shalt beUeve in thine heart that God hath raised
him from the dead, . thou shalt be saved." This is the other part
of the explanation, of which again there are two members ; and
these are set forth by hysterosis ; for ' to have the word in the
mouth,' which is last in order, is first explained. First of all, there
fore, ' to have the word of the gospel in the mouth,' the apostle
says is — ' to confess with the mouth that Jesus Christ is Lord ;'
then ' to have this word in the heart' is — ' to beUeve that God has
raised him from the dead,' or, that having died for our sins he has
been raised up for our justification :' for so I take it the whole work
of redemption is to be understood by synecdoche, under the head
of the resurrection of Christ ; and he purposely makes mention of
the resurrection, because, in the days of the apostles, nothing re-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 193
lating to Jesus Christ was so much talked of as his resurrection
from the dead. ' To have the word of faith in the heart,' therefore,
is — to believe in Christ, and ' to have it in the mouth' is — to pro
fess our faith. The apostle illustrates both the faith and the pro
fession by their subject to which, * or object ; and by their end or
effect. The subj eet of the faith is — ' the raising again of Jesus Christ
from the dead ;' that is — ' Jesus Christ himself, and the work of
our redemption in him, who died and rose again :' the subject of
the profession — ' Jesus Christ's lordship over us ;' which is both
different from that which he has Over other creatures, on ac
count of the work of our redemption accomplished by his deathj
and glorious for ever. In fine, the common effect both of the
faith and the profession is — 'salvation;' "thou shalt be. saved,"
says the apostle ; and this salvation also presupposes righteous
ness. 10. " For with the heart it is believed unto righteousness ;
and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation." We have
here the reason of the explanation, taken from the proper subject
in which,~\ and the end or effect, first of faith and then of confes
sion, or profession, thus : — We believe with the heart, or faith is
in the heart ; wherefore to have Christ in the heart, is to believe
on Christ raised from the dead : in like manner confession is of the
mouth, or it is the mouth wherewith we confess Christj and which
is the subject in wliich of confession ; wherefore to have Christ in
the mouth is to confess that Christ Jesus is Lord. The apostle
illustrates both faith in the heart and confession with the mouth
by their end or effect ; for we believe with the heart — " unto
righteousness," i.e. our righteousness or justification is the end and
effect of faith in our heart ; just as — " salvation" is the end of our
confession. Moreover the apostle caUs salvation the end and effect
of confession, not because it is not also the effect of faith, but that
he may teach us that all who beUeve on Christ must also profess
him in order to their becoming partakers of his salvation ; so that
* Ad quod. t In quo.
N

194 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
it is not enough for a man to say that he believes on-Christ, if, in
the mean time, he refuses to confess him, especially when he is
asked to give an account of his faith : and God caUs us to confes
sion even at the risk of death, and with the loss of everything
which we possess in life ; ' for he,' says our Lord, Matt. xvi. 25,
' who wishes to save his life [by changing sides and refusing to pro
fess Christ,] is unworthy of me, and shall lose his Ufe.' For this
reason, therefore, the apostle urges profession along with faith in
the case of aU who are to be saved ; as likewise Peter, 1st Epist.
iii. 15 ; since this profession is the " seal" wherewith we are sealed
to the Lord in the sight of the world, and ' the name of God writ
ten on our forehead,' to be read by aU even in the midst of perse
cutions. 41. "For the Scripture saith, whosoever believeth on him shaU
not be put to shame." By adducing the testimony of Scripture
(Is. xxvui. 16), he proves the reason which he has just concluded,
namely — ' "that confession of the mouth must be combined with '
faith in the heart, and that confession with the mouth is unto sal
vation,' or ' that the salvation of all those who from faith confess
that Jesus is Lord, is certain.' For two things are signified by the
expression — " shaU not be put to shame :" (1.) the duty of him
who beheves ; (2.) the grace of him who perseveres in that duty.
The duty of him who believes is — ' to profess his hope without
shame, and that Jesus Christ, as he is revealed in the Goapel, is
the Lord of his hope ;' " I am not ashamed," says the apostle, c. i.
16, " of the gospel of Christ:" and the grace of him who perse
veres in that duty is — ' that he shaU not be put to shame or disap- ]
pointed by his hope ; for " hope putteth not to shame," c. v. 5.
Consequently he is said " not to be put to shame,' who is neither
ashamed of the Lord Jesus, nor visited with shame on account of
the hope which he has reposed in him ; the apostle therefore thus
argues from the prophet : —
' Whoever beheves on Jesus Christ shall not be put to shame,'
i. e. ' he wUl neither be ashamed to profess the Lord, nor shaU hia
hope put him to shame when he so professes :'

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 195
' Therefore confession of the mouth both follows faith, and the
salvation of aU who profess from faith is certain.'
12. " For there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile."
The apostle, in quoting from the ancient Scriptures, having ex
pounded and taught that what is asserted by the prophet indefi
nitely — " he that beUeveth," Is. xxviii. 16— is to be taken uni
versally, and that the meaning is — ' Whosoever believeth,' pro
ceeds to establish his exposition, and to prove that the prophet is
to be understood universaUy. The argument employed is from the
removal of the distinction, or, as he elsewhere speaks, from ' the
breaking down of the middle wall of partition,' by which Jews and
GentUes were distinguished under the law, and which, under the
reign of Christ, no longer exists ; whence the apostle thus reasons :
' Under the reign of Christ, there is no longer any distinction be
tween Jew and GentUe, but they are both alike in Christ Jesus' —
this, which ia the antecedent, is given in the text : whence the
conclusion. ' Therefore what was formerly said concerning the grace of those
who beUeve, is now common to any who believe' — " Whosoever be
Ueveth on him shaU not be put to shame."
" For the same Lord of aU." He next proves the foregoing
antecedent — ' that there is no distinction between Jew and Greek ;*
and the arguments by which he proves it are two. The first is
taken from their common Lord ; for he who, according to mutual
covenant, was the God and Lord of the Israelites, under the law,
is now, under the reign of Christ, the same Lord of aU, since
" now," under the reign of Christ, as it is said, in Eev. xii. 10,
" is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God."
" Is rich towards aU." The second argument is from the abundance
of the grace of God, which now, under the reign of Christ, is
poured out upon all in common, both Jews and GentUes :—
' God is rich in mercy towards aU, both Jews and Greek :
' Therefore, whosoever believeth on him shall not be put to
shame.'
n2

196 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
" By whom he is invoked." This is an epanorthosis of the fore
going antecedent, whereby the apostle shews that these riches of
the mercy of God extend to aU, indeed, yet not to individuals of
classes, but to classes of individuals,— that is, to the elect from
amongst all, both Jews and GentUes,— who are here described by
their effect, viz. — ' their invocation of the name of God :' —
' God is rich in mercy towards all; but, by " aU," I mean only
the elect from among all, and whosoever invoke him, whether
from among the Jews or from among the GentUes.'
13. " For whosoever shall invoke the name of the Lord shaU be
saved." This is the establishment of the foregoing antecedent,
from the testimony of Joel, chap. ii. 32, from which let it be
observed, that ' the invocation of the name of God' is a part, and>
as it were, a species of that confession from faith whereby the
word of God is in the mouth unto salvation; so that the duty^
previous to salvation, of those who believe on Jesus Christ is —
' to confess the Lord, and to confess to the Lord.' We ' confess
the Lord ' when we give an account of our faith before men, and
profess that Jesus is Lord, according to the truth which is in him ;
we ' confess to the Lord ' by every kind of invocation and cele
bration of the name of God, and in this twofold confession of those
who believe, whereby they confess the Lord, and confess to the
Lord, that zeal of God which is according to knowledge is dis
played. 14. " How then shaU they invoke 'him on whoiri they have not
believed ? and how shall they believe on him of whom they have
not heard ? and how shall they hear without a preacher ?
' 15. " And how shaU they preach unless they have been sent ?"
This is the third argument whereby the apostle proves ' that the
zeal of the Israelites is not according to knowledge,' to which he
has made a transition by the foregoing epanorthosis, and testimony
of the prophet concerning the certain salvation of aU that invoke

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 197
the name of God. This third argument is taken, partly from the
adjunct of the sending or inward calling of the apostles, partly
from the conduct ofthe Israelites in rejecting the apostles with their
preaching. The apostle therefore reasons thus :—
' Although those who reject the apostles and men sent by God
to preach the gospel, invoke God, and have a zeal, yet is that zeal
not according to knowledge ;
' But we have been sent by God, and the Israelites reject ua
sent by God :
' Therefore, although the Israelites have a zeal of God, yet that
zeal of theirs is not according to knowledge.'
The proposition of this syllogism,, which is omitted, the apostle
proves from the adjunct of the necessity of the sending or inward
calling of those who preach, which he demonstrates in verse 14^
and the beginning of verse 15, by a resolution of effects into their
necessary causes, and that of five stages. The first' effect is —
'invocation,' which, from the foregoing testimony, the apostle has
proved to be of necessity previous to salvation ; hence, therefore,
he thus reasons by a sorites, or prosyllogism of successive stages : —
' There is no invocation without faith ; there is no faith without
hearing; there is no hearing without a preacher;' there is no
preacher without sending :
' Therefore, from first to last, there is no invocation unto salva
tion, unless those who are to preach the word of God have been
sent, and, consequently, the invocation of all who reject the apostles
and those whom God sends to preach the word of faith, is no in
vocation, and although they have a zeal, they have not that zeal
which is according to knowledge.'
From this chain of effects and causes, the apostle would teach
us three things : — 1st, That the invocation and zeal of unbelievers,
although they present the appearance of remarkable devotion, are
yet aU nothing more than an empty shew, but no genuine invoca
tion or zeal, because invocation unto salvation belongs only to
those who believe ; 2dly, That there is ordinarily no faith apart
from the word, (for it is the ordinary administration of God which

198 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
is here treated of; nor does the apostle bind or confine God's ex
traordinary operation to ordinary means, such as the sending of
preachers, and the hearing of the word preached,) so that that faith
which is buUt upon tradition apart from the word, and the faith of
those who despise preaching is no faith at aU ; 3dly, That he who,
as the apostle speaks, " desireth the office of a bishop," or appUes
himself to the preaching of the word of faith, must attend first of
all to the sending of God, and inward calling, since no man wiU
preach as he ought, unless he has been sent by God, and inwardly
caUed. " As it is written, How beautiful are the feet of those
that preach the gospel of peace, that preach the gospel of good
things !" Next comes the assumption, in the rest of the 15th, and
whole of the 16th verses, consisting of two parts ; the first Is —
' We, the apostles, have been sent by God to preach the word of
faith ;' the second — ' the Israelites do not believe, but reject us
who have been sent to preach the gospel.' The first part is itself
omitted, but is here proved from the testimony of the prophet
concerning the apostles who were to be sent to preach the gos
pel, and their reception by the elect only. Although rejected by
the world of those that perish, yet, to the elect, the prophet in
these words predicts that the expected heralds of the gospel
would come from God, so that, to them, their feet should be
beautiful. 16. "But they have not all obeyed the gospel; for Isaiah saith,
Lord, who hath believed our report ?" We have, in these words,
the second part of the assumption — ' but the Israelites do not be
lieve us who have been sent from God to preach the gospel :' this
is both itself expressed in the text, and the proof of it added from
the testimony of the prophet, Isa. liii. 1, where, being about to
foreteU the sufferings of the Son of God, and the glory that should
foUow, the prophet not only complains of the unbeUef of his own
age, but also presents to view the future difference among the
Israelites under the reign of Christ, and the full revelation of the
gospel.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 199
17. " Therefore faith is from hearing, and hearing through the
word of God." The conclusion of the third argument — ' There
fore the invocation of the Israelites is no invocation, and although
they have a zeal, yet it is not according to knowledge,' — being,
with divine prudence, suppressed to avoid offending the Israelites^
as has often been done before in this discussion, the apostle sub
stitutes for it this other, in which he passes from them to beUevers
themselves, and those who caU upon the name of God in truth,
with the view of ' provoking the disobedient Jews to emulation,'
as he openly avows further on, chap. xi. 14. From the same
sorites, or series of abridged syllogisms, as in verse 14, he con
cludes — ' that faith, which is the foundation of invocation, is both
produced and increased by the hearing of. the gospel preached by
himself and the other apostles ;' and that in this way : —
' There is ordinarily no faith without hearing ; there is no hear
ing without a preacher ; there is no preacher unless he has been
sent: ' Therefore, faith is from hearing, and hearing through the word
announced by the apostles, or those heralds whom God sends.'
The argument is from what equally foUows, contrariwise, in the
case of contradictories : *
' Without the hearing of the word preached, or where there ia
no hearing of the word preached, there is no faith :
' Therefore, contrariwise, or conversely, faith is from hearing, or
through the word.' And this appears to be said by a sort of apo
strophe,! whereby he avoids a direct reference to his opponents,
the Israelites, arguing against the Church of God which has em
braced the truth.
18. " But I say, have they not heard ?" Next come three pro-
lepses, in which the apostle anticipates objections arising out of the
last argument : Of these, two are contained in the remainder of this
chapter ; the third is given in the commencement of the foUowing*.
* i. e., in modern language — ' by contraposition,' or ' conversion by negation.'
t Turning aside from.

200 . LOGICAL ANALYSTS OF THE
-The first objection is to this effect: 'Israel has heard* — this, as
being obvious, is urged in the form of a question — " Have they,"
the Israelities, " not heard ?"
' Therefore, if faith is from hearing, and invocation unto salva
tion from faith, the Israelites also, believing, wUl be among the
number of those who invoke the name of the Lord, and shaU be
saved.' " Yea, truly their sound hath gone forth into all the earth,
and their words into the ends of the world." To this first objec
tion a twofold reply is given by the apostle. The first is expressed
in these words, in which the apostle not only grants the foregoing
antecedent- — ' that the Israelites have heard,' but also proves it by
the testimony of the prophet, cited from Psalm xix. 5, (4.) This
testimony may be explained in two ways ; either as above, chap. i.
20, concerning ' the knowledge of the invisible things of God *
from the things which he has created,' of which knowledge the
prophet spoke ; or, we may understand the apostle as here com
paring the preaching of the gospel by those whom God has sent
to preach, with the common preaching of created things, namely,
— ' that as created things, ever since the creation, have preached
God to the whole world, in order to leave all without excuse, f so
now the apostles sent forth by Christ, have preached the gospel to
the whole world, in order that the elect of God may be brought to
faith.' In whichever of the two ways you explain the testimony,
the argument ofthe proof is from the less, thus : —
' The whole world has heard concerning God, either through the
preaching of created things from the very beginning, or through
the apostles, now that the gospel has been revealed :
' Much more, therefore, the Jews — to whom the oracles of God
have been committed from the beginning, and to whom first it be
hoved that the gospel should be preached — have heard concerning
him.' ; The second reply of the apostle is a negation of theconsequence,
which he here passes over in silence, with that same prudence
which we have often had occasion already to notice ; but chiefly
* T« aoeirrm rii kou. f ' AinvxoKoymout.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 201
in order that It may manifestly appear, in his reply to the second
objection, that although faith is from hearing, and the Israelites
also had heard, yet that they had not believed so as to invoke God
unto salvation. From this the apostle would teach us — ' that al
though faith ia from hearing, yet all who hear do not believe, nor
from faith invoke God unto salvation ; for he proves that the Is
raelites had heard, and yet he has shewn that they neither believ
ed on God, nor Invoked him.
19. " But I say, hath not Israel known (God) ?" By ' know
ledge,' I understand here that which belongs to faith ; and, accor
dingly, this is the second prolepsis : —
' But Israel also has known God :
' Therefore he invokes God, and shall be saved.'
The apostle denies the antecedent of this objection ; and asserts
what was threatened by Isaiah against this people, viz., — that al
though they might hear with their ears, yet that they should not
understand with their heart ;' and this he here proves by a twofold
testimony. " First of all Moses saith, I will provoke you to emu
lation by that which is not a nation ; by a nation void of under
standing will I provoke you to anger." This is the first testimony ;
from which, by a comparison of minority, the apostle thus con
cludes : —
'Those who are to be provoked to emulation in understand
ing by a nation void of understanding, do not themselves under
stand ;
'But Moses has predicted concerning Israel, (Deut. xxxii. 21,)
that he is to be provoked to emulation in understanding by a na
tion void of understanding :
' Therefore Israel himself does not understand.' The assump
tion is given in this verse.
20. " But Isaiah useth boldness, and saith, I have been found
by those that sought me not, I have been made manifest to those
who asked not after me.

202 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
21. " But to Israel he saith, all day long I have stretched out
my hands to a people rebeUious and contradictive." The second
testimony is that of Isaiah, who, in chapter lxv., verses 1 and 2,
testifies concerning the continual caUing of Israel to grace, and his
rejection of God's caUing, thus : —
' That people who are rebellious and speak against God, stretch
ing out his hands all day long, and continuaUy caUing, although
they have heard concerning God, yet have not known him with
the knowledge which belongs to faith ;
' But " I have stretched out my hands all day long," says God,
by the prophet, " to Israel, a people rebellious and contradicting :"
'Therefore, although Israel has heard, yet has he not known God.'
The assumptiou is given in verse 21 ; being iUustrated in the
preceding (20th verse,) by the testimony of the same prophet con
cerning the effectual calUng on the contrary, of the Gentiles, who
while not seeking God have yet found him, and to whom, while
not enquiring after him and his grace, he has been made manifest.'

CHAPTEE XI.
" Hath God, I say, therefore cast away his people ?" This is the
third prolepsis, whereby the apostle anticipates an objection arising
out of the reply which he has just proved by the testimonies of
Moses and Isaiah. The objection runs thus :- —
' If God has been made manifest to the GentUes, but Israel has
become rebeUious, and a people that spealc agamst their God, it
foUows that God has cast away his people ;
' But the latter is absurd :
' Therefore,' say the opponents, ' the former, which you make a
shew of proving out of Moses and Isaiah, viz. — ' that Israel has not
known God,' must be false.'
The proposition is given at the beginning of verse 1.  " There
fore," that is, ' if, as you assert, God has been made manifest to

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 203
the Gentiles, and Israel has become rebellious against God, it fol
lows that God has cast away his people, and that Israel has ceased
to be the people of God.' The assumption also is comprised in
the same words, verse 1, being impUed in the interrogation — " Hath
God cast away his people ?" that is — ' as to the latter member of
the hypothetical proposition, viz., ' that God has cast away his
people,' you may see to it yourself, whether you have said so.'
" Far from it." To this objection the apostle replies in two ways :
first, by a negation as far as verse 7 ; then in verse 7, by a distinc
tion. He denies the hypothetical proposition : — ' I,' says the
apostle, ' do not say, nor teach, that God has cast away his peo
ple ; nor does that follow, as you represent, from my preceding
reply in the testimonies adduced out of Moses and Isaiah. The
apostle is not content with barely announcing this negation of the
proposition, but sets it off, both with a deprecation of so great a
judgment upon his brethren, and with an expression of abhorrence at
such blasphemy against God, as if nullifying the covenant which he •
himself had entered into with his people Israel ; both the depreca
tion of the judgment, a"nd expression of abhorrence at the blasphemy
being comprised by him in this one saying — " far from it." " For
I indeed am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of
Benjamin." He goes on to prove the foregoing negation, viz. —
' that God has not cast away his people ;' for which purpose he
employs two arguments. The first is taken from the most special
species, whereby, as by an instance, he seta aside the genus or
universal statement which has been denied, in this way : —
' I am an Israelite ;
' But I have not been cast away by God.
' Therefore God has not cast away his people Israel.' The pro
position of this syllogism is given at the end of verse 1, and proved
from his procreative causes * — ' Abraham and Benjamin.'
2. " God hath not cast away his people whom he foreknew."
This is the conclusion of the foregoing syUogism, amplified by a
* i.e. Progenitors.

204 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
definition of the people of God: — ' the people of God are those
whom he foreknew ; and God has not cast away this his people.'
By this the apostle would teach us that the true Church of God,
which is also the people of God, is to be defined from God's fore
knowledge, and the other " gifts without repentance"* which follow
his foreknowledge and attend upon his Church (see above, chap.
viii. 29, 30.) Whence it follows that the people or Chiirch of
God, in its essence or in itself, and in so far as it is the Church of
God, is invisible, as the apostle intimates (chap. ii. 29), when he
asserts — ' that he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, but he who
is a Jew inwardly ;' the reason of which is, that the foreknowledge
Of God, and the rest of that grace, " without repentance," which
he bestows upon his Church and whereby it is defined, is invisible.
The Church being, therefore, in itself invisible, is rendered visible
by external ministration, for ' to it were committed the oracles of
God' (see above, chap. iii. 2) ; then by its effects, as our Lord
teaches us, Matt. vii. 16, — " from their fruits ye shaU know them."
" Know ye not what the Scripture saith concerning Elijah?"
The second argument by which the apostle proves ' that God has
" not cast away his people,' is taken from the similar example of the
days of Elijah, thus : — •
' In the days of Elijah, although Israel apostatized, yet amid
the common apostacy of the multitude, seven thousand were pre
served who did not apostatize :
' Therefore, in like manner, at this time also, although Israel is
become rebellious and a people speaking against God, yet there is
a reservation of God's elect.'
The antecedent of this enthymeme, or protasis of this similitude,
is established by the testimony of Scripture which was known even
to themselves, and consists of two parts. " How he intercedes
with God against Israel, saying." The first part of the protasis,
viz., the complaint of the prophet speaking against Israel, and tes
tifying concerning the apostacy by the Visible Church, is contained
in this verse. * 'AfiiroifAtXtirote.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 205
3. " Lord I they have killed thy prophets and digged down
thine altars ; and I alone am left, and they seek my life." He
establishes Israel's^ apostacy from its effects, three of which are
enumerated in this verse : the first is — ' the slaughter of God's
prophets ;' the second — ' they have digged down God's altars ;'
the third — ' that they seek me, Elijah, to put me to death ;' and
the third effect is heightened by the adjunct of the ' lonely posi
tion' of the prophet — ' I alone am left,' says the prophet, ' and yet
they seek to slay me, the only survivor ;' wherefore they are guilty
ofthe same cruelty against the true Israelites, of which the Psalm
ist, Ps. lxxxiii. 5 (4), accuses foreign enemies and the profane
GentUes against the nation and name of Israel.
4. " But what saith the divine answer of God unto him ? I have
caused to remain to myself seven thousand men who have not
bowed the knee to the image of Baal." This is the second part of
the protasis or antecedent, and a reply to [what was hinted] — ' as
for the latter member of the hypothetical proposition,' viz., ' that
God has cast away his people, you may see to it yourself whether
or not you have said so.' The apostle replies first of all by an ex
pression of abhorrence — ' far be it from me to say that God has
cast away his people.' Then by adducing the principal efficient
cause of the reservation, — " I," the Lord says, " have caused to
remain to myself." Lastly, in the words — " have not bowed the
knee to the image of Baal," the Lord establishes his answer by an
argument of disparates, thus : —
' Seven thousand have not bowed the knee to Baal :
' Therefore,' the Lord says, ' they have been reserved for me,
and for my worship.'
5. "So therefore, at this time also, a reservation has been
made." This is the apodosis of the similitude, or consequent of
the enthymeme— 'therefore, at this time also, although Israel has
apostatized, yet a reservation has been made of those whom God
foreknew, "according to gratuitous election." By "election," I

206 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
understand, not that whereby the reserved IsraeUtes choose God,
but that whereby God has chosen them to be reserved : for al
though the faithful servants of God, rejecting idols and false gods,
choose the true God in Christ to be worshipped by them, as we
read of Joshua and the Israelites (Josh. xxiv. 15, 16.) ; yet the
same thing which the apostle John affirms concerning love,
(1 John iv. 10.) is here to be said concerning election, viz. — ' that
we have not chosen God, but that he has first chosen us,' and by
his election, has reserved us for himself. The "apostle, therefore,
here explains what was before said in the divine answer * in the
4th verse, "I have caused to remain to myself," (xarekivoir
\\havru) and infers the adjunct of the manner of reservation from
its necessary efficient cause : —
' It is God himself who, of himself, reserves for himself whoever
are reserved,' — this is asserted in the divine answer.
' Therefore, whoever are reserved, their reservation is made ac
cording to the gratuitous election of God,' — which is thence in
ferred, and here announced by the apostle.
6. " But if it be through grace, it is no longer from works/'
This is an inference and conclusion deduced from the manner of
making the reservation, of which he has spoken in the preceding
verse ; for the apostle reasons thus : —
' If the reservation of those who, amid the common apostacy of
the majority, have been reserved to righteousness and Ufe, be
through the grace of the divine election, then is their reservation
not from works ;
' But the former is true :
' Therefore, so is also the latter.'
The assumption of this syUogism has been already given in the
preceding verse ; the proposition is contained in the commence
ment of this verse. " Otherwise, grace is no longer grace." He
goes on to prove the proposition by two arguments. The first of

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 207
these is a reductio ad absurdum* or reasoning from that which is
impossible, thus : —
' If the reservation through grace were itself also from works,
then grace would not be grace.
' But that grace should not be grace is impossible :
' Therefore, if the reservation be from grace, it foUows that it is
no longer from works.'
" But if it be from works, it is no longer grace." The second
argument for the hypothetical proposition is from that which
equaUy foUows on the contrary supposition : — If the reservation
were made from works, then it would not be through grace ; and
if the reservation were through grace, it would no longer be from
the works of the law.' " Otherwise, work is no longer work."
He next proves the antecedent of the last argument, as he had
before proved the hypothetical proposition of the syllogism by
reasoning from that which is impossible : — ' Work would not be
work ;' and because it is impossible that contradictories should be
true at the same time — a thing, however, which he must of neces
sity admit to be true, who asserts, either that the merit of work is
gratuitous, or that the gratuitous reservation of the elect is from
works. The proposition and assumption ofthe syllogism, therefore,
having thus been proved, the conclusion or inference foUows —
' that reservation to Ufe and righteousness is not from works ;'
which the apostle here deduces and infers, in order forcibly to im
press upon the Eomans the leading conclusion of the whole epistle,
with which this inference is in reality identical, viz., — ' that this
RIGHTEOUSNESS AND LIFE ARE THROUGH THE FAITH OF THE
gospel.' From this I would have you observe — that neither can
there be either righteousnesa or Ufe to any man from the works of
the law, as the Jews thought, and almost all, through a perverted
zeal for the law, think stUl ; nor can any works of the law concur
with the grace of God in Jesus Christ as causes for procuring life
and righteousness to man, as the Papists think — because merit and
the gratuitous giving of life are so mutually opposite, that either
* Shewing that the opposite supposition lands us in absurdity.

208 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
being affirmed, the other is denied, and, on the contrary, either be
ing denied, the other is affirmed. Whence it follows, according to
the apostle, that if work be reckoned the cause of life and right
eousness, grace must of necessity be set aside, because that life
will be a reward from debt on account of merit, not a gratuitous
gift to the undeserving ; and, on the contrary, if grace be reckoned
the cause of life, aU the merit of every work must be set aside, be
cause life is from grace, and a gratuitous gift bestowed on the un
deserving, not a debt from the merit of works.
7. " What, therefore." Thus far we have had the first part of
the reply to the objection brought forward at the commencement
of the chapter, the apostle denying that God has rejected his peo
ple. This negation is here embellished with a rhetorical consulta
tion. For, first of all, the apostle introduces his opponents still
plying him with the question, — " What therefore ?" as much as to
say, — ' What, therefore, do you reply to the objection ?' " Israel
hath not obtained that which he seeketh for." This is the hypo
phora or subjoined reply of the apostle to the preceding question
of his opponents, and the second part ofthe reply to the objection.
In this reply he first of all admits the rejection of Israel, or the
people of God ; which must be understood of Israel according to
the flesh only : for, as there is one Jew who is a Jew outwardly,
and another who is a Jew inwardly, (chap. ii. 28, 29,) so there is
one Israel in the Spirit, and another in the flesh only, such as the
great majority of that people were in the time of Paul, and are
stUl ; consequently, he gives the name of ' Israel' to those who
were rejected, and says, — ' that Israel has not obtained that he
was seeking, viz. righteousness, and life from righteousness. He
then replies most appositely to the objection by a distinction.
" But the elect have obtained it," — this is the first member of th^
distinction ; " and those left have become callous/' — the second*
member of the distinction. Here observe, in the first place, that
as the apostle divides the Jews into him who is a Jew inwardly,
and him who is a Jew outwardly, (chap. ii. 28, 29,) and the seed

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 209
of Abraham into the children of the flesh, and the children of the
promise, (chap. ix. 7, 8 ;) so he divides the Israelites into " the
elect," and " those left." By " the elect " are intended — ' those
whom, along with Jacob, before they were born, or had done any
thing good or bad, (chap. ix. 11, 12, 13,) [God] chose to be con
formed to the image of his Son,' (chap. viii. 29 :) by "those left"
he means — ' the reprobate, who, being without election, have been
left behind to sin and death.' Observe again, that in the first
member ofthe distinction, the apostle does not say that 'the elect
have,' but that "the election has obtained it;" for such is the
force of the expression in the original, (^ hs \x~koyri lirsrvfcsv :) and
he speaks by metonymy on purpose, in order to teach us that the
cause of our righteousness and life is neither merit nor faith in the
elect themselves, but is in God, viz. his election of them before
the world was. I would have you observe, in the third place, that
in the second member of the distinction, he does not say that
' those left have not obtained it,' that is, ' have not obtained life,
but that they " have become callous ;" and that with a view to teach
us two things. First, he would teach us that the wicked are not
punished with death until they have deserved it by sinning. Se
condly, that the wicked, by sinning, contract such a habit of sin
ning, that at length they rush into sin without remorse, and
become hardened in heart against every admonition whereby they
are invited to return to a better life. This is expressed by the
metaphorical term — STagdiS^ffav, " they have become callous ;" for
ntupoq, or ' callus,' is a white, hard, dry substance, whereby broken
bones are united, which grows upon the body contrary to nature,
Uke hard akin, and is so hurtful to the joints or lungs, that they
become unfit for their natural motion : by the word sftagaiSriauv,
therefore, something simUar in the wicked Jews, whereby they be
came so hardened, as to be unfitted for every motion of the life of
God, and for every good work, is intended.
8. " According as it is written." In the three following verses
he both proves and amplifies the latter member of the distinction,

210 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
viz. — ' that those Jews left behind by election have become cal
lous.' The proof is drawn from the written word, for the apostle
speaks thus — " According as it is written." And in the same way
most proofs of the New Testament are adduced, both by Christ
and his apostles ; for in John, verse 39, our Lord appeals to the
written word—" Search the scriptures :' and in Acts xxvi. 32, the
apostle professes before Agrippa, in the presence of a numerous
assembly, that he said and taught nothing in the preaching of the
New Testament, except those things which Moses and the pro
phets, in the written word, had foretold should happen. " God
hath given them a spirit of deep sleep." Three scripture testi
monies are adduced to prove the hardening of the Jews : of these
this is the first, from Isaiah xxix. 10. "Eyes that they should
not see, ears that they should not hear :" this is the second tes
timony, from Isaiah vi. 9.
9. and 10. " And David saith," &c. This is the third testimony
from Psalm lxix. 22, 23. These testimonies prove two things :
(1.) that the Jews have become caUous ; (2.) that those who have
become caUous are left behind by election ; for God does not give
a spirit of deep sleep, &c, to the elect. The spirit of God, there
fore, thus reasons : —
' Those to whom a spirit of deep sleep has been given by God
become caUous, and are hardened thereby :
' But God gives a spirit of deep sleep, &c, to those Jews that
are left behind,' as appears from the testimonies that have been
adduced :
' Therefore those Jews that are left behind have become callous,
and have been hardened.' The latter member of the distinction is
thus proved in these three verses ; in the same verses it is also
amplified by the apostle, partly by a definition of the hardening
(rov rugStrdat) ; partly by its efficient oause, and partly by the
adjunct of the time. The definition and cause are both sufficiently
obvious in the testimonies by which the hardening is proved. .
. First, as regards the definition, " hardening" (wugog') is fa

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 211
spiritual callus,' or spirit of deep sleep, so stopping up the eyes,
ears and mind, as it is there said in the prophet, ' that the table of
those who are in this condition becomes a snare, a trap, and a re
tribution, and their backs always remain bowed down ;' a definition
which is made up of the genus — " a spirit," and specific difference
— " of deep sleep." This is explained by its various effects, of
which the first is — ' the darkening of the eyes pf their mind,' l- the
hardening and (as the prophet speaks) making fat of their heart ;'
the second — ' the turning of their table into a trap and a retribu
tion ;' the third — ' the perpetual bowing down of their back,'
Comparing these effects together, we shaU see, in the first place,
that ' not to see the things which they see, not to hear the things
which they hear, and not to perceive the things which they under
stand,' is at once their sin and their judgment : it is their sin, in
their abuse of the ministry ; for either to neglect or despise the
word of God when heard, his works when seen, and his grace
when offered, which is ' not to hear the word heard, not to see.
the works seen, and not to perceive the grace offered to the under
standing,' is to abuse the ministry, and is the sin of those who
abuse it ; and it is their judgment, inasmuch as in the time of the
long-suffering of God, and his gracious visitation of them — " the
things which belong to their peace are hid from their eyes."
The second effect, namely, — ' that their table should become a
trap and a retribution,' is their judgment only begun ; which, as
it turns out for good to the elect, so it turns out for evil to those
that are left behind. The third effect denotes their judgment,
and their judgment complete, as appears both from the severity
of the judgment, which is — ' the bowing down of their back,' and
from its continued duration — " bow down their back always."
But for the clearer understanding both of the definition itself,
and of this comparison of effects, we must briefly explain some of
the words which occur in the testimonies. The first word requir
ing explanation is — xaravvfyg, [Uterally] ' a deep sleep like night,'
whereby is denoted a most profound lethargy, such as deprives
those.who are under it of aU sense of their ovyu advantage,. This
o2

212 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
deep sleep had so spread among the inhabitants of Jerusalem,
during the time of Christ's walking in the flesh, that it caused him
to weep when he approached and looked upon that city, (Luke
xix. 42.) " When he drew near and beheld the city, he wept over
it, and said, Oh, that thou knewest, at least in this thy day, the
things that belong to thy peace, but now (these things) are hid
from thine eyes." Then the apostle does not say that God gave
them ' deep sleep,' but " a spirit of deep sleep," to teach us that,
as God distributes his gifts to his people through his own Spirit
dweUing in them, as it is written, (1 Cor. xii. 4,) " There are di
versities of gifts, but (there is) one Spirit;" so he inflicts his judg
ments upon those who are left behind through evil spirits, as the
avengers of sin and ministers of wrath. Both these truths are
clearly set forth in the Scriptures ; the first in Isaiah xi. 2, where
you will find — " the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit
of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of
Jehovah," — put for — ' wisdom and understanding, counsel and
might, knowledge and the fear of Jehovah, proceeding from the
indwelling Holy Spirit of Jehovah;' the latter in 1 Tim. iv. 1,
where the apostle himself explains what he means by " deceitful
spirits and doctrines of demons," namely — ' false doctrine, by the
just judgment of God, put into the mouths of false teachers by
means of devUs and evil spirits — -just as we read in 1 Kings xxu.
21, 22, 23, of a lie being suggested by an evil spirit to the prophets
of Ahab, to persuade Ahab to his own destruction. In the same
way, throughout the Scriptures, ' a spirit of infirmity,' ' of fornica
tion,' ' of covetousness,' ' of giddiness,' * are put for these evils pro
ceeding from God through an evU spirit. Thus, in 1 Sam. xvi. 15,
it is said that " an evil spirit from Jehovah troubled Saul;" and,
in Mark ix. 17, one who had been struck by God, through an evil
spirit, with inability to speak, (aka'kia,) is spoken of as having
" a dumb spirit ;" but this most manifestly appears from Matt.
xii. 43, where, by the " unclean spirit going out," is denoted—
' the uncleanness expelled for- a time by the power of the ministry ;'
* Vertiginis, Vulg. ver. of Isaiah xix. U ; Eng. ver.—' a perverse spirit.'

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 213
for the unclean spirit himself, where he has once been expelled by
the power of a stronger than he, namely, of the Holy Spirit, never
returns thither again. An " unclean spirit," therefore, is ' un
cleanness proceeding from an unclean spirit,' which being broken
off for a time by the power of the ministry, the spirit himself, from
whom it proceeds, appears to have been expelled from hypocrites.
And from Luke xiii. 11, where ' the infirmity of being bowed
down' is called — " a spirit of infirmity," which is explained in verse.
16, where we are told that " Satan had bound" the wretched wo
man therewith. When the apostle, therefore, quoting from the
prophet, says — " God hath given them a spirit of deep sleep," the
meaning is — ' that God, by means of evil spirits, as the avengers
of the sins of this people, and the ministers of his own wrath, has
inflicted upon them a total insensibility to their own advantage,
and to the day of their merciful vgitation.' In the third place^
the word "table" demands our consideration here. "Table" is
' that which serves for nourishment,' but is in this place transferred
from external to internal nourishment. By " table," therefore, I
understand here — ' the sacrifices of this people, and all the service
of the law,' which was given for life, and for the nourishment of
spiritual life, (chap. vii. 10,) but yet became a snare and death to
this people, according to the prophetic imprecation of the Psalmist,
namely, because, through a perverted zeal for the sacrifices and
service of the law, that people rejected Jesus Christ, " the end of
the law," offered to them in the gospel. Fourthly, the apostle
says that their table would become not only a snare, but also a
" retribution," whereby he would intimate that this judgment, viz.,
' that the law should become a snare to them,' is the just recom
pense (avri(ii<r6iot,!r) of their sin ; for, as they perverted the sacri
fices and service of the law to another end than that for which the
law was given by God, so it is a retribution and just compensation
from God, that the sacrifices and service of the law should serve
another end to them than that for which God gave them the law.
The law was given as a " child leader to Christ," (Gal. iii. 24) ;
when, therefore, through zeal for the law, they reject Christ, the

214 Logical analysis of the
just reward of their error is, that the law which was given for a
table, or spiritual nourishment, should become a snare. The last
expression to be considered here is, " the bowing down of the
back," which metaphorically denotes—' the judgment of those who
lie under, and sink beneath, the intolerable burden of the wrath of
God.' The definition of ' hardening,' therefore, is this^-' a spirit
of deep sleep, or a deep sleep inflicted by God through an evil
spirit, so closing the eyes, ears, and mind against the ministry of
the word, that the very table itself, i. e., the sacred ministry of the
word, which should be for spiritual nourishment, becomes death to
those who are in this condition, and being thus dead, they remain
under wrath for ever.'
The "hardening of the Jews is next amplified from its causey
which also is indicated in the testimonies to be the 'giving,'
' making,' ' bowing down,' wikpereby God gives them a spirit of
deep sleep, makes their table a snare, and bows down their backs.
If it be inquired — what is meant by this ' giving ?' I answer — it
is ' the effectual execution of the wiU of God, whereby, from eter
nity, they have been made those left by election, their own abuse
of the sacred ministry of the word intervening ;' for although they
were made those left by election before they had a being, because
it is not only written — " Jacob have I loved," but also — " EsaU
have I hated," yet, previous to their being afflicted with this hard
ening, and before that spirit of deep sleep is given to them, they
reject the knowledge of God and the love of the truth, as the
apostle says, c. i. 21, 26 — " because that though they knew God,
they glorified him not as God, therefore God abandoned them to
vile affections," and, 2 Thess. ii. 11, 12 — " because they received
not the love of the truth that they might be saved, therefore God
sends to them the effectual working of error, that they may beUeve
a lie, and that aU may be condemned who have not believed the
truth, but have had pleasure in unrighteousness." The cause of this
hardening, therefore, is of three degrees-: the proximate cause is 
' the judgment of God, whereby a spirit of deep sleep is given or sent
to them.' Prior to this is the cause of that judgment or sending

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 215
viz. — ' their own rejection of the truth of God,' to both of which
Jude says, that they were " foreordained of old," {irakai vgoysyga^-
(tsvovg,) (Jude iv.) indicating the most remote and primary cause.
The last part of the amplification is taken from the adjunct of
the time, at the close of verse 8, — " even unto this day :" which
words must be connected with the last clause of verse 7 — " have
become caUous," the preceding words in verse 8 being included
within a parenthesis. The same thing is affirmed by the apostle in
2 Cor. Ui. 13, 14, from the typical nature of the law : Moses put
a veil on his face while announcing the law, thereby intimating to
the Jews, that the end of the law, which is Christ, lay hid in a
mystery, under the enwrapment or covering, as it were, of the law,
which veU was not to be taken away except in Christ ; whence he in
fers the samething ashe here asserts, namely — 'that their minds were
hardened, and that the veil remained upon their hearts, in the read
ing ofthe Old Testament, even to this day, nor would be taken away
untU their hearts should be converted to Christ.' This conversion
we do not yet witness even to the present day — as the apostle
speaks of his own age — in the case of the great majority of this na
tion. The Lord convert both them and us, that the riches of his
goodness in Jesus Christ may be glorified in the fulness ofthe world !
11. "I say." We have here the second argument, by which the
apostle proves that the Israelites are to be restored to the God of
their salvation, taken from the end of their faU, and that fourfold ;
thus : —
' If the Jews and Israelites in general, who were formerly the
people of God and his visible Church, have yet stumbled against
his Christ — (1.) that through their faU, salvation might come to
the Gentiles, (2.) that they themselves might be provoked to emu
lation on seeing the salvation of the Gentiles, (3.) that through
emulation of the GentUes some of them might be saved, and (4.)
that their salvation might be the fulness of the Church of God-
then the Jews and Israelites in general are to be recalled to Christ,
notwithstanding their rejection of him ;

216 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
' But the former— viz., that the Israelites have stumbled for that
fourfold end — ia true : ' Therefore they are to be recalled.'
The proposition is omitted as obvious ; the assumption consists
in an enumeration in verses 11 and 12, of the ends for which the
Jews were given over to their own counsel, so as to stumble against
Christ the author oftheir salvation. " Whether have they stumbled,
or — " whether therefore have they stumbled," &c. The first end
is here illustrated by a contrast : — ' the Jews have not stumbled
against Christ that they should fall away from God; but that
through their fall salvation might come to the GentUes.' " Far
from it." He proves the arsis and first member of the contrast by
his own effect, in devoutly expressing his aversion to, and abhor
rence of the faUing away of the Jews — ' May God avert so great
a judgment from his people, as that the Jews should stumble
against Christ for this end, to fall away from God ;' whence what
is here expressed in the Greek idiom, by the words — " far from it"
(fiaj y'svoiro), is in the Syriac version expressed 'by a form of
prayer — " Do thou spare :" this is also the commencement of the
hypophora or subjoined reply, in rhetorical consultation ; which re
ply consists of two parts, of which this expression of aversion to so
great a judgment is the first. " But through their fall," &c. This
is the thesis and second member of the contrast, wherein we have
the true and- positive end for which the Jews stumbled against
Christ ; and it is at the same time the second part of the hypo
phora or subjoined reply to the question — " Whether," &c, at the
beginning of the verse, " To provoke them to emulation." This
is the second end for which the Jews stumbled against Christ,
namely — ' that by the GentUes drawing near to God in Christ, and
believing the Gospel, the Jews might be moved to anger and pro- _
voked to emulation, for a recompense, and that God might recom
pense * their iniquity, in moving to anger the God of their salvation,
by their idolatry and vanities ;' see Deut. xxxii. 21, — " they have
moved me to jealousy by those things which are not the mighty
(God) ; they have provoked me by their vanities : I also will move
* Eli Kvnpifftltetv.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 217
them to jealousy by that which is not a people ; I will provoke
them by a fooUsh nation."
12. "But if the fall of them," &c. This is the fourth end for
which the Jews stumbled ; for the third, namely — ' that some of
them might be saved,' is omitted here, to be more conveniently
expressed afterwards in verse 14 : the Jews, therefore, atumbled
against Jesus Christ, the Lord of their salvation : fourthly, that
their fulness might be the fulness and completion of the Church.
This end is proved from the first, by reasoning from the less to the
greater, in this way : —
' If the fall of them be the riches of «the world, and the dimi
nishing of them the riches of the GentUes, much more shall their
fulness be the riches of the world, and of the whole Church of
God ; ' But the former is true' — as we have seen in the first
end: ' Therefore so is the latter.' The proposition is contained in this
verse ; the assumption is proved in the next two verses ; and the
conclusion follows in verse 15. But to return to verse 12, by "the
fall," and " the diminishing," of the Jews the apostle means — the
rejection of the gospel, and of Christ offered therein, by the ma
jority of that nation ;' and by " the riches of the world," and " of
the GentUes," he means — ' their drawing near to God by embrac
ing the gospel, and Christ therein :' whence I would have you ob
serve — that the diminishing and riches, either of a people, or of
individuals from among a people, are to be estimated by the pos
session or want of Jesus Christ, offered in the gospel ; so that, he
who possesses Christ is rich, and, on the contrary, he who is with
out Christ as he is offered in the gospel, is diminished.
13. "For," &c. He goes on to prove the preceding assump
tion, and that the IsraeUtes have stumbled against Jesus Christ,
offered to them in the gospel, for the ends aforesaid ; the argu
ment being taken from the effect of Paul directed towards these
same ends : —

218 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
' I honour my ministry, to try if, by any means, I may provoke
my kinsmen to emulation, and may save some of them :
' Therefore, the Israelites have stumbled for these ends."
" In that I speak to you," &c. The words inclosed within this
parenthesis are a prolepsis, of two parts, whereby the effect of Paul
in discharging his ministry is explained : first, it is shewn how
Paul honours his ministry ; and then how that ministry which he
honours can be said to be his. In regard to the former, he says — :
' I honour my ministry in this that I say these things to you Gen
tiles,' that is, ' inasmuch as I assert that the Jews have stumbled
for the salvation of you Gentiles, in order that they being moved
to emulate you, may return to the God of their salvation.' As re
gards the other, he says, — 'I call this ministry mine, because, as
an apostle, I have been sent by the Lord to the GentUes.'
14. " To try if by any means," &c. We have here the two
ends on account of which Paul honours his ministry, illustrated by
the adjunct of their difficulty. The first end is — ' the provoking
of his kinsmen to emulation ;' the second, which, having been
previously omitted, is here expressed — ' the salvation of some of
them through that emulation.' The difficulty of both is expressed
by his saying — " if by any means I may provoke," or ' may be
able to provoke.'
15. " For if the casting away," &c. This is the conclusion,
illustrated by a similitude, and proved by reasoning from the less
to the greater. The conclusion relating to the reception of the
Jews is Ulustrated from the like—' it will be, as it were, a resur
rection of the dead : for by that type the prophet has iUustrated
their restoration from Babylon (Ezek. xxxvii. 1 ;) and in the same
way the apostle here illustrates their restoration from unbeUef *
and the power of Satan, which also is Babylonian bondao-e in a
spiritual sense. The conclusion thus Ulustrated, is proved, as
above, from the less, in the foUowing way : —
* 'Amo-rla.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 219
' ' If the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world ;
much more shaU their reception be, as it were, a resurrection from
death.' 16. "But if," &c. This is the third argument whereby the
apostle proves that the IsraeUtes are to be recaUed to God, and
wUl embrace Jesus Christ. The argument is taken from the
adjunct of the ' sanctification ' of that nation ; by which sanc
tification I understand — ' the separation from all the nations, and
consecration of that people, whereby, being separated from aU
the nations, they might be consecrated to their God, and might
become to him — " a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy
nation, and a people restored unto liberty, to shew forth the praises
of him who caUed them out of darkness into his marvellous light,"
as the apostle Peter, 1st Eph. ii. 9, quotes from Exod. xix. 6.
Accordingly he thus reasons : —
' Whosoever are holy, are to be recaUed out of the world unto
the God of their salvation in Christ ;
' But both the people of Israel, and the last of the stock of Israel,
are holy :
' Therefore the Israelites are to be recalled to God.'
The proposition is omitted as obvious ; the assumption is proved
in thi? 16th verse ; whence follows the conclusion — ' the Israelites
are to be recaUed.' The proof of the assumption consists of two
parts ; for he first proves that the mass of the Israelites, and then
that the branches are holy : by " the mass," I understand— the
majority of that people ; and by " the branches," — ' the last of
their posterity.' In both parts of the proof the language is meta
phorical. In the first part, the metaphor is taken, either from
the sheaf of new corn which the priest waved before Jehovah at
the beginning of autumn, as the first fruits of harvest, for the ac
ceptance of the people ; or from those first fruits which were of
fered to God after the seven weeks of harvest, when it was re
quisite that it should be unlawful for any one to eat either parched
or green ears, of the new corn of the year, before the offering

220 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
of these first fruits, in order that the rest of the mass might be
sanctified for the use of God's people, (see Lev. xxiii., verses 9-
22. ' The first fathers of the Israelites,' Abraham, Isaac and Jacob,
are, therefore, here compared to the first fruits ; because, as in the
offering of these first fruits unto God, the whole " mass was sanc
tified, so ' Israel' was holy, and, therefore, beloved in these fathers,
as the apostle afterwards explains in verse 28 — " as regards the
gospel, they are enemies for your sakes ; but, as regards election,
they are beloved for the fathers' sakes." In the latter part of the
proof, again, the metaphor is taken from trees, in which, of what
ever sort the root may be, such will also be the natural branches :
here, too, therefore, ' the first fathers' are compared to the root,'
and ' their posterity down to the latest,' to the branches. This
metaphor is transferred by the apostle to this place, out of Isaiah
xi. 1, where ' Jesse the Bethlehemite, the father of David,' is com
pared to " the root ;" and ' Jesus Christ, the son of David,' to the
" branch" or " scion :" whence, in Zech. iii. 8, he is styled — a
" sprout ;" and, further, to shew that he is the last scion, (Isaiah
iv. 2,) — " the sprout of Jehovah," because he was raised up by
God the Father, in the Son, through the Spirit, from the decayed
kingdom of David, Uke a new sprout germinating afresh from a
root. 17. " But if," &c. This is a prolepsis, wherein the apostle re
plies to a twofold objection of the GentUes against the Jews, and
their recal (above concluded in verse 15,) to the God of their sal
vation through the gospel. As the Gentiles were a reproach to
the Jews so long as the ministry of the law continued among the
latter, as this same apostle testifies in Eph. ii. 11 ; and Peter in
Acts x. 18 ; so the apostle foreseeing that the Jews, as rejecting
Christ, would be a reproach to the Gentiles who had professed
Christ, and knowing that this would not be to the advantage, but
to the serious injury of the Jews, since they would thence take
occasion to oppose the gospel the more, endeavours to anticipate
the evU by refuting the objections which he foresaw that the Gen-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 221
tiles would bring against the Jews ; and these, as we have said,
are two. The first objection is this : —
' The Jews, by rejecting Christ, have been broken off and fallen
away, like withered branches from their root :
' Although, therefore, the root and the first fruits of the nation
be holy, yet they themselves are not holy, nor to be recaUed to
God.' " And you being a wUd olive," &c. The second objection
which he foresaw that the Gentiles would bring against the Jews
is set forth by opposites, and is to this effect : —
' Although I have hitherto been a wUd olive,' some one of the
GentUes might say, ' yet am I now engrafted into the true olive-
tree, and that in place of the Jews who were broken off as withered
branches ; and I have become a partaker of the root which you
say is holy, instead of those who were broken off :
' Therefore I am to remain in the root, and the Jews are not to
be recaUed.'
These are the objections of the GentUes against the Jews, to
which the apostle here repUes, and his reply consists of two parts.
The first given in this 17th verse contains a concession, whereby
the apostle concedes to the Gentiles the two following things :
First, he concedes ' that the Jews were broken off as withered
branches;' yet by way of softening this apostacy of the Jews as a
check to the triumphing of the Gentiles over them, he says, by
meiosis,* — that " some of the branches were broken of." The se
cond thing which he concedes is this — ' that they themselves,
namely, the GentUes, have been engrafted into the root of the
Jews, and made partakers of the fatness of the true olive-tree ;'
as it is also elsewhere said, without a figure — that " they who are
of faith are the chUdren of Abraham," (Gal. ui. 7.)
18. " Yet glory not," &c. This is the latter part of the reply,
in which, by epanorthosis, he admonishes the Gentiles, ' although
engrafted into the true oUve, yet not to glory against the branches.'
* Softening.

222 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
By " the branches" I understand — ' the natural branches of the
true oUve,' that is — ' the Jews ;' from this glorying of theirs against
whom the Gentiles are interdicted by a twofold admonition. For
when the apostle says — " glory not," the meaning is — ' take care
that you do not either glory concerning their being broken off,
•nor glory yourself, whosoever you are of the Gentiles, after the
flesh,* and through carnal pride, concerning your own engrafting
into the root of the true olive, instead of the Jews, who are the
branches broken off.' The latter he brings forward as the topic of
the next admonition, wherein, replying, as it were, a second tim£
to the Gentiles, he exhorts them not to glory ; the argument being
taken from the subject of the glorying, iUustrated by a contrast :•—
' That glorying wherewith you, whosoever you are of the Gen
tiles, glory against the Jews, belongs not to you, but to the Jews :
' Therefore do not glory.'
He proves the antecedent from the subject of the glorying : —
' That glorying of yours, whosoever you are of the GentUes, is
concerning the root ;
. ' But the root is not your root, but the root of the Jews :
' Therefore, that glorying of yours, whosoever you are of the
GentUes, wherewith you glory against the Jews, is vain.'
He proves the proposition by the effects of the root : —
' The root bears thee :
' Therefore your glorying is concerning the root.'
" Thou bearest not the root." He next proves the second mem
ber of the contrast, viz. — ' that that glorying belongs not to the
GentUes themselves.' The argument is taken from the negative
effect or disparate — " Thou bearest not the root ;" and the apostle
thus reasons : —
' If you, whosoever you are of the GentUes, bear the root of the
true olive and of the Jews, into which you have been engrafted,
the honour would belong to you, and not to the Jews ;
' But you do not bear the root, but the root you :
' Therefore, the honour that you have been engrafted into the
* Karja) ffcy>ico:.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 223
root, and made a partaker of the true olive, belongs not to you,
but to the Jews.'
. 19. " Thou wilt say, therefore," &q. This is a second prolepsis,
wherein the apostle repUes to a third objection of the Gentiles in
reference to their glorying against the Israelites, and their recal to
the God of their salvation. " The branches were broken off," &c.
This objection of the GentUes is taken from the end of the rejec
tion of the Jews': —
' The Jews were rejected, and, as branches broken off, have
fallen away from their root, that I, who am of the Gentiles, might
be engrafted into the same :
' Therefore, neither are they to be recalled, nor am I to be re
jected from the root, and I must boast against them concerning my
engrafting into the true olive.'
The consequence of [this objection] of the GentUes rests upon
the plnlosophical and common maxim — that ' when we have at
tained the end, we must not look beyond it :
'Wherefore, since they were broken off for this end, that I
might be engrafted, it is necessary to stop at my engrafting, nor
must the recal of the Jews be urged beyond it.'
The hypophora, or subjoined reply to the foregoing objection, is
contained in this verse, and consists of two parts : — The first part
of the reply is the granting of the antecedent, namely — ' that the
Jews were rejected, and have become branches broken off for this
end, that the GentUes might be engrafted in their room.'
20. " By unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by
faith." We have here the second part of the reply, wherein he
refutes the assertion, either — ' that the GentUes are to boast on
that account,' or ' that there is to be no recal of the Jews,' and so
denies the consequence of the objection of the GentUes. The ar
gument is drawn from the causes both of the rejection of the Jews>
and of the engrafting of the Gentiles. On the one hand, he as
signs, as the cause of the rejection of the Jews, and that on account

224 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
of which they have become branches broken off — ' the unbelief
(ariffrfav) of the Jews ;' and, on the other, he points to ' the faith
(rianv) whereby Christ and the blessing of Abraham iri him,
are apprehended,' as the cause of the engrafting of the Gentiles.
From these causes he thus reasons : —
' If they have fallen away by unbeUef, and you stand by faith,
you must not glory against them as not to be recalled, but should
fear for yourself, lest, like them, you faU away from the root by
unbelief; ' But the former is true :
' Therefore so is the latter.'
The hypothetical proposition is omitted as obvious ; for it is clear
that he who stands by faith, and sees others faiUng by unbelief,
should take heed to himself, lest he, in like manner, disbelieve, but
ought not to glory against those who fall by unbeUef, as being him
self exposed to the same danger with them. The assumption is
contained in the words quoted : — " Be not high-minded, but fear."
This is the conclusion of the hypothetical syUogism, where, by
' high-mindedness,' we are to understand — the presumptuous glo
rying of the Gentiles against the Jews ; while the ' fear' which he
recommends to them is — that of chUdren, whereby believers fear,
lest, through sinful glorying, either against God or against another,
they should, as a recompense,* be deprived of God's presence and
favour. 21. " For if God spared not the natural branches, [take heed]
lest he also spare not thee." This is the second argument, whereby
he proves the inconclusiveness of the objection of the GentUes,
namely — ' that the Gentiles ought not to glory against the Jews,
because they have fallen away from their root by unbelief, but
should rather fear for themselves, lest they disbelieve in like man
ner. The argument is taken from the adjunct of the severity of
God in punishing unbelief, which the apostle proves that the Gen
tiles should fear, by a comparison of majority, in this way : —
* xvrifitio-Piav.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 225
' ' If God did not spare the natural branches disbelieving, but cast
them out from their root, much less wiU he spare you who are a
wUd olive, if you reject the faith in Uke manner with them ;
' But the former is true :
' Therefore so is also the latter ;' that is — ' God wiU not spare
you of the GentUes disbelieving :
' Wherefore, (for there is here a prosyUogism,) you should take
heed to yourself, lest you fall away from the faith ; but you must
not boast against the disbelieving Jews.' The proposition only is
given in the text.
22. " Behold, therefore, the goodness and severity of God," &c.
This is a coroUary and conclusion deduced from the preceding
discussion, in which coroUary he recommends to the consideration
of the GentUes both the goodness and severity of God. By " se
verity" I understand ' the judgment of God against the unyield
ing,' a judgment most just indeed, yet especially to be dreaded :
under the name of " goodness," again, I understand aU those most
desirable effects of the gratuitous favour of God, which he gra
ciously confers upon his beloved, and which are chiefly, and above
all other things, both to be sought after and retained by the elect
of God, or believers. "Towards those who have fallen, indeed,
severity, but towards thee, goodness," The apostle Ulustrates
both the severity and goodness of God by their subjects, or the
objects towards which they are manifested : that of the severity
is explained to be — ' the nation of the Jews who have faUen away
from their root :' that of the goodness — ' every one of the Gentiles
who has embraced Christ by faith.' " If thou shalt abide in his
goodness." This is an epanorthosis whereby he corrects what he
"has just said of the goodness of God towards the GentUes, and
warns them that that goodness of God wiU not be continued to the
Gentiles any longer than they shaU abide in that goodness. ' Tq
abide in the goodness of God,' moreover, as the apostle uses the
term "goodness" in this place, is ' by keeping the faith to stand
fast in Christ, for whose sake, and in whom, God has become good

226 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
to the GentUes, as he formerly chose the IsraeUtes, before aU the
nations, in the same,' (Deut, vii. 7, 8) ; whence, in 2 Tim. iv. 7,
this same apostle, in the near prospect of death, congratulates him*
self, in the Lord, that he has " kept the faith." We ought also to
observe here, in passing, that the apostle does not call in question
the perseverance in the true faith of those who are truly believers ;
for he himself teaches that that has been made certain by God,
since, speaking of individuals, those who are once in Christ through
faith, always remain in Christ ; but addressing aU the GentUes as
one man, he warns them that they would enjoy the goodness of God
no longer than they themselves should remain in the state of those
whom God follows with his goodness ; for although it be true,
speaking of individuals, that those who are once in God's goodness
shaU always abide in that goodness, yet is that not true of any
whole nation, because, a nation which now professes the faith of
Christ, may afterwards fall away from the same, of which we have
an example in the case of the churches of the East, so distinguished
in the times of the apostles.
23. " But they also shaU be engrafted, if they abide not in un
belief." This is a second epanorthosis, whereby he corrects what
he has said in the coroUary, concerning the severity of God against
the Jews ; namely ' that they themselves also shaU be delivered,
and again engrafted into their own root, if they abide not in their
unbelief.' This, too, in like manner, is to be understood, not of
the reprobate Jews individually, for the decree of reprobation also
is immutable, but of the nation, which, when the apostle wrote
this epistle, was obstinately going on in unbelief, and therefore
experienced the severity of God : and he hereby teaches, that the
nation of the Jews is to be delivered, if they themselves persist
not in unbelief. " For God is able to engraft them again." He
proceeds to prove the foregoing epanorthosis, by an argument
drawn from the ability of God. By '" God," in this place, he
means ' God become theirs according to his covenant with their
fathers ;' otherwise the argument from ' being able' to ' being,' or

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 227
from ' being able to be engrafted,' to ' being engrafted, or ' actual
future engrafting,' would not hold good. For God is able to do
things which he neither wills to do, nor is ever at any time about
to do ; as when it is said in Matt. iu. 9, — " God is able from these
stones to raise up children unto Abraham," which, however, he
neither wills to do, nor ever shaU do : but what good things he is
able to confer, these he shall confer upon his own, according to his
own good will ; wherefore, the apostle proves, from the abUity of
God, that as many of the Jews as abide not in unbelief, having
been reconciled in Christ, shaU be engrafted again into their own
root. 24. " For if thou wert cut out of the olive which is wild by na
ture, and hast been engrafted, contrary to nature, into the true
oUve ; how much more shaU these, which are the natural branches,
be engrafted into their own olive ?" He goes on to prove that God
is able to engraft the Jews again, by a comparison of their second
engrafting with that first engrafting of the Gentiles : — -
' If God was able to engraft the Gentiles into the root of the
Jews, much more shall he be able to engraft the Jews again into
their own root ;
' But the former is true :
' Therefore so is also the latter.'
The argument here is from the less to the greater. The propo
sition is given in the text ; and is proved by the apostle by a com
parison of dissimilarity between the Gentiles and Jews, as also
between the engrafting of the Jews and Gentiles respectively : —
' The GentUes were branches transferred from the wild olive,
but the Jews were the proper and natural branches of the true
olive ; and the GentUes are engrafted into a strange olive, con
trary to nature ; but the engrafting of the Jews wiU be as that of
fhe natural branches into their own olive-tree :
'If therefore God was able to engraft the Gentiles into the root
of the Jews, much more shaU he be able to engraft the Jews them
selves into their own root.'
p2

228 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
25. We have here the fourth argument by which the apostle
proves that the Jews are to be recalled to the God of their salva
tion. The argument is taken from the contrary, and the adjunct
of the contrary : ' the hardening of the Jews' is contrary to their
recal ; and the adjunct of the hardening is here represented as
consisting in two things — 1st, it is ' in part,' and 2dly, it is ' for a
time.' Hence, therefore, the apostle thus reasons : —
' Those who have been rejected, or hardened, in part merely, or
for a time only, are to be recalled in their own time ;
' But the Jews have been rejected in part, only, and for a defi
nite time :
' Therefore they are to be recalled in their own time.'
" For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this
mystery." The apostle first illustrates the assumption ofthe fore
going syUogism, viz. — ' that hardening has happened to Israel in
part, and for a time,' from its genus : it is a " mystery," or ' a
thing known only to those to whom it has been revealed from
God.' He then proves this mystery, or secret revealed from God,
by the adjunct of apostolical authority ; and that — with a view- to
move the Gentiles the more — embellished with a rhetorical wish.'
' I Paul, both an apostle and prophet of the New Testament,
announce this to you Gentiles as a mystery, or secret revealed
from God, which I would that you Gentiles also should not be
ignorant of, namely, that hardening has happened to Israel in part,
and for a time :
'Therefore. you are thus to judge, and to know upon apostoUcal
authority, that hardening in part, and for a time, has happened; to
Israel.' ,
" Lest ye be wise in your own eyes." In passing, he inserts^
within a parenthesis, the reason for which he has revealed to them
this mystery, and why he wishes the GentUes not to be ignorant
of it. The argument is drawn from the end, thus : — ' I announce
this mystery to you GentUes, and would not that you should -be
ignorant of it, lest you be wise in your own judgment,' that is,
' lest, contrary to the command of Christ, (Matt. xi. 29,) and con-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 229
trary to the genius of the gospel, (1 Cor. viii. 2,) you, who have
been caUed to Christ from among the GentUes, should either be
proud on account of your knowledge of Christ, or should triumph
over the Jews as ignorant of him.' " That hardening in part has
happened to Israel." This is the assumption itself of the syllo
gism, which, in the words immediately preceding, the apostle has
both ampUfied and proved. This assumption consists of two parts.
The first is this — ' hardening has happened to Israel in part only,'
(axo f/j'sgovg.) This 'hardening in part merely,' is opposed to
•universal apostacy, in the manner of inferior contraries or subal-
ternates : for the Jews were hardened, during the time of harden
ing, not universaUy, (xaQ okov,) but only in part ; so that the
elect continued unhardened, whUst those left by election became
caUous, as he himself speaks in verse 7 of this very chapter, and
has proved in the first six verses, both by his own example, and by
a comparison of simUarity with the times of Elijah. Wherefore,
from a comparison of this passage with that prophecy of this same
apostle concerning the future apostacy of the GentUes, where it is
said ' that the day of the second coming of Jesus Christ wiU not
arrive, except there first come an apostacy of the GentUes also,'
-the apostle wishes to shew, that even as regards apostacy itself,
the condition of the Jews is better than that of the Gentiles ;
since he predicts that there will be an apostacy of them also, and
that without even the addition of the note of Umitation, (kto
ftiigovg). The apostle, however, does not intend to intimate by
this prediction of an universal apostacy of the Gentiles, that there
wUl be none of God's elect remaining among them under Anti
christ : for when, in the same place, (2 Thess. ii.) he afterwards
predicts that Antichrist ' shall be consumed by the spirit of
Christ's mouth,' he certainly foretells that during the whole time of
the darkness of Antichrist, a part of the Gentiles shall remain and
be reserved among the elect ; through means of which, Antichrist,
in his own time, is to be gradually consumed, the flame having
been kindled by the Spirit of God, until he be destroyed by the
brightness of the coming of the Lord himself. The comparison

230 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
here, therefore, is not of individuals from among the Gentiles, but
of individual Gentile nations with individual Jews ; and the apos*
tie's meaning is : — ' that the apostacy of the Gentiles, under the
tyranny and darkness of Antichrist, will proceed so far, that there
shaU be no entire and whole nation among them which shaU pre
serve the light of the gospel pure ; whUst, on the contrary, in the
falling away of the Jewish nation, there shaU remain among them
both many sons of light, and even some sincere preachers of the
gospel,' of whom, the apostle, in the first verse of this chap., pro
fesses himself to be one, and, in our own day, we have seen Im-
manuel TremeUius to be another. The apostle, moreover, pur
posely makes the comparison in this way ; and, here, when he is
speaking of the hardening of the Jews, expresses the note of limi-
tion (a,7ro fi'sgovg) which he omitted in predicting the apostacy of
the Gentiles, in order that he may the more effectually repress
(which is the design of this passage) the triumphing of the Gen
tiles against the Jews. " Until the fulness of the Gentiles should
come in." This is the second part of the assumption, the mean
ing of which is — 'that hardening has happened to Israel, not
for ever, nor until the end, but for a definite portion of future
time.' This portion of time the apostle defines by its subject—
' the coming in of the fulness of the GentUes,' that is ' the draw
ing near of all the Gentiles, or the elect out of individual Gentile
nations, to Jesus Christ their Saviour, through the gospel call ;'
which coming in, or drawing near of the Gentiles, the Lord pre
dicts, in Matt. xxiv. 14, would precede the end and his second
coming. The mystery, therefore, which the apostle here an
nounces to the GentUes, is this : — ' that God has defined the num
ber which he is about to call out of all the Gentiles, by the
preaching of the gospel of the kingdom, that they may become
partakers of the grace of Christ ; and that, although in themselves,
these called from among the Gentiles are not a people, and a re
bellious people, yet, being led, through the gospel, to the obe
dience of faith, they shall become the people of God, in order that
the Jews, who have been hardened until the fulness of the Gen-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 231
tiles, may be provoked to emulation by their example,' (Deut.
xxxii. 21 ; Eom. x. 19 ; xi. 14.) the fulness ofthe Gentiles having
been thus brought in, the apostle says — ' that there wiU be an end,
or that the hardening of the Jews also will cease, and that they
shaU be recalled, so that aU Israel may be saved,' as he subjoins
in the following verse : —
26. " And thus aU Israel shall be saved." This is the conclu
sion of the fourth argument, whereby the apostle proves Israel's
recal, of which the assumption has been estabUshed in the verse
immediately preceding ; and it is likewise the antecedent of the
enthymeme, which went before in the 1st ver. of chap, x., as was
there remarked : this conclusion is therefore the sum of the whole
discussion concerning the gathering again of the Israelites, which
has been pursued from the beginning of the tenth chapter up to this
place. — ' Therefore, aU Israel shaU be recalled from their present
hardening, and gathered again to the God of their salvation.' In
stead, however, of this ' recal and gathering again,' which was to
be concluded, is put ' salvation,' the effect of effectual recalling and
gathering again, and the apostle says " And thus all Israel shaU
be saved ;" that is, ' having been recalled through the gospel to
the God of their salvation, and the spirit of hardening having
been removed, Israel, yielding to the gospel call, shall be brought
in with the Gentiles, and become partakers of the salvation of
God. " All Israel." In this conclusion, " all Israel," is opposed
to ' a part of Israel ;' but the question is — of which Israel ? of that
to which the present discussion seems to refer (see above, chap. iL
28) ; or of that which is Israel in spirit, and composed both of
Jewish and Gentile believers ? We answer, that it may be un
derstood of either. If we understand it of the former, then the
' part of Israel' is the handful of the saved during the time of har
dening, which has been reserved for God among Israel according
to the flesh, and separated unto himself from the multitude of
those that perish, according to the election of his grace ; whUe
those that perish claim to themselves, on account of their multi-

232 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
tude, the name of ' the Israelitish nation,' and of ' all the peo
ple.' Thus, in the days of Elijah, the seven thousand Israelites,
who had not bowed the knee to Baal, when the great majority and
bpdy of the people of Jehovah, during the reign and apostacy of
Ahab, had apostatized from Jehovah, kUled his prophets, and dug
down his altars, were a part of Israel (see above, ver. 4) ; so, in
the time of Paul, was that very small number of Jews who embraced
Jesus Christ, while the great majority were apostatizing and
denying him, and who are therefore caUed by the apostle in vv.
1 and 2 of this chap. ' the people of God, whom God has not cast
away :' this very smaU number of Jews, I say, is called a ' part of
Israel ;' to which part if we oppose what the apostle here says,
" all Israel shall be saved," then " all Israel" will be ' the great
majority of the nation, or the body of the ancient people of God,
descendants of Israel.' The meaning will thus be, ' that before
the gospel ministration is ended, and previous to the second com
ing of Christ, not only shall the preaching of the gospel prove
effectual for the bringing in of the Gentiles to Christ, but after
the Gentiles shall have been brought in, the same preaching shaU
be effectual, through the gospel call, for the bringing in of the
Israelites ; and thus, as some, reserved for God through the elec
tion of grace, owned Christ as Lord in the days of Paul, so, when
the fulness of the Geritiles shall have been brought in, the great
majority of the Israelitish people are to be caUed, through the
gospel, to the God of their salvation, and shall profess and own
Jesus Christ, whom formerly, that is, during the time of hardening^
they denied, and that the prediction of a blessed seed, made to
Abraham their father, has been fulfilled.' This interpretation of
the passage is most pertinent to the scope of the present discus
sion ; but because that recal of the Israelites is not yet witnessed
in respect to the majority, (xara ^Xtjdog,) most interpreters ex
plain the passage differently, and understand what the apostle here
says — " all Israel shall be saved," of Israel in spirit, and also of all
Israelites according to the flesh, who at any time have believed,
whether in times of apostacy, as were those of Ahab and Paul, or

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 233
Of open profession, as that of David, or of reformation, as those of
Hezekiah and Josiah. In this way the meaning will be — ' that the
GentUes having been added, through the gospel, to the people of
God, that is, to the Israelites, who are Israelites in spirit, as well
as according to the flesh, " all Israel," viz., Israel in spirit, consist
ing of the elect rrom among Jews and GentUes, " shall be saved"
at the second coming of Christ.' This, therefore, is the foundation
of the mystery, now under the gospel, of the recal of the Jews,
that as it was unknown to the Jews, who were chiefly under the
law, in what manner the Gentiles were to be called, so it is unknown
to the Gentiles, under the gospel, in what manner the Israelites
are to be recaUed ; whether the body of the people are to be re
called to faith during the ministration of the gospel, or the elect
only to salvation, along with the GentUes, at the second coming of
Christ. Understood in the latter way, the passage, instead of
being the conclusion of the foregoing syUogism, will rather be an
inference deduced from it, in this manner : — " And thus," that is,
' the GentUes having been brought in, and recalled to the Jews,
*. e., added to those who have been reserved according to election,
aU Israel in spirit, gathered out of Israelites and Gentiles, shall be
saved.' But the former exposition is the more probable of the two,
as being both more agreeable to the design of the apostle, and bet
ter established by the Scripture authorities which are subjoined. .
• " According as it is written." This conclusion of the fourth
argument concerning the recal of the Israelites to salvation, inas
much as it is the conclusion of a lengthened discussion, which has
been continued from the beginning of chap. x. up to this place,
the apostle confirms by scripture authorities, to teach us ' that,
in the matter of religion, all other arguments that may be adduced
go for nothing, unless both the arguments themselves, and the
conclusion deduced from them, be based on the written word of
God ;' so that in theology ' God himself has said' (avrog s<pri)
holds the place of a first principle, which does not admit of being
demonstrated : from this he would also have us learn ' that the
word on which faith ought to rely, and which is unhesitatingly to

234 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
be regarded as the word of God, is that which has been committed
to writing by God's amanuenses, the prophets and apostles alone ;'
and, therefore, in adducing the word of God to establish what he
is teaching, he says,—" According as it is written." The testi
mony of scripture brought forward is one, but composed of two
passages from Isaiah ; for it is a usual thing with this apostle to
make a single testimony of different passages from the prophets
put together into one : thus, in the 8th verse of this chapter be
has adduced one testimony, consisting of two passages from Isaiah,
to prove the hardening of Israel ; and so here he has framed one
testimony out of two passages from Isaiah, to establish the recal
of the same Israel to the God of their salvation. The one pas
sage is from Isaiah Ux. 20, 21, " the deliverer shall come out ot
Zion, and shall turn away ungodUness from Jacob ;
27. And this covenant [shall be] to them from me ;" the second
is from Isaiah xxvu. 9. — " When I shaU have taken away their
sins :" from both of which passages the apostle establishes, by the
authority of the prophet, the two following things : First, he
establishes, ' that Christ coming in the flesh is to take away ini
quity, not only from the Gentiles, but especiaUy from Israel, so
that he is to be acknowledged by that people as their avenger and
redeemer :' and as this did not take place immediately on the
coming of Christ and the first publication of the gospel, on ac
count of the hardening of that people, which he has before taught
has happened to Israel for the sake of the bringing in of the Gen
tiles, the apostle infers ' that this benefit wUl afterwards be con
ferred by Christ upon the Israelites, and that they, although now
hardened, are yet hereafter to be recalled to Christ, for the re
mission of their sins in him ; which recal wUl at length take place
after the GentUes shaU have been brought in, for the bringing in
of whom hardening has happened to Israel.' The second thing
which the apostle deduces from these passages is this, ' that the
covenant of God in Christ is to be with Israel after that previous
benefit shall have been bestowed, and God in Christ shall have

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 235
taken away their sins, and above all, the ain of hardening and re
jection of Christ.' The meaning of both passages, therefore, is
this, ' Although now that Israel is hardened, the apostle might
say, as he aays in Acts xiu. 46,—" We turn to the Gentiles," and
preach Christ unto them for the remission of sins, yet it wiU come
to pass at length, namely, when the fulness of the Gentiles shall
have been brought in, that all Israel shaU receive Christ, so that
they also shaU become partakers, as the Gentiles have become, of
the remission of sins in Christ ; and when this shall have taken
place, the covenant of God in Christ shall then be. with Israel, as
it now is with the Gentiles. That this is the meaning appears to
be proved by the most explicit language of the apostle in 2 Cor.
iii. 15, 16, where, speaking of Israel in his own age, he says, — *•
" even until this day, when Moses is read, the vaU is upon their
heart ; but when they shall have turned to the Lord, the vail shall
be taken away ;" in which words he seems to assert these two
things : — (1st,) ' that the Israelites were hardened, and that the
vail was upon their hearts at the time when he was preaching, to
wit, that an opportunity might thus be afforded for the bringing
in of the GentUes ;' (2dly,) ' that the Israelites would afterwards
at length turn to the Lord, at which time their hardening should
cease, and the vail be taken away.'
28. "(Therefore)," &c. This is a corollary, subjoined to the
last conclusion concerning the future recal of Israel to the God of
their salvation, in order that the apostle may thereby check the
triumphing of the Gentiles over the Israelites, against which he
has spoken at great length prolepticaUy in the course of the fore
going discussion, viz. in the 17th and following verses : as, there
fore, in the two preceding verses, the conclusion was ' that all
Israel are to be recaUed to the God of their salvation ;' so in this
verse, the apostle would conclude ' that the Gentiles ought not
to glory against Israel, not even during the present time of har
dening itself.' The corollary consists of two parts.. " As regards
the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes." In this, which is

236 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
the first part, he admits, indeed, that the Israelites are enemies td
God, but qualifies and softens the assertion, first, by saying —
' that they are enemies to the God of their salvation, not simpli-
biter,* and at heart, but secundum quid,\ and as regards the gospel ;'
secondly, by the end, viz. — ' that they are enemies to God for the
sake of the GentUes themselves,' that is, ' that the gospel of the
kingdom may be communicated to the Gentiles ;' and in this end,
especiaUy, lies the force of the argument, thus : —
' The Israelites are not enemies to God, except as regards the
gospel, and for your sakes, that the gospel may be preached to
you :
' Therefore, do not you Gentiles triumph over the Israelites,
although they are enemies to God.'
This first part of the corollary is deduced partly from the fore
going proleptical discussion in verse 11, where it is said — ' that,
through the fall of Israel, salvation has come to the GentUes ;'
partly from the fourth argument, and verse 25, where it is said —
' that hardening has happened to Israel only in part, and untU the
frdness of the GentUes should come in ;' the apostle, therefore,
thus reasons :—
' Hardening has happened to Israel, that, through Israel's fall,
salvation might come to the Gentiles ; and only in part, and until
the fulness of the Gentiles should come in :
' Therefore, the Israelites are enemies only for the sake of you
Gentiles, as it regards the Gospel.'
" But as regards election, they are beloved for the fathers'
sakes." This is the second part of the corollary, which is deduced
from the third argument, and preceding 16th verse : —
' The root of Israel is holy :
' Therefore, Israel themselves are holy and beloved by God ;'
whence the apostle proceeds by a prosyllogism, thus : —
' We must not triumph over God's beloved ;
' The Israelites are stiU holy and beloved by God :
' Therefore the Gentiles ought not to triumph over the Israelites.'
* Simply ; absolutely. t According to something ; relatively.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 237
This love, moreover, wherewith the Israelites are beloved by
God, is explained by its cause, which is, — ' the gratuitous election
of God ;' " Jehovah, thy God, hath chosen thee unto himself above
aU the nations which are in the whole earth," (Deut. vii. 6 ;) and
this election is the cause of the love, as it is said in the same place,
(verses 7 and 8.) The election itself is then explained by its sub
ject, which was — ' the fathers of the IsraeUtes :'
' God choose the fathers ofthe IsraeUtes, and the Israelites them
selves in their fathers :
' Therefore the IsraeUtes are beloved in their fathers because of
election.' 29. " For the gifts and caUing of God are such," &c. He goes
on to prove the consequence of the foregoing enthymeme, viz. —
' that the love of God stUl continues to remain to the Israelitish
nation, inasmuch as God chose their fathers, and themselves in
their fathers.' The argument is taken from the unchangeableness
of the gifts of God — both those which God, through his Spirit^
speciaUy confers upon his own, and effectual caUing, through which
these gifts become known to themselves, thus : —
. ' God cannot repent of his own election, whereby he has chosen
his own, nor of the love wherewith he loves his own, nor of that
gift which he specially confers upon his own, nor of the effectual
caUing whereby he calls his own out of the world unto himself,
and causes his gifts to become known to themselves ;' or, to ex
press the same thing in other words, ' election, love, effectual call
ing, are gifts so unchangeable, that they can never afterwards be
taken away from those on whom they have once been conferred ; ,
' But God chose the Israelites in their fathers, loved, and effec-
tuaUy caUed them to be a people unto himself: ' Therefore the
election, love, effectual caUing, and other gifts of that kind bestow
ed by God on the Israelitish nation, continued to remain with God'
— or, which is the same thing, ' the IsraeUtes stiU continue be
loved, because of their election in the fathers,'
From this, therefore, two things fall to be observed by us. The

238 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
first thing is, that the mind of the apostle is this, ' that the Is
raelitish nation, from the time that they were once elected in their
fathers, beloved and effectually called to God, have never since
been, nor ever shaU be rejected by God, but always continue the
people of God among the rest of the elect, as they were in the daya
of Elijah and Paul, and shall be in the days of their future recal :'
and this is what the apostle expressly asserts in verse 2 of this
chap. " God hath not cast away his people whom he foreknew."
The second thing which falls to be observed by us here, is that
although the hardened and apostates in the Israelitish nation often
formed the great majority of that people, as they continue from the
days of Paul to the present day ; yet these, according to the mind
Of the apostle, are never to be reckoned the Israelitish nation, but,
as he has spoken above, dried branches from the trunk of Israel,
which have been broken off through their own unbeUef.
30. The next two verses contain the fifth argument, whereby
the apostle proves that the Jews are to be recalled to the God of
their salvation. The argument is taken from the end of Israel's
apostacy or revolt — < the Israelites have not obeyed God, but have
revolted, for this end, that they themselves might afterwards Ob
tain mercy ;' from which end the apostle thus reasons :
' Whosoever are disobedient for this end, that they may after
wards obtain mercy, shaU obtain it'— this, which is the proposition,
is omitted, as being obvious and self-evident ; the assumption is
illustrated by a comparison. —
' As the Gentiles, who were formerly unyielding and disobedi
ent to God, have since obtained mercy; so the Israelites, who are
now unyielding and disobedient to the gospel, shall again obtain
mercy to the obedience of the gospel, and participation of the sal
vation which is in Jesus Christ :
' Therefore the Israelites, who have become disobedient, shall
obtain mercy, and are to be recaUed to the God of their salvation.'
" For, as you also formerly did not obey God." This is the
protasis or first part ofthe comparison; whieh contains two things:

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 239
(1.) ' The revolt of the Gentiles'— the Gentiles did not obey God;"
(2.) ' The issue of their revolt.' As regards the former, namely,
' the apostacy of the Gentilea,' it is illustrated by the adjunct of
the time — ' formerly, that is, 'from the building of the tower of
Babel even to the incarnation (hffdgxotriv) of the Son of God.'
" But now have obtained mercy." This is the second thing in
cluded in the protasis, viz. ' the issue of the GentUes' apostacy'—
'the Gentiles, after apostacy for a definite time, have obtained
mercy.' " Through their disobedience." The apostle illustrates
' the mercy of the Gentiles' and the issue of their apostacy, by the
adjunct of its occasion; which was — ' the disobedience ofthe Jews,
whereby, rejecting the gospel, they were deserted by God, and the
offers of grace through the gospel transferred to the Gentiles.'
31. " To have these also now," &c. : this is the apodosis, or se
cond part of the comparison and the assumption of the syUogism ;
which, in Uke manner, contains two things. The first thing is —
' the apostacy of Israel' — " they" viz. ' the Israelites,' " do not obey
God ;" which is in Uke manner iUustrated by the adjunct of the
time " now," that is ' now that Christ has come, and under the
revelation of the gospel, even to the bringing in of the fulness of
the Gentiles.' " That through your mercy they also may obtain
mercy." This is the second thing contained in the apodosis,
namely, ' the end or issue of the apostacy of the Jews,' viz, — ' the
obtaining of mercy ;' which is illustrated by the adjunct of its occa
sion — ' the Israelites, having been recalled, shall obtain mercy
through the mercy of the Gentiles themselves.' By the " mercy
of the Gentiles," moreover, I understand, ' that which, now that
the gospel has come, they have obtained through occasion of the
hardening of the Israelites,' that is ' the grace which they have
received to beUeve the gospel when preached, and to embrace
Jesus Christ offered in that preaching for righteousness and Ufe ;'
of which grace we see an instance at Antioch (Acts xiii. 48, 49),
where, while the Jews are contradicting and fuming with indigna
tion, the GentUes hear, and, having heard, rejoice, and for joy ex-

240 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
tol the word of God, so that from them this same grace sounds
forth and is published through the whole region, to be yet beUeved
in among the Gentiles. Through this grace, or mercy of God be
stowed upon the Gentiles, the apostle says, that the Jews shall
obtain mercy, when the time of their recal and obtaining mercy
shall have come : because God, through this mercy, will provoke
the Jews, in their own time, to emulation, that is, to embrace the
same mercy with the GentUes, which is said, in v. 11 of this chap.
to be the end of the mercy conferred upon the Gentiles.
32. " For God hath shut up," &c. This is the sixth and last
argument whereby the apostle proves the recal of the Israelites,
from the end of God in shutting up under disobedience, which is
— ' that he may shew-mercy to the disobedient themselves;' whence
the apostle thus reasons : —
' Those whom God shuts up under disobedience, in order that
he may shew mercy to them, are to obtain mercy, and to be re
called to the God of their salvation ;
' But God has shut up aU' — that is, ' not only the GentUes, in
times past, but now also the Jews' — ' in unbelief, that he may
shew mercy to aU,' that is, ' not only to the Gentiles, but also to
the Jews themselves :
, ' Therefore, as the Gentiles have obtained mercy, and have been
brought in through the gospel, so are the Israelites to obtain mercy,
and to be recaUed to the God of their salvation.'
The assumption alone is given in the text, the rest being obvious.
This " shutting up," moreover, whereby God shuts up all under dis
obedience, is — ' the effectual operation of God accordmg to his own
eternal decree, whereby, through his own wisdom and knowledge,
he effects that all, first the Gentiles, and then the Jews, have be
come disobedient, not only in Adam, through his fall, but also
since, in such a way, that God himself should always continue
most just, and be justice itself, so as to be in no degree the author
of the disobedience or sin, either of the Gentiles or of the Jews
but whereby he makes the disobedience of both the medium of

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 241;
displaying his own mercy in Jesus Christ ; which niercy, whoso
ever shall despise, shaU perish eternally to the glory of his justice
in judgment, as those who have been fore-ordained to that des-!
piaal.' Thi8 same mercy and justice the apostle has set before us
for our contemplation, when, in the 22d verse preceding, he ad
monishes every one, saying, — " Behold, therefore, the goodness and
severity of God ;" just as also, in the foUowing verse, he admires
the wisdom, knowledge, and justice of God, as shining forth in hia
goodness and in his severity, apart,
33. Hence, to the end of the chapter, we have an epipbonema-
tical* conclusion of the discussion which had been prosecuted from
the commencement of chapter ix. up to this place, concerning the
revolt of the Israelites, the caUing of the Gentiles, and the recal
of Israel when once the fulness of the GentUes has been brought
|n. ' The epiphonema consists of two parts. The first part, which
is given in this 33d verse, contains an assertion of the wisdom of
God, the knowledge of God, and the justice of God in all his ad?
ministration ; the assertion being—' that God himself is wisdom
itself, knowledge itself, and justice itself.' This assertion, more
over, is embelUshed by a twofold exclamation, wherein the apostle
admires the wisdom, knowledge, and justice that are in God. " 0
the profound riches, both of the wisdom and of the knowledge of
God ! " This is the first exclamation, in which he both magnifies and
admires, as weU the wisdom as the knowledge of God. He mag
nifies them, moreover, in two ways. First, absolutely, when he
puts—" the riches of the wisdom," and " the riches of the know-
lege" for — 'the wisdom,' and 'the knowledge' " of God;" by
which magnifying he would intimate — -' that God himself is rich
riri wisdom, also that the knowledge of God is the riches of know
ledge, and, consequently, that God is rich in knowledge ;' for so
the apostle is elsewhere wont to express the essential knowledge
of God ; as in Col, ii. 3, where he says, that in Christ "are hid
aU the* treasures of wisdom and knowledge," just as " iri him
* A sentence added to finish with ; a moral.
Q

242 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
dwelleth aU the fulness of the Godhead bodUy," as it is said in the
9th verse of the same chapter. Again he magnifies this know
ledge and wisdom of God comparatively, when he says — that the
riches of his wisdom, and the riches of his knowledge are " pro
found," and as it were ' an abyss of wisdom and knowledge, un
searchable alike to angels and to men, and, consequently, to every
creature :' for God knowa both what ia in angels and what is in
men, and needa not that any one should teU him (John ii. 25);
but into hia boundless wisdom and knowledge neither man nor
angel can penetrate. FinaUy, he admires them by exclaiming —
" Oh I the profound riches," &c. " How inscrutable are hia judg
ments, and unsearchable hia way a !" By the u- judgments" of God
I understand ' the counsels of the divine mind,' or the primary
effects of his wisdom and knowledge, especially, however, as adapted
to shut up all under disobedience, in order that God may shew
mercy to all : by the " ways" of God again, I understand ' the
executions ofthe divine mind,' or the secondary effects of his wis
dom and knowledge, especiaUy in shutting up all under disobedi
ence, in order that God may shew mercy to aU. This, therefore",
is the second exclamation, wherein the apostle, with devout admi
ration, asserts — ' that both the counsels of God, and the execution
of his counsels, whether in shutting up under disobedience, or in
shewing mercy, are inscrutable to man in such a way that although
man cannot see the reason of them they are nevertheless always
most just and most wise.'
34. " For who hath known the mind of the Lord," &g. He
proves the first part of the assertion, viz. — ' that the riches, both
ofthe wisdom and ofthe knowledge of God, are profound beyond
every creature,' by the teatimony of scripture, from Isaiah, xl. 13,
14. The apostle cites the prophet, and interrogatively plies
every creature with the negation of penetrating into the mind
of God; for when he says— " for who hath known the mind of
the Lord.? or who hath been his counsellor?" he wishes to
extort from all, whether angela or men, the confession that

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 243
there is none. The apostle, therefore, thus reasons out of the
prophet : —
' No One, whether angel or man, has ever penetrated into the
knowledge of the mind of God, or been able to act as hia coun-
seUor in the conduct of his affairs :
' Therefore, the riches both of the wisdom and of the knowledge
of God are worthy of admiration.'
35. " Or who hath previously given to him, and it shall be ren
dered to him again ?" He next proves what he has above said in
the second part of the exclamation in verse 33, viz. — ' that God is
most just, and consequently the rule of justice itself, both in aU his
counsels, and in the execution of them aU, although his counsels
are inscrutable, and his ways unsearchable.' The argument is
drawn from the definition of justice; for justice consists in render
ing again what has previously been given ; since it is the part of
justice to render justly, or as equity demands, to the giver. Of
this justice, as there are two kinds — distributive justice, and com
mutative justice, so what we have said is common to both ; for dis
tributive justice bestows nothing on him who deserves nothing,
but dispenses to him who has previously deserved reward or
punishment, as the case may demand ; while commutative jus
tice demands that, in a voluntary and lawful contract, a just
price be given for a thing received in exchange. He, therefore,
on whom nothing has been previously bestowed, as a most free
agent, cannot be accused of injustice, either in his counsels, or
in his ways and actions towards others. The apostle, accordingly,
thus reasons —
' He to whom no one, either angel or man, has previously given
any thing, so that it may be rendered again to the giver, cannot
be unjust, either in his counsels, or in the execution of them, but
is most juat ;
' Bui nothing has been, nor is it possible that anything could
have been previously given to God, by any one, either angel or
man, so that it might be rendered again to him by God :
Q 2

244 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
Therefore, God is unjust to no one, either angel or man, either5
in his counsels, or in the execution of his counsels.'
The assumption— which deprives every creature who ia but a
creature, of alLmerit, and vindicates God from aU injustice, both
in his decrees, whether to life or to death, and in the execution of
what he has eternally decreed — is given in the text, and is the
very thing which the same apostle has before replied in the course
of this identical discussion, (chap. ix. vv. 20, 21)—" Nay, but O
man ! who art thou that repliest agairist God ? Shall the thing
fashioned say to him that fashioned it, Why hast thou made me
thus ? Hath not the potter power over the clay, out of the same
lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dis
honour ?" — in which words he vindicates the justice of God, what
ever may be the coinplaints of sinners against it, and upon the
same ground, viz., that he is a most free agent, and a debtor to
none. 36. In this verse he proves the foregoing assumption, viz. — <¦'
' that no one has previously given to God that it may -be rendered
to him again.' The argument is taken from two effects of God,
and the end of both jointly : the first effect is that of — ' creation,'
for aU things are " from him," effecting ; the second is that of —
' preservation,' for aU things are " through liim,". as the God of
providence, and the administrator of all ; the end of both is— 'his
own glory,' which is expressed by the words — " to him," (hg
¦avrov,") that is, — ' for the sake of him and of his glory.' "To him
be glory." This is the second part of the epiphonema, as we have
observed on verse 33 ; and contains a celebration- of the divine
praises, which is here made in two parts. The first part contains
a proclamation, whereby the apostle, in the name of the whole
Church, ascribes glory to his God. " To him be glory for ever."
He amplifies the glory which he has ascribed to God by its ad*
junet, uairiely— ' that it shaU both endure, and ougnt to be cele
brated by the Church for, ever.' • " Amen !" This is the second
part of the celebration of the divine glory, containing an, acknow-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 245
ledgment,' whereby the apostle, in the name of every member of
the Church, signifies his approbation of the glory which he has
proclaimed, as most justly ascribed, and to be ascribed for ever, ta
his God;

CHAPTEE XII.
: Thus far we have had the first part of this isagoge to the truth
in Christ,* and compendium of the Christian religion, in the com
mendation of the gospel and proof of the proposition — ' that, the
gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believ
eth.' In this proof the apostle has discussed two things : first — :
' that righteousness whereby man is justified before God ;' and
secondly — 'the life which follows thereupon.' And he has rea
soned concerning each in two ways, both constructively and
destructively : concerning righteousness — ' that it is through the
faith of the gospel,' he has reasoned from the 18th verse of chap. i.
to the 20th verse of chap. v. ; from which place up to the commence
ment of the 8th chapter he has replied to all objections whatever,
drawn from the law, which could be adduced against the righteous
ness of faith : in chap. viii. againj he has reasoned concerning the
full persuasion of life, and the certainty of escaping condemnation,1
which in its beginning at least, is possessed by aU who are justified
through the faith of the gospel ; and has replied to the objections
against that way of Ufe, taken from the people of the law, or Israelj
according to the flesh, from the commencement of chap. ix. up to
this place, or the commencement of the 12th chap. Now follows
in order, the second part of this isagoge, which whoUy consists in an
exhortation to a life worthy of the gospel, or such as befits him
who is righteous, and looks for life from the righteousness of faith,
that is, God's righteousness in Jesus Christ.
* T«i< sv X^iirrai' ' icXvihiav.

246 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
1. "I exhort you, therefore," &c. This exhortation is deduced
from his previous teaching, as a conclusion from its antecedent, or
an effect from its cause, which the apostle indicates in the com
mencement of the chapter, by the illative particle (ovv) " there
fore," to teach us : — ' that a conversation conformed to this world,
and a sincere profession of the gospel, are inconsistent and incom
patible with each other, so that whosoever would live a new Ufe
here, in accordance with a sincere profession of the gospel, so as
thence to hope for eternal life, must withdraw himself from the
conversation of this world ; and, on the contrary, that whoever has
not withdrawn himself from the conversation of this world, does
not yet sincerely hope for eternal life, nor has yet begun to be a
new man, and to live upon this earth that life of God which is
called ' the new life,' namely, that of an evangelical profession :
and this is what the apostle elsewhere expressly asserts, Col. iii.
yv. 1, 2, 3, where he connects the desire, and consequently the
hope of those things which are laid up for us in that everlasting
Jifej with the first resurrection, subjoining — " for ye are dead," and
afterwards, ver. 5 — " mortify, therefore," &c. ; wherefore, no man
can live a life worthy of the gospel, unless he be mortified to the
world. This second part of the isagoge consists in a proposition, con
tained in the two first vv. of this 12th chap. ; and an exposition of
the proposition, from the 3d ver. of chap. xii. to the 15th ver. of
phap. xv. The apostle proposes this exhortation of his to a life
Worthy of the gospel, in these first two vv., in two ways : first,
figuratively, by an allegory borrowed from the law, in ver. 1 ; then
in plain terms, without a figure, in ver. 2. The allegorical propo
sition ia this : — " present your bodies a sacrifice to God ;" which
he first of aU persuades to by arguments, and amplifies. The ar
guments which he employs are three in number. Of these, the
first is taken from the instrumental efficient cause, indicated by
the words already quoted — " I (the apostle Paul) exhort you, to
present your bodies a sacrifice to God :" for evangehcal exhorta
tion, by the heralds of God, is the instrument of new obedience,

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 247
whereby God ordinarily effects that his people should present
their bodiea a aacrifice unto him ; and this exhortation, whenever
it is accompamed with apostoUcal authority, is of no Uttle weight
to persuade to obedience. Paul, therefore, thus argues here : —
' I, an apostle of Christ Jesus, exhort you, by my authority as
an apostle, to present your bodies a sacrifice to God :
' Therefore, do you present your bodies to God aa a Sacrifice.'
" Brethren." The second argument of exhortation ia drawn from
a participation in common grace, which the apoatle indicates by
the common brotherhood subsisting betwixt himself and them ; for
whoever are brethren in Christ, are at the same time, also the sons
of God in Christ, " and if sons, also heirs, joint-heirs with Christ,"
and partakers in him of common grace : in styling them — " breth
ren," therefore, that is — ' partakers, through Christ Jesus, of the
same grace with himself,' he wishes to shew, that that communion
or brotherhood in common grace, should persuade them to obe
dience, and should induce them to present their bodies, as he him
self had presented his, a sacrifice to God. "By the compassions
of God." " Compassions" (hixrigpoT) denote two things : first — •
' the effects of mercy ;' that is, ' the inward affections proceeding
from mercy ;' and secondly — ' the very tender affections of mOst
loving mothers.' By " the compassions of God," therefore, in this
place, the apostle means — ' the very tender affections of God, as of
a most loving father, to speak anthropopathicaUy, towards ug, who
have been reconciled to him in Christ, and all proceeding from the
divine mercy :' for so the Psalmist defines the compassions of God,
in Psalm ciu. 13, when he says, that — "Uke as a father pitieth his
children, so Jehovah pitieth them that fear him." This, therefore,
is the third argument for the aUegorical proposition, whereby he
persuades them to present their bodies as a sacrifice to God. The
argument is taken from the end, thus : — ' present your bodies as a
sacrifice to God, by the compassions of God,' that is, ' that it may
be made manifest both to your own conaciences, and to others in
the Church, who are the chUdren of God's mercy, that you are
partakers of these compassions ;' or it may be said that the argu-

248 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
ment contained in these words is drawn from the efficient cause/
in this way : —
'Since God is merciful to you in the communication of
the gospel, and of his grace in his Son,' as has- before been
proved, and has thus shewn that he entertains towards you
the affection of a father, and that of the tenderest kind (Isaiah
*lix. 14, 15):
' Do you therefore, as a thanksgiving for so great a kindness" —
even the mercies ofthe children of God, communicated to you in
Jesus Christ — present yourselves as a sacrifice to God.'
From this observe two things : Notice first — that, if any one
wishes to shew that he is a vessel of mercy, and a partaker of the
compassions of God, he should offer himself to God as a sacrifice,'
Uving, holy and acceptable. The second thing to be noticed is—
that if any one be a partaker of the compassions of God, he can
not but offer himself as a sacrifice to God ; for such is the power
of the compassions of God communicated to any one, that they
cause him, to whom they have been communicated, to offer him
self to God as a sacrifice, living, holy and acceptable.
: " That ye present your bodies."
Thus far the three arguments in support of the proposition :
next comes the proposition itself, enunciated figuratively, as has
been said— <" present your bodies as a sacrifice untd God."
The form of expression is allegorical, and borrowed from the
law : we, or our bodies, are compared to the bulls, oxen, lambs,
kids, and other animals, which were offered to God under the law ;
our new obedience, which is the effect of faith and sanctification^
is compared to the consecration of the animals to be slain, whereby,
before being slain, they were presented to Jehovah at the altar ; and
so the acceptableness, in Jesus Christ, of our imperfect obediencej
is compared to the acceptableness of these sacrifices : for as many
things which are said in the law about the sacrifices to be offered
to God were shadows of the Son of God, who was offered on the
altar ofthe cross for our transgressions that he might reconcUe uS
to God ; so the ancient sacrifice of animals was a type of the sar

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 249
crifice afterwards to be offered to God, among all nations by new
obedience and giving of thanks, (Mai. i. 11.) By " bodies," accor
dingly, in this proposition, we are to understand by synecdoche—
' the whole man, composed of body and soul:' for as Christ redeems,
and reconciles to the Father the whole man, and sanctifies the
whole man by his Spirit, (1 Thes. v. 23) ; so man should present,
not only his body, but his entire person as a sacrifice to God, by
'blameless living. The apostle, therefore, here puts one constituent
of man for the entire man, a part for the whole ; and he thus
speaks, because, although it is from the heart that what either de
files a man, or proves him pure, proceeds, according as it is writ
ten — " out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh," and
elsewhere — that thefts, murders, fornications, and whatever defiles
a man, " proceed from the heart ;" yet it is in the actions of the
body especiaUy, as being openly subjugated to the bodUy eyes,
that God is either glorified, or his name exposed to reproach.
" Living," this is the third part of the verse, wherein he proceeds
to ampUfy the proposition of the exhortation thus defended by its
arguments ; and this he does in two ways : first, by the adjuncts
of the quaUties of the sacrifice to be offered ; and, secondly, by a
definition of this offering, whereby we present our bodies a sacri
fice to God. The adjuncts of the qualities of the sacrifice are
three : first, the sacrifice which we offer to God must be — " liv
ing;" then — " holy;" thirdly — " acceptable." By the first of these
quaUties this sacrifice of Christians is distinguished from that
of animals under the law : for the beasts which were offered were
slain, and consequently were dead sacrifices ; but the apostle
exhorts us so to offer ourselves to God, that we may be alive
when offered.
The same quaUty distinguishes the eucharistic sacrifice of our
new obedience, from the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ: for he
offered himself to God as a ransom, * and as the price of our re
demption by death ; but, as regards us, the apostle bids us offer
ourselves as a living sacrifice to God. Moreover, by the 'life'
^ ¦ - - Eif Xur/tav.

250 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
here aUuded to, I understand—' that new life, which ia oura through
the regeneration of the Spirit,' and which, in Gal. ii. 20, ia caUed —
' the Ufe of God :' the apostle, therefore, bids us take heed to our
selves, and seek, when we offer ourselves to God, that we may per
ceive the life of God begun and advancing within us. " Holy."
By the second quality, the sacrifice of Christians is distinguished
from the sacrifices of the GentUes, among whom both reUgion, and
life with men, which are the two branches of the new obedience
or offering here enjoined, were most fuU of defilement, from which
the apostle bids Christians take heed that their aacrifice be " holy"
or separated ; as he also charges at length, in Eph. iv., ver. 17 to
25 : for the ' sanctification,' either of a person or thing, is ' the se
paration of that person or thing from the defilement of a perishing
world.' This sanctification or separation of the sacrifice from de
filement, was shadowed forth by the sacrifice under the law, which,
by the command of God, behoved to be without spot or imperfec
tion, (Deut. xv. 21 ;) also, by the cleanness of those who offered,
and those who brought the sacrifice : for it waa unlawful for any
one to present himself under the law, unless he was pure according
to the purification which the law required ; [as we learn from]
Numb. ix. 6, where those who had been defiled by the dead body
of a mari are kept back from celebrating the passover of Jehovah
on the fourteenth day of the first month, and are put off to the
fourteenth day of the second month, that, having been first made
clean, they might then preaent themselves to Jehovah. " Accep
table unto God." This is the third quality, whereby the sacrifice
of those who are Christians in truth is distinguished from the sac
rifice, that is, from the service and life of aU who are not in Christ
Jesus, whether they be idolaters, without the pale. of the visible
Church, or heretics, or utter hypocrites, within its bosom. These
are altogether an abomination and abhorrence to God, both as re
gards themselves and their reUgion and life — "I have no deUght
in you, saith Jehovah of hosts, and I accept not an offering at your
hand," (Mai. i. 10 ;) ' whosoever are not in Christ ;' and that be
cause both the offerers, and whatever is offered by them, are im-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 251
pure : [for so we learn from] Tit, i. 15, where, when the apostle
has said, that — "to the defiled ((/iSiMatrpivoig) there is nothing pure,"
but that, " both their mind and conscience are defiled," he further
defines those whom he denominates " defiled," as " unbelievers," *
i.e., ' aU who are not engrafted into Christ Jesus through genuine
faith ;' therefore, it is because those who are not engrafted into
Christ Jesus, as weU as whatsoever is offered by them are defiled,
that neither they themselves, nor the gift which they offer, are ac
cepted, as the prophet speaks* Although,- therefore, that accept
ableness, or the third quality of the Christian sacrifice, whereby it
becomes " acceptable to God," follows the two preceding, whereby
the apostle commands that it be " living" and " holy ;" yet — inas
much as neither our new life, nor our begun sanctification can
stand before God, on account of the imperfection of both, unless
covered by Jesus Christ and his perfection — that acceptableness
is, properly speaking, the effect, neither of the life, nor of the holi
ness which has been begun within us, but of Christ apprehended
by us through faith ; therefore, it is not because this sacrifice of
Christians, namely, life and begun sanctification, is Uving and holy,
that it is acceptable unto God ; but it is because whoever is endued
with new life and true hohness is in Christ, that both the life and
holiness, and the gift itself, are acceptable,
" Which is your reasonable service." This is the second ampU-
fication of the sacrifice to be offered by Christians, taken from a
definition of that sacrifice : if you ask — what is the sacrifice of the
people of God under the gospel, or of Christians ? it is — ' the rea
sonable service of God's people, or of Christians.' In this defini
tion, " your service," or ' the service of the people of God,' is the
common genus, denoting — ' the duty to God to be performed by
God's people, according to both tables of the law, from the very
beginning of the world, on to its very end :' and in calling that
service (Xarge/av) " the reasonable" (rfjv Xoy<x^), he lays down
the difference, whereby the service ofthe people of God, with which
they serve him now under the gospel, is distinguished from that
* 'Ax/Vt»«.

252 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
with which they served him under the law; the one being external
and confined to stated places, times, and carnal ceremonies, but.
the other internal, in spirit and in truth. This difference, our
Lord points out (John iv. 20, 21, 22, 23,) in his reasoning with
the Samaritan woman, when she proposes to him a question of
controversy betwixt the Samaritans and the Jews, along with the
arguments on either side. The Samaritans said that God ought
to be served on Mount Gerizzim, the Jews, at Jerusalem ; this
was the controversy : the argument of the former was — ' that there
their fathers served God ;' of the latter — ' that according to the
law, it was necessary so to worship him,' (Deut. xii. 16, compared
with 2 Sam. xxiv. 18, in the former of which passages, God's
people are commanded to serve him in that place which Jehovah
should choose for himself out of all the tribes of Israel ; and in the
latter, he makes choice of the thrashing-floor of Araunah the Jebu
site, at Jerusalem). Our Lord replying to this proposition ofthe
woman, and justifying the Jews thus far in that controversy,
shews that the distinction betwixt the divine service from that
time forward, and the service of former times, would be this,
namely — 'that hitherto it was necessary that God should be
served at Jerusalem, as the Jews said ; but that thereafter a time
should come, yea, then was,' — by which he means 'under the
gospel' — ' in which the service of God should not be restricted
either to the Samaritan mountain, or to Jerusalem, but when those
who served God should serve him in spirit and in truth, wherever
they pleased.' The apostle, therefore, here calls this service of
God in spirit and in truth, without any restriction of place — " the
reasonable ¦ service ;" the whole of which he says is included in
the offering whereby every Christian offers himself as a sacrifice
to Jehovah.
2. " And do not conform yourselves to this age." This is the
second branch ofthe proposition, iUustrated by a contrast, and by
the end. "And do not conform yourselves to this age." This
forms the first member of the contrast, wherein he prohibits his

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO'THE ROMANS. 253
brethren, that is, all who were sharers- and partakers with himself
in the righteousness of faith and life through Jesus Christ, accord
ing to the gospel, from conformity (avtf^ri^jarie^ov) with the pre
sent age. By "the jpresent age " (roc kiaiva rovrov) here, I un
derstand, by metonymy of the adjunct for the subject — ' the men
of this age,' those, namely, whom the apostle, in 1 Cor. ii. 14, caUs
" sensual," that is, ' having no endowments except those of nature,
corrupt as that now is, and entirely destitute of regeneration,* or
the new birth through the Spirit :' for so Jude, in the 19th verse
of his epistle, defines the " sensual " man (-^vxixov) as — ' the man
who has not the Spirit (of Christ,') (rov ro smvpa fwj 'syjovra.)
By the 'conformity' ((rvax^otrisybov) again, which he here pro
hibits, I understand—' the endeavour to conform one's self in mind,
will, and the external character also of one's words and actions to
those who are sensual, and the chUdren of corrupt nature merely.'
Jn this, the first member of the contrast, therefore, he prohibits
conformity, either in our words or actions — whether internal, that
is, of the mind, or external, that is, of the body^with those who
have not been bom again ; for an extended statement of which
prohibition, along with the grounds of the same, see 2 Cor. vi. 14,
15, 16. " But transform yourselves by the renewal of your mind.".
This is the second member of the contrast, whereby he recom
mends to his brethren to endeavour to grow in the Spirit, or the
renewal of the mind, (which growth in the renewal of the mind, is
the growth of the inward man ;) and to manifest that growth by
a life unlike to the Ufe of this age, or " this world," as the apostle
styles it, in Eph. ii. 2. The import of these words is thus the
same as that of the charge which you read in Eph. iv. vv. 17, 23*
and 24 — " this I say, therefore, and charge you by the Lord, that
ye walk no longer as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their
mind;" "but be ye renewed in the spirit of your mind, and put
on the new man ; which, after God, is created unto righteousness
and true holiness." By the term " mind, (rov voog,) therefore, I
understand what the apostle means by the same word, when he
* naXiyysvsarixf.

254 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
says above, chap. vii. ver. 25—" with the mind indeed, I myself
serve the law of God ;" and which he himself, in the 22d verse of
the same chapter, has before interpreted [by the expression]^-" as
regards the inward man," {Kara rov hu av&ganrov) : " the mind,"
therefore, in this place, is — ' the inward man,' which, in Eph. iv.
24, is caUed— " the new man," that is—' the whole and entire na
ture of man, in so far as he is renewed,' or, as the apostle speaks,
— r" is created (anew) unto righteousness and true holiness," By
u renewal," (avuxaivaiotv,) again, I understand — not that whereby
" the mind,"* or ' inward man ' is renewed more and more day by
day, but — 'that whereby we ourselves are renewed at first, so
that we become inward men and new creatures.' Or you may
prefer to understand the term " mind " here in the same sense as
that in which it is used in Eph. iv. 17, namely, as — ' the old
mind, and such as was that of the GentUes without God ;' and
with this exposition, what is here added — " your " — seems to
agree, because what the mind of the Gentiles and those who stUl
remain in their natural atate is now, that the mind of the renewed
also was before they were renewed : therefore, when addressing
the renewed, he says— "be ye transformed by the renewal of your
mind," their "mind" may be weU enough understood as — 'that
which they had before they were renewed ;' and, taken in this
sense, "the renewal" (q avuxaiva>cng) wiU be— not that of our
selves, as we are by nature into the " mind," or new man, but —
' that of the old mind (rov voog) into the new mind.' Otherwise,
this ' transformation ' (f/isratrxflf/jdritrig) will be — ' the transfigura
tion of ourselves, whereby having been renewed in spirit, we so
change — in thought, word, and deed — our formerly impure nature,
that we become unUke to the world, and to what we ourselves were
when in the world) being assimUated to God,' that is — " created
(anew) after (the image of) God, in righteousness and true holi
ness." Three things are worthy of our riotice here. The first
is— that our renewal coinmences with the mind ; whence it
foUows, that before our renewal, the mind itself, aud the " wis-
# 'Q vous .

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 255
dom of the flesh," aa the apostle calls it, c. viii. 7 — just as the
external actions of the body, the words, the affections of the
heart, and the wiU itself — is enmity against God, and is wise after
the old man, until it be renewed by the Spirit. Hence also the
leading principle * of philosophers, whereby purity is ascribed to
the mind of man, even in his natural state, in ihe laying down of
rules, and also the freedom of choice of the Pelagians, Papists, and
Semi-pelagians, are refuted ; for if the mind itself must be renewed)
there is in man neither a mental light which is free from sin, nor a
voluntary choice which is not subject to sin. Notice, in the second
place — that, while the apostle here bids us ' be transfigured and
transformed,' or ' transfigure and transform ourselves,' yet he does
not ascribe to us any power or ability, either to transform, or not
to conform ourselves to this age, aU power for our reformation
being from the Holy Spirit ; but the apostle exhorts us for two
other reasons. He exhorts us, in the first place, that he may stir
us up to a devout use of the means employed by the Holy Spirit.
Thus, the Holy Spirit renews us through the ministry of the word)
and, therefore, the apostle excites us, by these exhortations, to a
frequent attendance upon the ministry of the word, in order that
we may be renewed thereby. Secondly, he exhorts us, because
the very exhortation itself, when it has seemed good to the Holy
Spirit to work through the medium of exhortation, is " the power
of God," or ' his powerful and effectual instrument ' for renewing
us. To these reasons we may also add a third, viz.— that the
apostle exhorts us to renew ourselves, although that is the work of
Go*d alone, Jn Christ, through his Spirit, in order to stir us up to
co-operate with God for the accomplishment of that work, accord
ing as it is written — -' to him that asketh it shaU be given, and to
him that knocketh it shall at length be opened.' We should ob
serve here, thirdly— that, according to. the mind of the apostle,
the Christian, sacrifice, or that which, in the preceding verse, he
has commanded us to offer " living" unto God, is made up of two
parta ;. the one consisting in our reformation, or the renewal of our
'fiytfcevtKof.

256 . LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE '
mind, whereby we are coriformed to God, and created again, after
his image, in righteousness and true holiness; the other, in our"
transformation,* whereby we are made unlike to this age, and ab
stain from the ways of this world, and of that life which is accord
ing to 'the prince who has the power of the air,' as the apostle
speaks, Eph. ii. 2.
" In order that ye may prove." We have here the end of each
of the foregoing — both of our transfiguration, whereby we are
made unlike to the world in our life, and of our renewal, (avuxai-
ya/asaig rov voog,) whereby we are made new creatures ; fer we are
both renewed and . separated from the world for this end — ' that
we may prove what is the will of God.' By " the wUl of God,"
here, I understand — ' his will as made known in the law concern
ing the new obedience of the renewed ;' for so the apostle explains
it in 1 Thess. iv. 1, 2, where, after reminding them of the com
mandments to new obedience which he had given them, he com
mands them to excel in the practice of these more and more every
day, subjoining this reason — ' that thewill of God is their sancti-
ff cation.' He then goes on to defirie " sanctification" by the mat
ter of it, as — ' abstinence from fornication, and every other poUu-
tion whereby the vessel of any of them — that is, either his body
or heart — might be defiled ;' for God dweUs, through his Spirit) in
both of these when regenerated, and each is to the regenerate, as
it were, a vessel or shrine in which are deposited the treasures of
spiritual grace, as the apostle himself speaks in 1 Cor. iv. 7. "To
prove" (ro Boxifidt^siv) that wiU of God signifies three things. ¦„
First, it is — ' to. understand' (ffvvisvai) God's will, that is, both to
know what it is, and to be able to distinguish it from every thing
.which is thrust upon .us, under the pretext of its being God'a will,
-when it is not that wiU, as the apostle interprets this word in
,Eph. v, 17. Secondly, " to prove" (ro BoxtfJud^siD) the wiU of God
is— -' to approve it when understood ;' and, in the third place, it is
¦ — ' to choose, or embrace, it when approved ;' for even the sensual
man (o i^vxizog) both understands the will of God, and wUl ap>
* Msr«ff%»jj««'nff,si.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 257
prove it when understood, but cannot embrace it, as the classical
writer testifies concerning Medea —
" The best I see and can approve,
The worst I still pursue and love ;" *
and,- therefore, the apostle here subjoins this proving of the will of
God as the proper end of the renewal of our mind, and of our se
paration from " the present evil world."
" That good and acceptable." He proceeds to illustrate " the
wUl of God," as in the preceding verse he had illuatrated the
Christian sacrifice by a threefold epithet. First, [by saying] that it
is " good," or ' whoUy relates to good things,' so that whatever God
wUls to be done by the regenerate, is itself good. Secondly, [by say
ing] that it is " acceptable," that is—' that it, in like manner, re
lates to things acceptable to God,' so that whatever is done by the
regenerate, according to the wUl of God, is acceptable to God in Jesua
Christ, and ia regarded as his service : hence, when the apostle exhorts
the regenerate to duty, he ordinarily employs this argument—' that
it is acceptable to God, (Phil. iv. 18; Col. iii. 20; 1 Tim. ii. 8.)
Moreover, by these two things, viz*- ' that it is good and acceptable
to God,' the apostle distinguishes the wiU of God from aU human pre
cepts in the matter of reUgion, which those who obey, under the idea
of serving God, neither do well, nor is what they do acceptable to
God, as our Lord himself testifies, in Matt. xv. 9, when he says--^
' that aU such service is vain.' " Perfect." . This is the third epi?
thet of the divine will, whereby it is distinguished from all science,
art, or other tradition whatsoever of men concerning duty ; for all
these are imperfect ; whereas, on the contrary, the divine wUL
made known by the law, is in every way complete, and shews to
man in the most perfect manner, what he should either do, or not
do; what is duty, and what a violation of duty.
3. Thu8 far we have had the proposition ; now comes the expli
cation of it, which wholly consists in various Injunctions concern
ing duty, according to the sound' doctrine ofthe gospel; for 'to
* (i Video meliora proboque; deteriora sequor." — (Ovid, Metam. vii. 20, 21.)
R

258 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
present ourselves as a sacrifice to God,' is — ' to be united to God)
and transformed, by the renewal of our mind, from the form or
fashion of this age ;' and ' to prove what is that holy, good, and
acceptable will of God,' is— ' by the power ofthe regenerating
Spirit " to walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit," or ' to
live dutifuUy, and in a manner worthy of the gospel.' Accordingly}
the explication of our 'Uving, holy, and acceptable sacrifice,' con
sists in — a setting forth of injunctions, whereby a life worthy of
the gospel is prescribed ; all of which are based upon the authority
which he possesses through the grace of his apostleship. This ex
position, therefore, ia divided into two parts : the first containing,
by way of a general, foundation, the authority of him who enjoins ;
the second, the injunctions themselves of a life according to the
gospel. The authority is, indeed, connected with the first injunc
tion, and laid down as the foundation of his injunction to those
whom he first enjoins, namely, the pastors in the evangelical
Church of God; in such a way, however, that it is more than ob
vious that it is likewise the foundation of the other injunctions
that follow, as appears from the 15th verse of chap, xv., where, at
the close of the whole, he assigns as the reason of his boldness of
speech,* and freedom in setting them forth — ' the grace which was
given him from God,'f A. e., the grace of apostleship and of fidelity
therein, which he has received from God, with a share of fruit
through common faith. .
" Therefore I command," (Ksyai yap). The term ydg is here the
n6te of regular Ulation : for as the apostle, in the two preceding
verses, has proposed to speak concerning a life worthy of the gos
pel ; he now proceeds, in due order, to deUver injunctions regarding
that life which is worthy of the gospel. Or the particle yag may
be taken as the note of the cause ; as if the apostle had said — >'I
both propose and enjoin concerning a life worthy of the gospel,
with authority, because grace for the apostleship has been given to
me.' In whatever way the: particle in question is taken, whether
as Ulative or causal, the word Xsyai, ' I say,' or ' command,' is a
\\u.'y<nu.i. f T^i* %aptv iofauruv aury &<ri tou Slav.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 259
term of authority, and appropriate to the commander in an army,
or a general among his aoldiers ;* and therefore Paul, having been
appointed as it were a general in the Christian warfare, by his
Lord, to enjoin upon others their duty, speaks with celestial au
thority, in accordance with the word of their common Lord. " I
command every one that is among you, through the grace which
has been given unto me." This is the reason whereby he shews
that that authority of his to command every one among them, is
not usurped but legitimate, as resting upon the grace of apostle
ship which had been committed to him by God ; and whereby he
pfecludes aU evU speaking on the part of the envious, if any should
be disposed to charge him with arrogance, while enjoining Sobriety
in wisdom, therefore thus reasons : —
' Grace for the apostleship has been given to me : Therefore I
command those things which I now proceed to write and commend
to you, by no usurped authority, but by the authority of the
apostleship which has been committed to me.'
" To every one that is among you." The foundation of autho
rity and grace having thus been laid, next come the injunctions ;
which are twofold: 1st, common; and 2d, special. I caU those
1 common which are due according to common law and simply, e.g u
to love one another. By the special again, I mean those which
are due, not simply, but on account of some special respect which
they have either to ourselves, or to our brethren ; for example—
" to the pure aU thinga," now under the gospel, " are pure," nor
are we forbidden by the law to eat any thing we please, but " to
him that esteemeth any thing impure, to him it is impure," and he
is bound, in respect to his own estimation, not to eat thereof; also
in respect to another, as a weak brother (namely), lest he cause
him to offend ; according to the law, therefore, we are free to eat;
but if any one eat without faith, or with cause of offence, then to
eat is evU. The apostle proceeds to treat of the injunctions of the
former class, from this place to the commencement of chap. xiv.
These are twofold, answering to the twofold duty which, according
* Compare Matt. viii. 9.
R 2

260 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
tp .the sound doctrine of the gospel, devolves on all who profesathe
gospel, and this twofold duty again arises out of the double relation)
which they sustain: for sincere professors ofthe gospelare, iri the;
first place, members of the Church of God, and in this relation.
they are bound to those mutual duties which befit the members of
a body of that kind; then they, are members ofthe body politic, or>
of a Christian state, and in that relation also there are duties de-.
volving upon them. Concerning the duties which we owe as mem-:
bers of the Church, the apostle enjoins in the remainder of this
chap, (xii.) ; and concerning those to which we are bound as mem-.
bers of a Christiari stater in the following chap. (xiU.) The former
again, or those which devolve on professors of the gospel as mem
bers of the Church, are also twofold ; for first, there are the duties
of the presidents,* or those who watch over others in the Church ;
under which are also included the duties of those over whom they
watch, answering, by analogy and proportion, to those of their su
periors : and concerning these, he enjoins from this place as far as:
verse 9. As there are also, now under the gospel, two classes of
men who watch over others in the Church of Christ, some " la
bouring in word," and others having charge in other ways (1 Tim.
v. 17); so there are two parts of this enjoining: the one respects
those who teach ; the other, those who have charge in other ways
in Christ's church. Both of these are exempUfied by the apostle
in the words already quoted, and that jointly, by their common
Object; for the apostle here denominates every one, under the
gospel, who watches over others in the Church of Christ in any
way — " one who is among them" (rov ovru lv avrolg) after the
example of Solomon, who, in 1 Kings iii. 7, describes the duty of
a king, by his "going out and coming in" among his subjects:
' he who is (6 a>v) in the Church,' therefore, in the passage before
us, is — ' he that goes out and comes in, in the sight of God arid of
his Church, is one who has charge.' " Let him not be wise more
than he ought to be wise ; but let him be wise unto sobriety."
This is the first part of the injunction, or that which respects those

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 261
who teach; illustrated, first of all, by a contrast, or if you please,
by the contrary : for " to be wise unto sobriety," and " to be wise
more than one oughtj" are contraries, although here distinguished
by the marks of a contrast — "not (this)," "but (that.") The in
junction, therefore, here given to those who teach is this — -'lei
those who teach in the Church be wise with sobriety, and riot
more than they ought.' The excess of ' being wise,' (rov <pgovs7v)
which the apostle here prohibits, is not the excess of the gift itself,
as if more of the gift of wisdom were given to any one thari ought
to be given ; which was the mistake of Festus, and the objection
wherewith he encountered Paul — :" Paul ! much learning doth
•drive thee mad" (Acts xxvi. 24) : for the gift of wisdom, like all
other gifts, is given to every one by the Spirit of Christ (1 Cor;
xii. 11), who gives to each according to his own good-will, and
whose wUl is the rule of just measure, so that neither excess nor
defect can be detected in his gifts, which are given in duemeasure'J
with respect to the recipient ; and, hence, the gifts which are here
¦said to be 'given to every one according to the wiU of the Spirit
of Christ,' are elsewhere said to be given — -" according to the mea
sure ofthe gift of Christ" (Eph. iv. 7), to teach us, that the Spirit
gives to every one in the measure that is due. This excess, there
fore, is not in the gift, but in the estimation of ambitious man, arro
gating to himself more than he ought, and that, indeed, variously.
For some arrogate to themselves a wisdom which they do not posA
sess; as the seven sons of Sceva, who laid claim to a knowledge
of casting out devils and conjuring (Acts xix. 13, 14), although
the event shows that they had received no such knowledge (v. 15) i
Others, who have really received the gift of wisdom, think that
they have received it in a larger measure than they have received
it ; which was the error of Aaron and his sister Miriam, when they
spake against Moses, (Numb. xii. 2.) — "Hath Jehovah spoken
only by Moses ? hath he not spoken by us also ?" They say with
truth, indeed, that Jehovah has Spoken by them, and that they
have been endowed with the gift of prophecy ; but they are mis
taken in this, that they think themselves endowed with it in an

262 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
equal measure with Moses, as appears from the reply of Jehovah
(vv. 6, 7, 8, ofthe same chapter). Thirdly, others glory concern
ing a gift received, as if they had not received it ; as those who
are blamed on that account by the apostle in 1 Cor. iv. 7. Those,
in fine, are said "to be wise more than they ought," (vrsg pgovstv)
who are either busy-bodies,* and think that they can do all things
by their own wisdom, even things to which -they are by no means
caUed by the Lord ; or who, carried away by their opinion of their
own wisdom, search into, and think themselves able to discover
things, in the matter of faith and religion, which have not been re
vealed at all by the Lord in his word. In short, therefore, aU
those who are proud, either of a gift which they do not possess, or
of a gift received as if they had not received it, or who are busy-
bodies, and enquire into things not revealed, are said by the apostle
in this place — " to be wise more than they ought" (virsg (pgovstv),
" As God hath imparted to every one the measure of faith." Thus
far the first part of this enjoining has been illustrated by the con
trary : now comes a second iUustration of the same from a defini
tion of ' sober wisdom ;' for " to be wise unto sobriety" (pgovsTv ug
rqv aaxpgosvyriv) is — ' to be wise according to the measure of faith
which God has given to every one.' "Faith," in this place, is
not as the Papists falsely and without authority affirm, a rule of
faith, handed down from the apostles, apart from the written and
only word, by which not only the profession and teaching of every
one, but even the Scriptures themselves and the preaching of the
apostles are to be tried ; since Scripture itself is the rule of faith,
nor is it to be tried by any other rule : but by " faith" is here
meant — 'the knowledge of faith,' or 'the knowledge of God
through faith in Jesus Christ, which God has given to every
one, out of the written word, through the operation of his
Spirit ; and hence, what is here termed " faith," is called,
in 1 Cor. xii. 7 — " the manifestation of the Spirit," (puv'sgufftg rov
irvsvparog,) or ' the knowledge of faith manifested through the
Holy Spirit out of the written word.' This " faith," or ' know-
TloXwrftet'yf&oyte-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 263
ledge of God in Christ,' is not given in the same and equal
measure to aU, not even all who teach ; but ia given to each in
his own and proper measure, according as it has seemed good to
the Lord to give it to every one. " To be wise unto, sobriety,"
accordingly, is — 'in profession, and in teaching the Church, to
keep soberly and modestly within the measure of the undoubted.
knowledge of God, namely, that most certain knowledge which
God has freely given to every one through his Spirit, and which
can be estabUshed by the genuine authority of the written word.'
The first part, therefore, of this injunction, enjoins on those who
teach in the Church — since aU have not the same illumination
from the word, but each knows according to the measure of know
ledge which has been given him— enjoins, I say, that neither in
profession should any one presume on knowledge above his mea
sure, nor in teaching set forth any thing except what is most cer
tainly known from the written word of God, as the standard of
truth. : 4. The apostle here stops to explain the definition of ' sober
wisdom' which he has given at the close of the preceding verse ;
and iUustrates what is there said, viz. — ' that God has not imparted
the same measure of faith to every one.' The argument by
which it is iUustrated is drawn from an extended similitude, the
protasis of which is contained in this verse, and consists of two
parts. " For as we have many members in one body." This is
the first part of the protasis — " we have many members in one
body ;" where by " body " he means — ' the human body,' or ' that
of the outward man.'* " But aU the members have not the same
action." This is the second part of the protasis concerning the
different duty, and gift for duty, of each individual member as
compared with the rest ; which difference or diversity, both of
duty and gift, the apostle here expresses by the different action
of each member : the members of the external body have not aU
the same action, but every one its own proper action, distinct from

264 . LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
the actions ofthe other members ; whence it. follows — since action
ought to be conformable to duty, and duty is accordmg to gift — .
that every member in this external body of ours has both its own
proper gift and duty, distinct from the gift and duty of any other
member. Accordingly, in the protasis, he lays this foundation, as
it were, of his illustration — ' that, seeing there are many members
in our one body, every one has its own gift from God,.. its own duty
according to that gift, and its own action according to that duty ;
by each of which every individual member is distinguished from
the rest.'
5. We have here the apodosis of the comparison, of which there
are, in like manner, two parts. " So we, (being) many, are one
body in Christ." This is the first part of the apodosis :— ' as there
are many members in this one external body of ours, so we, being
many, are one mystical body in Jesus Christ ;' the foundation of
which you will find in 1 Cor. xii. 13, viz. — ' that all we who are in
Christ have been baptized by one Spirit into one body.' Moreover,
this is said to be done "in Christ," both because he himself is " the
head," (Eph. i. 22 ;) and because that one Spirit has been given
to every member as the source of the new life, or Ufe of God iri
each, and of all the spiritual gifts which belong to that Ufe — by
bim as the head of the Church. In fine, by the " many " here,
you are to understand — ' each of those who are In Christ, but
especially those who teach :' for the apostle is here speaking
chiefly of them, as appears from the subsequent induction ; and of
each of them, as has before appeared from the definition, where it
is said — that " God has imparted to every one," that is, ' to each
and every one who teaches,' " the measure of faith." This ' mul
titude of members,' however, may be otherwise taken for — ' the
multitude of assembUes or congregations which are united in
Christ, as the greater members in the body ;' in which sense we
find the multitude of the member of Christ spoken of in 1 Cor.
xii. 27— '* Moreover, ye are the body of Christ, and membersin
particular :" where, when he says— "-body," he means ' assembly,'

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 265
and when he: calls them—" members," he indicates that the
Corinthian Church was ' a member, or particular assembly,' aa
compared with other assemblies, or churches of Christ. "And
one by one members of each other." This is the second part of
the apodosis, by which two things are expressed: first — 'that
every one who is in Christ, apart, but especially he who teaches
or labours in the word, is furnished with his own separate gift in
the mystical body of Christ, for his own duty in the body, and the
ipierformance of that duty ;' secondly — 'that as the gift, and duty)
and performance of duty of each have reference to the good of the
whole body, so Ought they to have reference to the good of every
other member.' The apostle therefore says, ' that every one is a
member, not merely of the body, but also of every other member
an the body ;' not as being properly a member of a member, but
because the action of each member is subservient to the use of
every other; for although the eye in the external body is not a
member of the foot, but of the body, yet inasmuch as it serves the
"foot by its action, it Is in , some sort a member of the foot also,
namely, as respects use. In Uke manner, although every one who
is in Christ is, properly speaking, a member of the body, yet- he
may also be said to be a member of every other ; because, what?
ever gift he has received from the common Lord, he has received
for the use of every member.
6. He now returns to the injunction concerning those who ' are
in,' or have charge in the Church: of God, and subjoins the second
part of it, wherein he prohibits aU those who in any way have charge
of Christ's flock, from the abuse of the gifts which they have re
ceived for the edification and advantage of the Church of God ;
as the apostle elsewhere testifies that " the manifestation of the
Spirit" * is given to every one who has it " for profit," f namely,
for the benefit and advantage of the Church. This part of the in
junction is accordingly distinguished from the preceding, inasmuch
as the apostle has there prohibited arrogance in the case of any
. '- tonn^aiffiv rov mivu/amtos , t ng« r.

266 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
one assuming what he does not possess, or being " more wise than
he ought to be wise ;" whereas he here prohibits the abuse of a
gift received. The second part of the enjoining, therefore, is this
— ' whoever in any way has charge in the Church of God, should
rightly and faithfully use the gift which he has received for the
benefit of the Church, and not abuse it.' This, which is the gene
ral proposition of the second part of the injunction, the apostle
omits ; iUustrating it, however, both by its cause, and by a special
induction of particulars. " But having different gifts according to
the grace which has been given unto us." This is the cause of the
second part of the injunction ; from which the apostle thus
reasons : —
' We who are in the Church of God, and have charge of Christ's
flock, have received different gifts, and these proceeding from the
Spirit, through grace ;' or, which is the same thing — ' we have re
ceived gifts, every one his own, and that freely from God, through
the Spirit :
' Let no one therefore abusehis gift, but let every one use it for
the benefit of the Church ;'
" Whether prophecy, let us prophesy according tb the propor
tion of faith,"
7. " Or ministry, let us be occupied in ministering." We have
here the second iUustration of the second part, from an induction
in which he reduces aU the gifts of those who have charge In the
Church of God to two classes : The one he denominates " pro
phecy," (Tgo<p7irsiav ;) the other, " ministry" (htax.oviav.) " Pro
phecy" I call ' the gift of teaching,' and " ministry" embraces the
other gifts, all the gifts, namely, of those who, though not teach
ers, have charge in the Church. We find both these words thus
used in other places. So Tgo^r'svu or wgo^rgia is used in
{1 Cor. xiv. 3,) where a ' prophet' ia aaid to be one that " speak
eth unto men," that is, either " to the edification" of the Church
of God as a teacher, or "to exhortation and comfort" as a pastor ;
" prophecy," therefore, is here put for ' any gift of teaching ;' al-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 267
though it is true that it is elsewhere employed in a narrower sense,
as in Eph. vi. 11. Aiaxovta here, taken in a wider acceptation,
comprehends aU other duties in the Church of God besides the
office of teaching ; in this sense the term is also used in 1 Tim. iU.
8, &c, where, after he has shewn what sort of persons " bishops"
or ' those who teach in the Church' should be, he describes
" deacons," -that is, ' those who, though not teaching, have charge
in other ways in the Church of God ;' as appears from his requir
ing in the former that they be " apt to teach," but not in the lat
ter ; although it is true that the term haxovia is found employed
in the New Testament, both in a wider sense for every office in
the Church, so as even to include the apostles, (2 Cor. iv. 1 ;) and
in a narrower sense for those who, neither teaching, nor watching
over the morals of the Church, have only charge of the poor and
the Church treasury, (Phil. i. 1.) The apostle iUustrates both
these particulars of the induction by the adjunct of the manner,
and a subdivision of the particulars. The adjunct of the manner
of the first particular, inasmuch as it ia general, is joined to the
genus, to be afterwards repeated under the several species. The
manner in this case is — that he who has received the gift of pro
phesying or of teaching should teach — " according to the analogy"
or proportion of faith." By " the analogy of faith" here, we may
underatand what he haa before denominated^-" the measure of
faith," or even — ' the articles of faith' coUected out of the written
word, and comprised in that Confession of Faith which has been
received from the very commencement of the Christian Church-,
and which, aa being conformable to the teaching of the apostles, is
commonly caUed — the Apostles' creed : in whatever sense the term
be taken, the prophet is enjoined not to depart, in prophesying,
from the common foundations which he has understood with cer
tainty from the word of God. " Both he that teacheth, in teach
ing ; and he that exhorteth, in exhortation." He subdivides ' the
prophet' into ' the teacher,' properly so caUed, and ' the pastor,'
(Eph. iv. 11 ;) both: of whom are bound, the one to teach, and the
other to feed the flock of Christ " according to the proportion of

268 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
faith." By 'the teacher' I understand 'him who, with simplicity
and honesty, interprets the word, as the knowledge of it is pre
served in the Church; and by 'the pastor' 'him who addresses
the Church, according to the known principlea of the word, in ex
hortation, admonition, reproof, &c, (for aU these are here, by sy
necdoche, included under the term " exhortation,") and therewith
combines for the further consolation of the Church, the adminis
tration of the sacraments, according as the word directs. " He
that distributeth with simpUcity ; he that presideth with diligence ;
he that sheweth mercy with cheerfulness." He now IUustrates the
second particular ofthe induction, or "the ministry," * both by a
subdivision of the ' deacons' t or ' ministers,' and by the adjunct
of the manner of ministering. Three species of deacons or minis
ters are here enumerated : — (1.) " Those who distribute ;" (2.)
.¦" Those who preside ;" (3.) " Those who shew mercy." " Those
who distribute," I understand to be " those who, in the narrowest
sense of the Words, are denominated deacons ; with whom is the
care of the treasury of the Church, that they may collect into it)
and distribute from it, for the benefit of the poor.' "Those who
preside" or ' presidents,' I understand to be those whom the
apostle, in 1 Tim. v. 17. calla ' eldera not labouringin the word)'
and whom, in 1 Cor. xii. 28, he terms, " governors ;" these are
' they who, along with the teachers and pastors, watch over the
discipline and morals of the house of God.' The third species are
" those who shew mercy," that is, ' who relieve the wretched,' and
whom the apostle, in the passage quoted from the epistle to the
Corinthians, calls " helpers ;" under which title I understand, not
private Christians contributing of their own substance to the re
lief of the poor, for the apostle is here speaking of those who have
charge publicly in the Church ; but by " those who shew mercy,'.'
I understand here — ' those who, having received the alms of the
Church from the guardians of the Church treasury, apply them to
benefit of the afflicted poor, especiaUy those who are labouring un
der any sickness.' Among " those. who shew mercy," therefore, is
. * Atocxoviav, ; . f Aieixowv,' 1

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 269
included that order in the Church which, in Acta vi., and 1 Thh,
v., is denominated the order of "widows ;" although the whole
order is here expressed in the ihasculine gender, as being one in
which males, no less than females, are required : for the afflicted
poor, especiaUy the sick, have need, not only of widows to nurse,
and watch them, but also of surgeons and physicians, and other
men of that sort, who are necessary for; their comfort in their sick
nesses. This is the subdivision of the deacons, The second am-
pUfication of the deacons is taken from the adjunct of the manner
of ministering (haxovfag). Here, however, the adjunct of the
manner, not being common, like that of those who teach, but pe-
culiar in the case of each speclea of deacons, is not subjoined to
the genus, as we haye before seen the manner of prophesying sub-,
joined to the gift of prophecy, viz., ' that it should "be " according:
to the proportion of faith" (xar ava\oyiav rtjg itieriug) ; but to
each species of deacons their own manner of ministering is sub
joined: (1.) In those who distribute, " simplicity" is required; (2.),
In those who preside, " diUgence" in watching over the morals of
the people ; (3.) In those who shew mercy, " cheerfulness." By
' simpUcity in those who distribute' I understand— -' that integrity*
whereby they keep back nothing which has been contributed for
the benefit of the poor ; nor lay out any thing with respect of per
sons, but in proportion to the necessities of the recipients,, and ac
cording to the appointment of the eldership :' the more so, because
this respect of persons has disturbed the Church of Christ from its
very infancy ; as we see in Acts vi. 1, where the slighting of the:
Grecian widows in the ministration is mentioned as the occasion
of the first dissension in the Christian Church. The virtue of
elders who do not teach, and their legitimate manner of minister
ing is " diligence ;" and denotes ' their sedulous assiduity, or as
siduous sedulity in attending to the morals of the people,' as those
upon whom it is more incumbent to attend to morals, than upon
ministers themselves, or those who labour in the word: for the lat
ter are distracted from such dUigence by the ministry of the word,
and doctrine ; as Peter would intimate when he says (Acts vi, 2)

2.70 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
" it is not good that we should leave the word of God, and admi
nister tables." The peculiar virtue of those who shew mercy is
" cheerfulness," inasmuch as, in their official capacity, their business
lies with the afflicted and wretched ; and because if, in ministering)-
they appear morose, and disgusted with the distress of those to
whom they minister, they wUl aggravate the affliction of the per
sons to whom they ought to bring consolation : it is therefore re
quired of them that they execute the ministry which they perform
towards the afflicted with cheerfulness, and in such a way as to
aUeviate their affliction.
9. Thus far we have had the ordinary duties of those who have
charge in the Church of Christ, which are to be attended to with
unvarying equity, even to the second coming of the Lord. From
these we have said that the duties of the flock are to be inferred
by analogy. Thus, if the teacher teaches according to the propor
tion of faith, the Church should also learn and advance in the
knowledge of the gospel of peace, according to the proportion of
faith ; and if the pastor shall exhort, admonish, threaten, administer
the sacraments, and, along with the elders, who do not teach, ad
minister discipline, the flock ought also to obey them according to
the analogy of faith, and that lovingly, for their work's sake, as
the apostle elsewhere (1 Thess. v. 12, 13) enjoins upon the flock.
Nor should a twofold honour be wanting in the Church to the
deacon, namely, first, the honour due to him as a Christian man ;
and, next, that due to his office as deacon, (hiaxoviag,) whether he
' distribute with simplicity,' or ' shew mercy with cheerfulness.'
Next come the duties which are common at once to the. flock,
and to those who have charge of it ; the source and origin of all
which is " love" or affection. " Let love be unfeigned." What,":
and of what sort love ought to be in aU, both in the flock and in
those who have charge of the flock, is described in these words,
from the disparate. ' Love,' simple and sincere in its nature, is
uniformly seen in the face and actions, as proceeding from the
heart; the ' feigning of love,' or love appearing in the face or ac-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 271
tions, iand not proceeding at aU from the heart, is diverse from
true love. The apostle, therefore, here commands that love should
not be feigned, but that, in as far as any one manifests love either
in his Words or his actions, so far should his inward conaciousness
be witness to him that he. loves with the heart. To this agrees
the paying of John, (1st Epist. iii. 18,)." My little children, let us
not love in word or tongue," that is, ' in word or tongue only,' as
those who love feignedly; "but" also "in deed," which is some
thing more than to love in word only ; " and," moreover, " in
truth" (akriOsta) Ukewise, which has its seat in the heart. This is
the foundation of the common duties. Next comes a general pro
position, consisting of two members : — (1.) . " Abhor that which ia
evU;" (2.) " Cleave to that which is good." This proposition ia>
borrowed from Ps. xxxiv. 15, . (TremeUius's version,) and comprises
the sum of the law in two parts — the first being a prohibition of
that which is evil, and the second containing an injunction about
doing that which is good ; whence we are called upon to observe),
that there is a twofold duty to which sincere love binds us, and
that there is a twofold sin opposed to the duty of love, which aU
we who love unfeignedly ought to abhor. The first duty is here
said by the. apostle to be — ' such a performance of what is good,
as may make it manifest to all who witness it, that, in performing,,
we cleave to that which is good;' the second duty is — 'such a
hatred and abhorrence of that which is evil, that all who behold it
in our actions may perceive that we are so separated from what is
evU, as to abhor it with our whole souls.' Hence, there appears
on the other, .hand a twofold sin, or a sin of two kinds : the one
consists — ' in doing what ia evil, which is increaaed, if, in the doing,
there be seen in us who do it a delight in the evil which we do,
the opposite of that abhorrence of evU which is required in the
sound doctrine of the gospel;' the second kind of sin is — ' th©
neglecting to perform, or even the cold performance of what ia
good, from which all who witness our conduct easily arrive at
the" conclusion, that we by no means cleave to that which ia
good/

272 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
: 10. Thua far we have had the foundation of Chriatian duty— ^
'¦'love unfeigned." Thua far also we have had the proposition,
consisting of two members : (1.) ' to abhor that which ia evU ;*
(2.) ' to cleave to that which is good.' Next comes an expKcation
of the propoaition, in which, although the law of God, contained
in the Decalogue, is as a lamp to the feet of those who have em
braced the gospel, yet the apostle, in enjoining duty, does not pro
ceed precept by precept, or according to the order of the com
mandments ofthe Decalogue, but takes up the tables, and imposes
duties on the Christian Church, as the tables of the law require.
These duties are of two kinds ; some which are common, without
any special relation or respect, from this verae, as far as verse 13 ;
others with special relation or respect, from verse 13, to the end of
the chapter. The injunctions of the former kind are threefold;
those which come first, in the 10th verse, respect the second table
of the law; the next, in verse 11, respect both tables; and the
last, in verse 12, the first table.
The absolute injunctions, or injunctions of the first kind which
respect the second table of the law) are two ; just aa the dutiea
which the second table of the law recommends to the people of
God are twofold ; for the second table enjoina those things which,
are due to men in the Lord, and that, indeed, in a twofold man
ner, either generaUy, by every one to every other, or particularly)
what any one ought to perform to another, according to hia rank
and condition. " In brotherly love be. kindly affectionate one to:
another." This is the first injunction which respects the secorid
table of the law, comprising in a few words, and as it were in the
form of an abridgement, the latter precepts of the second table)
concerning that zeal for life, virtue, property and reputation, which
every one should affectionately so cherish in himself towards an
other, of whatever state or condition, as to abstain from the con
trary appetite or desire. And the apostle points to that common
brotherhood which aU who have embraced the gospel have in
Jesus Christ, as the foundation of this injunction ; for there ia this
difference between the love of the law and that of the goapel,

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 273
(since even the law, apart from the gospel, urges love,) that the
love of the gospel is the love of brethren indeed, but of brethren
regenerated in Jesus Christ ; whereas that of the law is the love of
brethren in the flesh (xaroi ffdgxa) only. " In honour going be
fore each other." This is the second injunction having respect to
the second table of the law ; which he extends, in an evangelical
acceptation, (xar IvayysKiov) as a commentary upon the first pre
cept ofthe second table : for there, in a legal sense, every one who
is inferior in state, condition, age, or in any other respect accord
ing to the flesh, is commanded to shew honour to his superior ;
but the apostle, propounding the precept in an evangelical sense,
commands that, in the judgment of love, every one who is in Christ
should esteem another who is equally in Christ, as " before," or
' superior to' himself, and should honour him on account of the
grace-that is in him. For so the apostle explains his own meaning in
many places : — " Consider those who walk so, as ye have us for an
example" (Phil. iii. 17); "We pray you, brethren, to acknow
ledge those who labour among you, and preside over you in the
Lord, and admonish you, so as to esteem them exceedingly dear
for their work's sake" (1 Thess. v. 12, 13) ; " Obey and be sub
ject, to those who rule over you" (Heb. xiii. 17); in all which
places, writing, to churches, and even to the more powerful (ovva-
ffrag) in those Churches, he yet charges them to submit themselves
to the preachers of the gospel, how humble, and of how despicable
a condition soever according to the flesh)* on account of the grace
of preaching, or the grace given to them to preach the gospel.
But this is proved, -in a more general manner by what the apostle
says in commending Onesimus to his master, as well as by the
common injunction (Eph. vi. 9) — " Ye masters do that which is
just unto your servants, leaving, off threatening, (avisvrsg r^v aicsi-
~b3\v), knowing that your own master also is in heaven, and that
there is no respect of persons with him :" in which words the
apostle most distinctly charges even the powerful masters in the
f - * Comp. Col. iv. 1. (Translator.)
S

274 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
Church, to observe, cherish, and honour according to its measure,
the measure of grace in. the meanest oftheir servants.
11. " In endeavour, not slothful ; in spirit, fervent; serving the
Lord." We have next the three injunctions respecting both
tables of the law : the first concerning ' endeavour ;' the second
concerning ' zeal according to knowledge ;' the third regarding
' the object or aim to which Christians should constantly have re
spect in all their endeavours and zeal.' I call " endeavour" — ' the
Sedulous outward diligence of a Christian man in performing the
duties, either of the first or of the second table : the apostle en
joins that this should be ' earnest;' but by meosis, to avoid offend
ing the tender consciences of Christians, instead of saying — ' earnest
endeavour,' he commands them to avoid the charge of sloth' in per
forming these duties of a Christian man. " Zeal" — I consider tQ
be — ' inward ardour propeUing the outward members of the body,
so that these may be " the instruments of righteousness" to the
glory of God, in the practice either' of the first, or of the second
table of the law : this zeal he has elsewhere (c. ix. v. 3,) professed ;
and by this zeal, the conduct of our Lord in overturning the
tables, and casting out those who traded as merchants in the house
of God, is defended out of the Psalms, in Matt. xxi. 13.* The
third injunction is annexed to each of the preceding, as an epanop>-
thosis, whereby the apostle charges and enjoins upon the Church
to take heed to themselves both in endeavour and zeal ; because
we see both endeavour and zeal which are not in the Lord : he
would therefore have them watch attentively^ that in whatever
they do by endeavour or zeal, they may serve the Lord, and see
that they be not hurried along to any thing, either by inward zeal
or outward endeavour, unlesa both the spirit and word of the Lord
lead the way.
i
12. "In hope, rejoicing; in afflictions, patiently enduring; in
prayer, continuing constantly." Here follow, in the third place, ,
* This seems to be- an error ; the passage is John ii. 17. (Translator.)

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 275
the injunctions respecting the first table of the law ; which are
three in number : the first is — ' the joy of the Holy Spirit,' of
which ' the hope that putteth not to shame ' is pointed out as the
foundation ; the second is of ' patient endurance,' or ' patience in
afflictions ;' the third, concerning ' the prayers of faith continued
in with joy and patience.' ' Hope ' is laid down as the foundation
of 'joy,' because, although already "sons," yea, "heirs," yea, "joint-
heirs with Jesus Christ," we do not yet see what we shall be ; and
although aU things are ours, whosoever of us are Jesus Christ's,
nevertheless, we possess by right only, not being yet in actual pos
session, but hoping, and that with the ' hope that putteth not to
shame,' that the time wiU come when we shall be in actual posses
sion of aU things. So long aa we are here, therefore, the subject
matter of our joy is not future possession, but the hope of future
possession, as it is said, chap. v. 2 — " We glory in hope of the glory
of God." ' Patient endurance in affliction ' is recommended to us,
both because affliction, or the cross, is the lot of the sons of God
in the present life ; and because patient endurance can neither be,
nor be seen, except where there is suffering in the case of him who
so endures: hence the apostle says — 'that suffering produces pa
tience.' The third injunction is subjoined, as an admonition, to
each of the preceding, lest either joy should cause us to forget, or
affliction to lay aside ' prayer ;' against both of which evils Chris
tians must be upon their guard : for we are both ready to become
remiss in prosperity ; and in trials, we have need of the apostolic
exhortation — ' be not afraid, in any thing, on account of those who
are opposed to you ' (Phil. L 28), and again — ' but let your prayers
be heard before God, continued in with thanksgiving' (Phil. iv. 6).
13. " Communicating to the necessities of the saints ; following
after hospitality." Next come the relative injunctions, which are
twofold, according to the twofold relation or respect which Unfits
and makes them particular : for that particular relation or respect
involving duty has for its subject, either others, from v. 13 to v.
19 ; or ourselves, from v. 19 td the end. The relation or respect
s2

276 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
of which others are the subject, arises from a threefold foundation'?
first, from the different sorts of men with whom we live, vv. 13,
14 ; then, from the different mental affections of those with whom
we Uve, v. 15 ; and, thirdly, from their different effects, vv. 16, 17,
18. As regards the first, or the different sorts of men with whom'
we live, the apostle divides all men into4-' saints,' and ' persecu
tors' (haxovrag) ; where he would have us observe in passing,
that all who are not, along with us, partakers, of the Holy Spirit"
unto sanctification, are 'persecutors' (diaxovreg) ofthe saints: as,
also appears from the first announcement of the' gospel, (Gen. iii.:
15), whence the apostle appears to borrow this distribution ; for;
as all men are there divided into ' the seed of the serpent' and ' the
seed of the Church ;' so it is distinctly stated that there wiU be
perpetual war and persecution on the part of the seed of the ser
pent against the seed of the Church, .until at length the head of
the serpent shaU be bruised, as is fully unfolded by the apostle in
Kev. xii. Concerning our duty towards the saints, he gives two
injunctions : the first relates to that sacred ' communication '
(xoivaviag), whereby we relieve the poverty of the saints and the.
necessities of our brethren, according to the measure of the boun
ties coriferred upon us ; the second, enjoining the exercise Of hos-;
pitality towards others.
14. " Bless those who persecute you ; bless (I say) and curse
not." Concerning persecutors,* and our duty towards them, there
is but one injunction — "bless them;" which the apostle amplifies
by repetition — "bless (I say)," and by the prohibition of the con
trary—" curse not." By such soUcitude and earnest commends
tion of this duty, the apostle would teach us two things : — the first
is, that in the remains of the flesh and corrupt nature {t5|i fvffei),
we are prone to curse those who persecute us; the second, that in
the zeal of God and in the strength of the Spirit, We should esper
cially strive against this corruption of the flesh, and endeavour to
bless even our Very persecutors, that, if such only be the wUl of
Tuv ilaixovratv.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 277
•God, they may, by our blessing, be withdrawn from their cursing)
and led to the God of our blessing.
15. "Rejoice with those who rejoice, and weep with those who
weep." The second relation or respect of which others are the
subject, arises from the different mental affections and internal
emotions which we see In those with whom we live. According
to these emotions the apostle divides all men into — " those who
rejoice," and " those who weep," that is, ' those who are affected
either with joy or grief; and enjoins upon Christians — ' to sympa
thise with both, and to be affected in like manner with them, so as
to rejoice with those who rejoice, and to weep with those who
weep.' 16. " Be of the same mind one towards another." This is the
third relation or respect of which the persons with whom we live
are the subjects ; according to which the apostle divides all men
into — -' those who either affect us with good as members of the same
body,' or ' with evil as opposed to us in a different body.' The
Christian duty to be performed towards both is set forth by the
apostle in two ways : separately, in this 1 6th verse, and the begin
ning of the next ; and jointly, in the close of verse 17, and in verse
18. The duty to be performed towards those who are members of the
same body and do us good, or are our helpers for good, is set forth
in this verse, and is threefold. First of aU there is — ' unanimity
and consent of mind in every thing that is good ;' for otherwise, ' to
be unanimous,'* or " to be of the same mind one toward another,"f
and harmonious in evil, is not only not a Christian duty, but is an
agreeing together contrary to duty : the apostle therefore enjoins
that they should avoid feuds and altercations, such as are every
where seen to arise among men from the flesh and our corrupt
nature. " Not thinking highly (of yourselves) but yielding to the
lowly." The second duty to be performed towards our brethren, or
* 'Ojj,o$oon7*. • \ To auro us a-XXriKovt Qgomv.

278 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
those who are members of the same body with ouraelves, is—' ge
nuine humUity and the shunning of pride, as contrary to Christian
humility.' Of this duty, two parts are here distinguished bythe
apostle, opposed to the twofold pride which is seen in men : the
first is — ' not to think highly of ourselves and of our own gifts ;'
the second is — f to submit ourselves and yield to the most lowly
and least members in the Church, for their edification in the com
mon grace :' whUst, on the other hand, there are in Uke manner
the two following parts of pride : the one — ' too high an esteem of
ourselves and of our own gifts ;' the other — ' the contempt and
rejection of our weak brethren.' This duty, compared with the pre
ceding, is the cause of the former ; for as pride breaks up concord,
so Christian humility both produces the same, and preserves it
when produced. " Be not wise in your own eyes." This is the
third duty, viz. ' the shunning of that self complacency* whereby
one is pleased with his own opinions ;' which is contrary to the
spirit of discernment, whereby one discerning modestly and wisely,
both in regard to his own conceptions, and those of others who are
his brethren, chooses and holds fast that which is truly good : for
a man is said to be " wise in his own eyes," when he is so puffed
up with an opinion of his own wisdom, as neither to think, nor en
dure it to be thought, that there is any understanding except what
he himself understands and thinks. This ' self-complacency* we
may fake either as a separate vice, or as the third and last degree
of that pride which we have mentioned as contrary to Christian
humility. I prefer, however, to view it in the former light, as the
vice which is opposed to that peculiar Christian duty or gift, which,
as before observed, is denominated ' the spirit of discernment.'!
17. " Rendering again evU for evil unto no man."" Next comes
the duty which is to be performed by the Christian towards those
who do him evil, and are in a different, mystical body from that
which he himself is in, and that a body opposed to him. The
'AufailioiSt
t Or iufiiua may be rendered — ' presumption ;' and discretio — ' discretion.  Tr.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 279
body which is opposed to the mystical body of Jesus Christ, is
that which we have before denominated — " the seed of the ser
pent," or, as John speaks — " the offspring of vipera ;" ' the children
of their father the devU,' and, if we may so express it — ' the mys
tical body of Satan.' These can do nothing but evU to the saints,
or those who are members of Jesus Christ : yet the apostle com
mands the Christian to receive these very persons — doing him evil,
and as it were opposed to him in an opposite body — in a Christian
manner, and dutifuUy : and he sets forth the duty which he wishes
to be performed towards them by meosis, viz* by forbidding the
neglect of the duty — ' do not render evil to those who do evil to
you ;' instead of saying — as he might have said, and afterwards
indeed does say — 'receive those who do evU to you, by doing
good to them.' There is one expression, however, used in pre
scribing this duty, which is especiaUy worthy of remark ; for the
apostle does not say — ' do not render again evil for evil to the evU
or ungodly] but commands that evil instead of good should be ren
dered " to no man." By this he would intimate, that it is not only
the evil and wicked who do evU to the Christian, but that even a
Christian may do evU to a Christian, and those who are members
of the same mystical body in Jesus Christ may injure each other,
as David did Uriah ; the apostle, therefore, in order to extend this
duty beyond the ungodly and those who are opposed to us, enjoina
upon the Christian to render again evil for evil "to no man,"
whether an ungodly man or a brother : and it is certainly most
agreeable to reason, that if we pardon an ungodly man doing us
evU, we should stiU more pafdon a brother doing us injury through
infirmity. Thus far we have had the duty to be performed by the Chris
tian, both to those that do him good, and to those that do him evil,
separately : now foUows the duty to be performed to both jointly,
which is twofold. " Attending to things honourable in the sight
of aU men." This is the first injunction, wherein the apostle en
joins that the Christian should conduct himself honourably in his
whole conversation and doings, so that, in what he does, he may

280 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
be free from blame or censure on the part of any man, whether in
the Church or out of the Church ; yet, at the same time, taking
care that what he honourably attends to and does, he should so do,
that he may be able to take his stand on the authority of the Word
of God, in reply to any one, whether good or bad, who examines
him ; and may proceed with confidence in the doing of it, being
ready to answer for the honourableness of what he does to any one
who requires of him an account of his conduct. I thus extend the
injunction generally ; not denying, however, that it has a special
•reference to that zeal whereby a man strives to secure, either for
himself or others, the outward blessings of life : in this, especially,
the apostle commands that the Christian should be seen to be
honourable, both by the godly and ungodly ; as we find that the
•apostle himself acted, from 2 Cor. viii. 21, where he defends
his zeal in making a collection through the Gentile Churches, to
relieve the poverty ofthe saints in Judea, (of which Agabus gave
warning, Acts xi. 28), by this very Christian duty, namely, that
in making that coUection, he was attending to things honourable
in the sight of God and men.
18. " If it be possible, as much as Ueth in you, living at peace
with all men." This is the second injunction which the Christian
should observe towards both the godly, and the ungodly, jointly : —
' the Christiari should Uve at peace with every man, whether godly
or ungodly.' So Abraham lived at peace with the Syrian brothers,
Eschol and Aner, (Gen. xiv. 13) ; Isaac with Abirnelech ; Heber
the proselyte, with Jabin ; and so I^ul himself became aU things
to aU men, in order that, living at peace with aU, he might, from
among all, gain some to Christ. The apostle, however, restricts
this injunction about living at peace, by a twofold restriction,
whereby he reminds us in passing, that the present life is not the
life of our peace ; and that we shall not be able to live at peace
with aU men here in a holy manner, inasmuch as our life is laid up
with God in Christ, in the heavens. The first restriction is — " as
much as lieth in you ;" the meaning of which is this : — ' it is cer-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 281
tain that your peace in this life is ' disturbed,' for he has before
eaid that there are some who persecute and do evil to the sons of
the Church ; ' however,' says the apostle, ' let not an occasion of
disturbing your peace proceed from yourselves, but, as much as
Ueth in you, cultivate peace even with the wicked.' The second
restriction of the injunction is expressed in these words, when the
apostle says — " if it be possible ;" by which he would intimate
that it is impossible but that an occasion for disturbing our peace
may proceed from ourselves ; for we who believe on Christ must
retain, along with faith, the confession of the mouth ; and a wicked
world will endure neither the one, nor the other, with peace. The
apostle therefore enjoins upon the Christian not to disturb his own
peace for the sake of the things of this world ; at the same time
admonishing him, if troubled by a wicked world on account of his
religion, not to abandon either his faith or profession for the sake
of the peace of the world : because, although the occasion must
often unavoidably proceed from himself; yet the cause is to be
found in the wicked who persecute the faith. From this the
apostle gives us to learn the following things : First— that it is
-impossible, in this world of wicked men, but that an occasion of
disturbing the peace of the Church may proceed from the Church
herself and her sons : for if the Church could have avoided all
occasion for the disturbance of her peace, the apostle would have
said — ' be at peace with all,' and would not have added — " if it be
possible ;" but, by adding this condition — " if it be possible," he
would intimate, that it is impossible that the Church or any of her
sons, continuing to belong to God, should be at peace with the world;
Thus Noah must either have contended with the world, or ceased
to persevere in the hope of being saved when the waters should
overwhelm the wicked ; so Moses must either have offended God
or Pharaoh ; and so it was necessary for Abirnelech, either to have
refused to do his duty to David, or to afford an occasion to Saul
for the slaughter, both of himself, and his family. This last exam
ple merits our attention, in order that we who are saints may be
able to distinguish between the cause,, and the occasion, of the dis-*

282 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
turbance of the peace of the Church, The occasion sometimes
proceeds from the Church herself; but the cause is always found in
the wicked: just aa the occasion of Abimelech's death proceeded
from himself, and the duty which he piously performed to David ;
whereas the cause was found in Saul, who could not hear a word
about duty performed to David, on account of the evU disposition
by which he was actuated towards him. And from this we learn
another difference between the cause and occasion of the distur
bance of the peace of the Church ; the cause is always accompanied
with sin ; but the occasion may be without sin, inasmuch as it may
be impossible to avoid either deserting our duty, or giving occasion
to a wicked world to disturb our peace. The apostle therefore
commands us to cultivate peace—" if it be possible ;" intimating
that it is often impossible, if we keep the path of duty in which
it behoves us to persevere. Secondly, we are to observe from the
apostle here — that whenever an occasion for disturbing our peace
can be avoided without sin, it ought to be avoided: for so the
apostle speaks — 'cultivate peace as much as Ueth in you;' that
is — ' as far as you can avoid an occasion for the disturbance of
your peace without sin, avoid it.' And it is most worthy of ob
servation, in the third place — that the Christian cannot do that
which he is unable to do without sin : for so the apostle here says,
that sometimes it does not ' lie in us' to avoid an occasion for the
disturbance of our peace ; inasmuch as that often cannot be done
without sin on our part.
Thus far we have had the relation or respect of which others are
the subject, according to which the apostle has commended to
Christians the various duties incumbent upon them : next comes
the second relation and respect, which is seen in Christians them
selves, whom the apostle therefore caUs his " beloved ;" according
to which relation or respect of which they are themselves the sub
jects, there devolves upon them a duty to be performed to others,
in the Lord, and that the gospel of God, which they profess, may
be weU spoken of even among those that are without, when they
see that duty performed by them. According to this respect

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS, 283
which is seen in Christians themselves, the apostle divides Chris
tians into two classes : to some, injury has been done ; others are
aimed at that they may be injured. Upon each of these classes,
according to their state and condition, there devolves a Christian
duty ; which the apostle sets forth, as above, first separately, in
vv. 19 and 20 ; then jointly, in the last verse. " Not avenging
yourselves." This is the duty of Christians to whom injury has
been done, separately ; which the apostle sets forth by arsis and
thesis, or by prohibition and injunction contrasted. The prohibi
tion is- — ' that they should not themselves avenge the injuries which
they have received from others ;' which is the usual and daily prac
tice of the natural man and the world who know not Jehovah,
namely, to take vengeance upon each other for injuries received.
" But give place unto wrath." This is the thesis, or second mem
ber of the contrast, wherein the apostle shews Christians, affirma
tively, the duty which devolves upon them whenever injury is done
to them ; their duty is — ' to give place unto wrath.' This, some
understand of their own wrath ; so that the meaning wUl be — ' that
Christians who have been injured should spare this wrath, lest they
be carried along by it to the immediate avenging oftheir injuries,
which is the manner and custom of a perishing world.' Others un
derstand it ofthe wrath of God ; so that the meaning wiU be — ' that
those who have received injuries should not be wroth unto ven
geance, but should leave those who do them evil, if they repent not,
to the wrath of Jehovah, so that their own wrath may give place to
the wrath of Jehovah, and that to him, the glory of inflicting ven
geance upon the wicked, in his moat just wrath, may be ascribed.'
Others, again, explain it of the adversary who does the injury ;
so that the meaning wiU be — ' that Christians, Uke their Father,
should exercise forbearance, waiting, with much long-suffering, if
perchance God may grant repentance even to those who do them
evil and injure them. I consider that these three senses are in
cluded by the apostle in the words  " Give place unto wrath" —
taken by themselves ; for the duty of giving place unto wrath is
established in all these senses, jointly, by the argument which the

284 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
apostle subjoins, — " For it is written, Vengeance is mine; I wUl
repay, saith the Lord." The apostle establishes both the arsis and
thesis by the authority of God, taken from the law, Deut. xxxii.
35, thus : —
' The avenging of injuries belonge to Jehovah alone, who pre1-
mises that he will repay, and wiU perform his promise :
' Therefore Christians and those who believe on Jehovah should
not avenge their own injuries ;
' Therefore, also, they should spare their wrath, that they may
give opportunity to God for being wroth with the wicked, if they
repent not, and for avenging, in his most just wrath, the injuries
done by them to his people; which is his prerogative, as the
authority of the quotation from the Scriptures proves.
20. " Therefore, if thine enemy hunger, feed him ; if he thirst
give him drink." By "" enemy," I understand here — 'the enemy
of Christians who aims to do them injury :' this injunction, there
fore, inculcates the duty separately devolving on the Christian
who is aimed at by an enemy, that injury may be done to him.
The duty is this — ' that the Christian should encounter the enemy
who so aims at injuring him, by doing him good ; but the apostle
propounds the genus or general injunctionin the form of a twofold
particular duty, borrowed from the Scriptures : ' If your enemy,'
that is 'he who would deprive you both of food and Ufe, be
hungry, encounter him by feeding him, and ministering what is
necessary to his wants; in Uke manner, if he thirsts, give him
drink.' This injunction the apostle establishes by two arguments.
First of all, he deduces it from the previous injunction, by reason
ing from the greater to the less : —
' The Christian should not avenge injuries received :
' Therefore, what is less, he should not encounter an enemy,
who seeks, in the manner of an enemy, to injure him, by offering
injury, but by doing him good instead of injury; and this deduc
tion the apostle indicates by the term " therefore," (ovv) in the be
ginning of the verse.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 285
" For if thou do so, thou shalt heap coals of fire upon his head."
This is the second argument for the injunction, which is allegori
cal, and taken from the same Scripture (Prov. xxv. 21, 22) whence
the injunction itself was borrowed. By this aUegory, the Holy
Spirit indicates, that if the Christian does good to him who desires
to do him evil, he wUl render his enemy, or him who desires to do
him evil, if he repent not, inexcusable (avaffoKoy/irov) by so do
ing; and wUl thus heap up for him wrath against the day of
wrath, and judgment against the day of the just judgment of God ;
for as coals of fire, placed on the head, torment the man on whose
head they are placed, so the good deed performed by a godly man
towards his enemy, wUl torment him, both in this life with the con
sciousness of his injury and inexcusableness,* and for ever, if he
repent not, by the heaping up of the wrath and judgment of God.
Of this we have an example, in the justification of David by Saul,
which he extorted from his enemy, again and again, by doing him
good. (1 Samuel xxiv. 18 ; xxvi. 21.)
21. "Be not overcome by what is evU, but overcome malice by
goodness." This is the injunction concerning the duty which jointly de
volves, both upon the Christian who has suffered injury, and upon
him who is aimed at by an enemy that he may be injured ; — ' it
devolves on both, jointly, not to be overcome by the evil deed of
him who does evU to the one, or has wished to do evil to the other ;
but it devolves on the Christian to overcome the malice of both by
his own goodness. ' To be overcome by evil ' is — 'tobe induced
by the evil deed of a wicked man to do evil to him in return,' but
fto overcome malice by goodness' is — 'to be so superior to our
enemiea, whether they have done us evil, or have wished to do us
evU in time to come, that they may be compelled, by the evidence
of our goOdnesa and performance of duty, frankly to juatify us, as
Saul did David,'

286 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE

CHAPTER XHI.
Thua far, in chap, xii., the apostle has prescribed to Christiana
the Christian duties which devolve upon them as members of the
Church of Jesus Christ. Since Christians should also live duti
fully in the world, and without offence among those that are with
out, he now proceeds, in this 13th chap., to prescribe the duties to
be performed by them in the state. These, like those in the pre
ceding chap., are partly relative, or such as arise from a particular
respect, as far as ver. 7 ; partly common, thence to ver. 11 ; whence,.
to the end of the chap., he winds up, by a common conclusion as it
were, his injunctions of both kinds concerning morals — both those
which are suited to Christians as members of the Church, and
those which are suited to them as members of the state. This
chap., accordingly, consists of three sections : the first treats of the.
particular duty of Christians in the state ; the second, of their com
mon duty in the same ; the third contains the common conclusion
of the injunctions concerning morals. The relation or respect of
some towards others in the state is twofold, viz : — the one of supe
riors towards inferiors ; the other, of inferiors towards those who
are superior to them in any way. The state being distributed, ac
cording to this relation, into superiors and inferiors, the apostle
distinctly prescribes the duty which inferiors ought to perform to
wards their superiors ; and from this prescribing, it most evidently
appears what are also the duties to be performed by superiors to
wards those who are subject to them in a Christian state. For if
I yield obedience to my superior and president, as a power ordained
by God ; the president himself also, who is superior to me, is bound
not to preside, nor to exercise his power over me, beyond what has
been appointed him by the Lord. Therefore, as a Christian man
sins and violates the Christian duty which he ought to perform, if
he does not obey his superior enjoining what is just, and in the
Lord ; so the superior himself also sins, if he enjoins unjustly, and

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 287
not in the Lord : nor is obedience to be rendered to him by the
inferior; and that, indeed, "because of conscience," that is, 'lest by
yielding obedience to the unjust and ungodly injunction of his su
perior, he should ain against God, and therefore against conscience.'
As, therefore, he must obey his superior, because of conscience,
as the apostle says ; ao, because of conscience, he must refuse obe
dience to his superior, whenever, in enjoining, he departs from
obedience to God, who alone is supreme, and whose will alone is
the rule of justice, so that whatever he shaU have willed he may
enjoin, and whatever he shaU have enjoined, ought to be performed
by every man. Although, therefore, these relative injunctions are
propounded simply, and only to inferiors, yet by analogy, and in
due correspondence, they are twofold ; just as in Eph. vi. 1-10, the
apostle expresses the fifth commandment of the Decalogue, and
thence infers these duties also.
1. " Let every soul be subject to the superior powers." " Soul"
is here put, by synecdoche, for the compound whole, viz. — ' every
man whom God has in any way made Inferior to another, especi
aUy in the state ;' so that, the meaning Is — ' let every man be sub
ject to him whom the Lord may have set over him in the state :'
Under the name of ' subjection,' again, as a sort of abridgment, all
duty whatever, which any inferior owes, in the Lord, to his supe
rior, is included. Accordingly, this is the only injunction express
ed in the chap. ; and, from it another is, by analogy, to be inferred.
The injunction expressed is this — " Let every soul" — ' every infe
rior man' — " be subject" — ' perform every duty which he ought to
perform in the Lord' — " to the superior powers," that is — ' to those
whom the Lord has set over him ;' and the injunction is general,
concerning the duty to be performed to any one who is superior in
the state, in whatever degree he may be superior, or by whatever
name he may be caUed, as Peter expounds this passage, (1st Ep.
ii. 13, 14.) Here, however, it is deserving of our attention, that
the apostle does not say — ' superior powerful ones,' but " powers ;"
whereby be would intimate that the Christian, in the duty of his

288 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
obedience, should religiously and wisely distinguish between' the
'powerful one' and ' the power] that is, the office of the superior, and
the man himself who holds the office ; and that for the three fol
lowing ends : — 1st, That that which ought, according to the ordi
nance, to be performed to such a power, should not be refused to
the superior himself; 2dly, That the Christian should not surren
der himself to be obedient to the man, although his superior, be
yond what the power and the ordinance of God demand ; so that
his obedience may not be respect of persons (TTgoffawroATj-^a,)
but a duty proceeding from a consciousness of the power having
been ordained by God ; 3dly, That whenever obedience must be
refused because the powerful one exceeds. the limits of his power
ordained by God, that refusal of obedience itself should yet be
made with consideration and respectfully, on account of the respect
which the Christian is bound to yield to the power with which the
powerful one — who enjoins beyond the limits of the power com
mitted to him — is invested, and which he bears. " For there is" no
power," &c. Next come the arguments for the injunction, which
are four in number i the first is from the efficient cause, in the re
mainder of the 1st, and the 2d verse ; the second, from the effect
of the magistrate, that is, from his work, and the end of his work,
in verses 3 and 4 ; the third, from the necessity imposed, in verse
5 ; the fourth from the effect of those who are subject themselves).1
in verse 6. The first argument runs thus : —
' The Christian ought not to resist the ordinance of God, or
that which is from God ;
' But every power is from God :
' Therefore the Christian ought not to resist the power, but
submit himself to It.'
The injunction itself is, indeed, deduced as the conclusion, but
in a negative form ; for it is the same thing whether you say 
' that the Christian should be subject to every power,' or ' that he
should resist no power.' . As to the other parts of the syUogism,
the assumption is first given in the close of verse 1, being estaj-
blished by the cause, viz., the efficient cause, which is — ' the ordi,-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 289
nance of God ;' and by a twofold assertion founded upon that or
dinance : the one assertion is propounded under the form of a
double negation — " there is no power except from God ;" the
other simply and absolutely — " the powers which are, are by God ;"
and to both, the foundation and cause is subjoined, when the
apostle says, that they are — " ordained" by God.
2. " Therefore whosoever setteth himself In opposition to the
power, resisteth the ordinance of God." We have, in these words,
the proposition of the syllogism, including also the conclusion :—
' We must not resist the power, because we must not resist the
ordinance of God.' " And they that resist bring condemnation
upon themselves." This is the establishment of the proposition,
from the effect of that resistance whereby any one resists the ordi
nance of God, which effect is — ' condemnation :' —
' Whosoever shall resist the ordinance of God shall bring upon
himself condemnation,' that is, ' shall receive condemnation as the
reward of his resistance :'
' Therefore the Christian who hopes for salvation, and not con
demnation, from God through Jesus Christ, should not resist the
ordinance of God.'
Here again, it is worthy of remark, that the apostle does not say
' that those who set themselves in opposition to the powerful re
sist the ordinance of God,' but ' those who set themselves in op
position to the power,' thus intimating, that there are cases in
which the powerful may be justly resisted. Although, for ex
ample, the kingdom of Israel could not have resisted the power of
Jeroboam, when once he had been acknowledged as king, they
could have resisted him when he forced the calves upon them ;
for such resistance would not have been resistance to the power,
but to the powerful one abusing his power-: they could, nay, not
only could, with the approbation of God and their own consciences^
hut even ought to have so resisted ; and because they did not do
this, the people of Israel are every where rebuked by the prophets
as guilty of apostacy in the sight of God, inasmuch as they did
T

290 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
not hinder the apostacy, which, although begun by their kings,
they both could and ought to have hindered. Sueh resistance,
however, to ungodly superiors who trample upon religion, should
not be offered by every one, nor by any private individual, but
only by the estates of the realm and its higher members, either all,
or at least some of them : the private Israelites, therefore, acted
rightly, who, when the whole kingdom complied with their ungodly
king in his apostacy, did not resist the king and kingdom, but
passed over into the kingdom of Judah (2 Chron. xi. 16), there to
worship Jehovah with a good conscience, according to his own
law. As, therefore, private individuals are not permitted to resist
the magistrate, even when he enjoins what is ungodly, but rather
to withdraw, and go to a place where they can serve God with a
good conscience ; so neither are the estates of the realm ahd
higher members of the kingdom to be condemned, if at any time
they have resisted their superior, seeking to make havock of the
Church and true worship of God, providing that the arms of that
resistance shaU have been defensive in opposition to tyranny, not
offensive and aimed at a superior. Such, of late years, were the
arms of the estates of France, whereby they defended themselves
against the king forcing Popery upon them, and persecuting them
on account of the pure worship of God. Therefore, although those
who resist in this manner, for conscience sake, are wont to be caUed
' rebels,' and to be proscribed as such by the tyrants who perse
cute them on account of the worship of God, yet are they neither
rebels, nor enemies, but by far the best of subjects, even in relation
to the tyrants themselves who persecute them ; as clearly appears
from the difference between those who thus resist tyrants, and those
who are enemies to, or rebels against the power, when compared to
gether : for rebels and enemies wiU not lay down their arms at the
desire of the power, even when making just concessions ; whUe
those of whom we are speaking would have yielded a most ready
obedience to their superiors, had they only granted them permis
sion to serve Jehovah.
Next comes the second argument, which runs thua : 

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 291
' Whosoever is the minister of God for good to the Christian,
to him the Christian should be subject, or should subject himself;
' But the magistrate,' says the apostle to the Christian, ' is the
minister of God to you for your good :
' Therefore you should be subject, and should subject yourself
to him of your own accord.'
To this argument the apostle passes on, in this third verse, pro-
lepticaUy, and by anticipating what might be urged as an objec
tion by the Christian ; the objection is to this effect : —
' I cannot subject myself to himself who is a terror ;
' The magistrate is a terror :
' Therefore I cannot subject myself to the magistrate.'
To this objection the apostle replies, in the beginning of the
verse, by making a distinction in the assumption, viz. : — ' that it is
true the magistrate is a terror to evil deeds, or to those who do
evil,' which is the one side of the distinction ; the other is — ' that to
good deeds, or to those who do good, the magistrate is not a terror.'
From this the apostle, turning as it were to the Christian, deduees,
so to speak, a hypothetical corollary : — there is no reason why you
should be afraid of the magistrate, if you do that which is good ;'
and this he proves by the contrary : —
" If you do that which is good, you shaU obtain praise from the
magistrate :
' Therefore, if you do that which is good, there is no reason why
you should be afraid of the magistrate.'
4, " For he is the minister of God to thee for (thy) good." This is
the assumption of the syUogism, or second argument. " But if," &c.
From the assumption he deduces, as before, a hypothetical coroUary :
— 'if you do that which is evU, be afraid ofthe magistrate.' "For he
beareth not the sword in vain." We have, in these words, the reason
ofthe coroUary,and ofthe dread which the evil-doer has of the magis
trate, from the end of the magistrate's appointment rendered vain :—r
' If the evU-doer were not afraid of the magistrate) the magis
trate would bear the sword to no purpose and in vain ;
T 2

292 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
'But he does not bear it to no purpose.'
" For he is the minister of God." He next proves this assump
tion, first, by an argument drawn from the office of the magis
trate : —
' He is the minister of God for wrath to him who does what is
evU:' Secondly, by reasoning from the end of his office : —
' God employs the magistrate as his mimster, for this end, that
he may inflict vengeance on the evil doers :
' Therefore he does not bear the sword in vain.'
5. " Wherefore it is necessary to be subject." This is the third
argument whereby the apostle concludes that every soul should
subject himself to the superior powers ; the argument being taken
from the adjunct of its i necessity :' —
' It is necessary to be subject :
' Therefore every soul ought to subject himself.'
' For that which we are lawfuUy and honourably urged by ne
cessity to yield, ought to be yielded by us willingly ; since there
fore we are bound by a lawful and honourable necessity to yield
subjection, we ought to subject ourselves to the superior powers of
our own accord and willingly.' The assumption alone of this argu
ment is given in the text, being the only thing in the argument to
he determined, or concerning which there can be any doubt. " Not
only because of wrath." He proceeds to establish the assumption,
viz. — ' that it is necessary that we should subject ourselves to the
magistrate,' by bringing forward the grounds of this honourable and
lawful necessity : —
' We must be subject to the magistrates ; and the necessity for
such subjection is this, that otherwise the magistrate is divinely
armed with just wrath against those who are not subject :
• ' Therefore we ought to subject ourselves to the magistrate, that
-we may avoid his wrath.'
- " But also because of conscience." The second ground is that
of ' conscience.' By " conscience" here 1 understand—' that of sub-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 293
I
jects in reference to their duty, whereby, according to the 5th com
mandment of the law, they are bound to subject themselves, and
that lovingly, to the superior powers, because of the injunction of
Jehovah ;* so that this conscience is not given by, nor based upon
human laws, but upon a divine command. From this it follows,
that subjects are no farther bound to obey the magistrate because
of conscience, than iri as far as he himself presides and enjoins with
a good conscience, and on the authority of the word of God : and
besides, it is worthy of observation, that the wrath of the magis
trate, unless directed against the disobedient, refusing to do their
duty according to the injunction of Jehovah, is neither just, nor
lawful, nor to be feared by his subjects, but Christians, in the Chris
tian warfare, must pass through the midst of it to victory in Christ,
by the power of the Spirit of God ; as we see in the case of Daniel,
who rose to victory through the lions' den, with his three friends,
-who esteemed the wrath of the king as nothing in comparison
with their duty to God, although the disobedient were threatened
with a fiery furnace, the heat of which had been increased seven
times. 6. " On this account also ye pay tribute." This is the fourth
and last argument by which the apostle establishes — ' that Chris
tians should subject themselves to the magistrate :' it is taken from
their effect — ' they pay tribute, and that on account of labour and
ministry ;' for the argument runs thus : —
' To whom you pay tribute for ministry and promoting a com
mon work, to him you should be subject in the doing of that work;
' But you pay tribute to the magistrate for carrying on the com
mon work of governing the state in the Lord :
' Therefore you should willingly and lovingly subject yourselves
to him in the doing of that work.'
The assumption only is given in the text ; and as both it, and
the proposition to which it is subjoined, are self-evident, the
-apostle, without any further proof, leaves it to themselves to con
clude ' that they should subject themselves, in the Lord, to the supe-

294 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
rior powers.' As for what he says, therefore, in the latter part of
the verse^that the magistrates are "attending upon this very
thing," by " this very thing" he means—' the duty which it de
volves upon magistrates to perform, according to the word of
God, and in a good conscience ;' arid that is — ' to take care of the
state, and to preside over and enjoin upon his subjects, religiously
and in the Lord.'
7. " Render therefore to all what ye owe." We come now to
the second section of the chapter, which, like the first, contains
only one injunction concerning the common duty to be performed
by Christians to all who live with them in the state. The injunce
tion is this — ' render to all and to every one what you owe.' All
who live along with us in the state are either equal to us, or un
equal ; the unequal being those who are our superiors or inferiors.
Hitherto we have had, in this chapter, a particular injunction con
cerning the latter, according to their particular relation and respect
towards each other : the apostle now lays down an injunction con
cerning both these, and all others who are included in the second
branch of the division — viz., our equals — to be performed to all
and each, as our feUoW-citizens and those who are inhabitants of
the same state with ourselves. The injunction refers to universal
justice ; the substance of it being — ' give to every one what is
justly his due :' the meaning therefore is this : — ' O Christian, who
ever you may be, whether superior, inferior, or equal to your fel
low-citizens, you are bound to perform to all others who are fellow-
citizens with you in the state, and to each according to his rank
and degree, this duty — to owe no man any thing.' This duty, the
apostle both proves — viz., that it is incumbent upon Christians—
and illustrates. The proof is briefly comprised in the illative par
ticle (ovv) " therefore ;" the illustration is subjoined, and the apostle
prosecutes it more at length. " Therefore " (ovv) : this illative
particle shews that this second injunction of the chapter, which
refers to the common duty of Christians, is deduced from the fore
going discussion, or from the relative duty, and particular injuno-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 295
tion concerning the duty of inferiors to superiors ; and that, by
reasoning from what equally foUows in the case of relative oppo
sites, thus : —
' Inferiors should perform the duty which they owe to their su
periors ; and superiors, in their turn, the duty which they owe to
their inferiors :
' Therefore, for an equal reason, equals ought to render to equals,
and all to all, the duty which they owe.'
" To whom tribute is due, tribute :" Next comes a twofold illus
tration of this common injunction. The first is drawn from an in
duction of the duties which one owes to another ; but an incom
plete induction, consisting of four particulars only, without pero
ration. Of these, the three first are borrowed from the foregoing
discussion, and contain duties to be performed by inferiors, to then-
presidents and superiors : for it is the duty of inferiors ' to render
tribute.' The same may be said also of — " custom," and " fear :"
for it is the part of inferiors to fear their superiors ; and wherever this
order is inverted, there we see duty inverted and devilish. Thus,
in the days of Christ, the ecclesiastical presidents of the Jews
would have said — that the baptism of John the Baptist was " of
men ;" but were withheld from saying it by fear of the people. In
Uke manner, they would have apprehended Christ at the feast of
the passover, yet, having assembled the council, they resolved not
to do it ; and the reason is assigned- — " lest there should be a
tumult among the people :" they feared, therefore, to seize our
Lord openly, because they were afraid for themselves, ofthe peoole,
who were their inferiors ; an inverted fear, which shews that they
had forsaken the path of duty : for had they not been " foolish
shepherds," whose ' right arm was dried up, and their right eye
utterly darkened' (Zech. xi) — that is, had they not departed from
duty — instead of their having had to fear the people, the people
would have had to be afraid of them. " To whom honour, honour."
This is the fourth particular in the induction, and unlike the three
preceding : for as the preceding particulars of the induction con
tained a duty to be performed by all to their superiors ; so this

296 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
fourth one contains a common duty, to be performed by every Chris-:
tian to each and aU of his feUow Christians. For it is the duty of
all to do honour to all, as the apostle teaches us in the 10th verse of
the foregoing chap., where he says, concerning all Christians gene
rally, both equal and unequal — " in honour go before one another."
8. " Owe'no man any thing." The second illustration is taken
from what equally foUows in the case of contraries ; for to " render"
and to " owe" are contraries : the apostle, therefore, Ulustrates his
injunction, thus : —
"Owe no man anything :
" Render therefore to all what ye owe."
An iUustration must be drawn from that which is more evident^
the apostle, accordingly, takes it as a thing known and evident—
'that no one should continue the debtor of another in any duty;'
whence he makes plain that which he enjoins, viz. — ' that every one
should render to another what he owes.' " Except (this) to love
one another." This is an epanorthosis and correction of the fore
going .prohibition concerning owing no man anything; the epanor
thosis being taken from one, and that the most common duty, as we
have before shewn on chap. xii. ver. 9 — " let love be unfeigned."
On account of this common duty of love, he corrects his injunction
concerning the prohibition of debt ; thus shewing, that ' to love,'
in the case of Christians, is a duty of such a kind, that whUe always
and perpetually paid, it is never fully discharged, but remains still
to be performed even by those who perform it best,.. that is, who
love others most. One reason for this is the foundation pointed out
by the apostle in 1 Cor. xiii. 13, where he says — ' that love fail
eth not, but abideth ever, even when faith and hope shaU cease.'
" For he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law." This is a
second reason for the epanorthosis, in addition to that from 1st
Cor. xiii, and is taken from the effect of him who so loves as to be
no further a debtor in love. That effect is — ' so to fulfil the latf,
that he who does so is no longer bound to fulfil it;' which is a
thing impossible and that cannot be done : for he who has fulfilled

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 297
the law even to the utmost perfection, is not thenceforth released
from its fulfilment, so as to be no further bound to fulfil it; since
the Christian must live lawfuUy at aU times. Hence, therefore,
the apostle thus reasons : —
' Whosoever has so loved another, as to be no further bound
to love him, has so fulfilled the law, as to be no longer bound to
fulfil the law, or to live lawfully ;
' But there is no one who has so fulfilled the law, as to be no
further bound to Uve lawfully :
' Therefore, neither has any one so loved another, as to be no
longer bound to love him.'
By " the law," in this place, the apostle means — ' that concern
ing the duty to be performed by man to man ;' for it is the duty
of man towards man which is here the topic of discussion : and this
law concerning the duty of man towards man, is that which is com
prised in the second table of the decalogue.
9. " For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery," &c. He goes
on to prove the proposition of the foregoing syllogism, viz. — ' that
whosoever loveth another hath fulfilled the law, by two arguments.
The first is taken from a complete induction, thus : —
' If aU the commandments of the second table are comprised in
this one commandment — " thou shalt love, thy neighbour as thy
self," then it follows, that whosoever so loves his neighbour, as to
be no longer bound to love him, has fulfilled the law ;
' But the former is true' — as appears from this induction — " Thou
shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not kill, &c. ; and, if there
be any other commandment, (of the second table,) it is briefly com
prised in this one saying, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy
self:" ' Therefore the latter also is true.'
The proof of the assumption ia aU that is expressed in the text.
10. " Love worketh no ill to its neighbour." This is the second
proof of the assumption, taken from the disparate of such love, which

298 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
comprehends the transgression of the whole law concerning the
duty of man towards man : that disparate is—' to work iU to one's
neighbour ;' whence the apostle thus reasons : —
' If love works no iU to its neighbour, then love is the fulfilling
of the law ; s
' But the former is true : •
' Therefore so is also the latter.'
The assumption is contained in the first part of the verse.
" Therefore love is the fulfilling of the law." This, which is the
second part of the verse, is the conclusion of the last syllogism,
and is also the same with the proposition of the first syUogism.
Here it is worthy of remark, that the apostle defines ' love' by —
" the fulfiUing of the law," just as John has defined ' sin' by — " the
transgression of the law :" for whether we speak of the law re
specting the duty of man towards man, of which the apostle is
here speaking, love is the fulfiUing of it ; or of the law concerning
the duty of man towards God, love is the fulfilment of it. As
therefore sin is the transgression of the law, and of both its tables ;
so love is the keeping of both tables of the law : from which it fol
lows, that sin and love are two things so opposite and contrary,
that the one being affirmed, the other is denied ; and the one being
denied, the other is affirmed.
11. " And that, knowing the season." Next comes the third
section of the chap., and general conclusion of the injunctions con
cerning morals, which have been continued thus far, from the com
mencement of chap. xii. To this general conclusion, the apostle
makes a transition, by the foregoing admonition regarding the per
petual debt of love : for, as has just been proved, every duty to be
performed by the Christian towards man, whether in the Church
or in the State, is included under ' love,' as a kind of abridgment.
The apostle, therefore, in concluding — ' that we must always love
or that the duty of love is, as it were, a debt ever to be paid by
the Christian to every man, yet never to be fully discharged,' at the
same time concludes — ' that the Christian should perform every

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 299
duty towards every man with whom he lives, whether in the Church
and as a member of the Church, or in the State and as a member
of the State.' And I am induced to take this view of the passage
by the twofold reference of this 11th verse : for in it the apostle
proves, at one and the same time, both that which he has chiefly
proved, viz. — ' that we should owe no man anything, except (this)
to love one another,' and that which foUows next in order, in verses
12 and 13, namely, the conclusion of his discourse, which is — 'that
we should cast off the works of darkness.' And this twofold re
ference of the verses before us is manifest, partly from the first
clause of the verse—" and that, having considered the season" —
wherein he repeats what has been said at the beginning of verse
8th, viz. — ' that we should owe no man anything except (this,)
to love one another ;' so that the meaning is — ' and that I advise,'
or ' and this I say, owe no man anything, except to love one an
other, having considered the season which is now presented — hav
ing considered it, namely, yourselves — as I the apostle have con
sidered and observed it ;' for the plural participle slhorsg indicates,
that this observation of the season (xaigov) is to be referred to the
Romans themselves also, to whom he writes, thus — ' you, knowing
and observing with me the present season, ought to owe no man
anything, except to love one another.' This is the first reference
of this 11th verse. The second, or that whereby this verse refers
to what foUows, is manifest from the particle ovv in the latter part
of verse 12 ; which indicates, that the admonition there given —
" let us caat off the works of darkness" — is, as it were, deduced
from what precedes, by reasoning from the same observation of the
season in the beginning of verse 1 1 : so that the meaning is — ' let
us, namely, you and me together, cast off the works of darkness.'
In this last section of the chapter, therefore, we have, in the first
place, in verse 11, and the beginning of verse 12, the argument for
the common conclusion, which is also a second argument for the
foregoing injunction — " owe no man anything, except to love one
another ;" in the second place, we have, in the middle ofthe 12th
verse, the common conclusion itself; which is then explained by

300 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
being variously amplified in the close of verse 12, and the two last
verses of the chap.
" Having considered the season." The common argument, both
for what goes before, and for the common conclusion which fol
lows, is taken from the adjunct of the season ; whence the apostle
thus argues : —
' If it is now time that we should awake from the sleep of sin
to love each other always, and to perform every duty to all, both
in the Church and in the State, we should now awake from the
sleep of sin to every duty, and to love each other always ;
' But the former is true :
' Therefore so is also the latter.'
By " sleep" I understand here — ' death in sin,' according to the
explanation of this apostle himself, in Ephes. iv. 14 ; where, after
he has quoted from Isaiah the words, — " Awake, thou that sleep-
est," he subjoins, and that by way of commentary, from the same
prophet — " Arise from the dead :" if ' to wake one that sleeps' is
,' to raise him again from the dead ;' the sleep of those that sleep in
sin is itself ' death in sin.' Then by ' awaking' I understand here
— that ' repentance' which follows regeneration ; for by it, he that
sleeps in sin awakes to duty ; and he who was dead in sin riseB
again to love always. " For now is our salvation nearer than
when we believed." This is the reason of the preceding assump
tion, and that whereby he proves that it is now time that we
should awake from sleep. The argument of the proof is deduced
from the adjunct of ' the nearness' of salvation — " now ;" which
is set forth and illustrated by a comparison of majority : — " now
is our salvation nearer" — that is, ' nearer to us' — "than when we
believed." For the understanding of this proof we must expound,
in the first place, the time indicated by the adverb — " now ;* then
the time at which they are said to have " believed ;" and, in the
third place, we must enquire what is denoted by the term " salva^-
tion." By " now" (wv) I consider is indicated—' the time of the
appearing of the gospel.' By ' the time at which they are said to
*Ni».

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 301
Rave beUeved,' I consider is denoted — ' the time of the ministra
tion of the law, and the whole period that preceded it, from
the first giving of the promise in Paradise ;' during all which
time they had the gospel, although more obscurely, and also the
gospel promises, in which believers trusted, both under the law, and
before the law.. By " salvation" I understand — ' the kingdom of
heaven, and the fulfilment of that kingdom in us ;' which was both
said to be " at hand" at the appearing of the gospel, when that
kingdom was clearly revealed, and is to be consummated at the
second coming of the Lord. The apostle, therefore, in this verse,
reasons in the same way as the Baptist in Matt. iii. 2 : —
" The kingdom of heaven is at hand," or is nearer, now that the
gospel is coming, than it was in the days of believers under the
law, and before the law :
' Therefore, now that the time of the gospel is coming upon you,
repent ye,' or, as Paul here speaks, ' it is time that you should
awake from sleep and repent.'
My authority for this exposition is the apostle himself, in Gal.
iU. 23 — " TUl faith should come, we were kept under the protec
tion of the law, being shut up unto the faith which was afterwards
to be revealed:" where the apostle teaches — 'that believers under
the law were sustained by the gospel promises, until the clear reve
lation ofthe faith,' or ' the manifestation of the kingdom of heaven,'
as John speaks, ' should come ;' by which ' kingdom of heaven,' or
' clear revelation of faith,' believers in Christ, now under the gospel,
are strengthened and preserved unto the complete salvation which
is immediately to foUow : so that salvation is nearer to us now,
than it was to believers, either under the law, or before the law.
There is one objection to this exposition, viz., that the apostle is
here writing to the Romans, who, being GentUes, were never
under the ministration of the law, and, consequently, could, not
be said to have then beUeved. To this I reply, that it is true the
apostle is writing to those Romans who had embraced the gospel,
most of whom were not Jews, having been brought in from among
the Gentiles ; but that the apostle here addresses them as no

302 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
longer GentUes, but fellow-citizens of the kingdom of heaven, and
members of that one Church which has existed from the very be
ginning : and that he says to them, as members of the Church —
' that salvation, or the kingdom of heaven, is nearer at hand to
them than it was to their ancestors in former times ;' meaning by
' ancestors,' not the Gentiles from whom they were.descended, but
believers under the law, and before the law, whose chUdren they
were through faith, as the apostle himself affirms, addressing the
Galatians, who were Gentiles equally with them — •" whosoever are
of faith (even Gentiles) are the children of Abraham" (Gal. iu. 7).
12. " The night is advanced, and the day is at hand."
By " the night," I understand here — ' the time which the Romans
had passed as GentUes, and in ignorance of the true God ;' by
*' the day" — ' the time at which, having been fuUy renewed, they
became the children of light, and were illuminated with the true
knowledge of God in Christ :' so that the meaning is : — " the nightf'
— that is — ' the time of your ignorance' — " is advanced," — that is,
1 is now past altogether, except that, in those who have been borri
again and Uluminated, there stiU survive some remains of their
former ignorance and corruption, not yet completely mortified ; and
the day of your complete deUverance, both from ignorance and
from natural corruption, is now at hand, and wiU ere long be here.'
This is therefore a second argument, whereby the apostle proveB
— ' that it is now time that they should awake from sleep,' from
a comparison of dissimilarity between their former condition as
GentUes, and their condition now that they have embraced the
gospel ; whence the apostle thus reasons : —
' If the time of your ignorance has so gone by, that nothing but
the remains of that ignorance is left ; and if you have been so Ulu
minated with the knowledge of God in Christ, that the gospel-day
has clearly risen upon you, and that the day of your salvation is
near — it foUows that it is now time for you to awake from the sleep
of sin, and to repent ;
' But the former is true :

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 303
' Therefore, so is also the latter.'
" Let us therefore cast off the works of darkness." This is the
common conclusion concerning the duty to be performed by the
Christian, both in the Church, and in the State, deduced from the
foregoing argument from the season, as is indicated by the par
ticle (ovv) " therefore," in this way : —
' If it is now time for us to awake from sleep, we ought to cast
off the works of darkness, and to live dutifully, as children of light,
both in the Church and in the State ;
' But the former is true :
' Therefore, so is also the latter.'
The assumption has been previously given; the conclusion is
contained in- the words last quoted. " And let us put on the habit
which befits the Ught." Next comes the Ulustration of the com
mon conclusion, from a distribution or enumeration of the parts of
this 'casting off,' whereby we cast off the works of darkness;
which parts are two in number : the first relates to " habit," or the
inward reformation of the mind ;' the second, to " walk," i, e. ' out
ward actions,' or ' the regulation of the body.' By " light," I un
derstand here — ' the knowledge of God in Jesus Christ,' as opposed
to " night," or ' ignorance of God in Christ ;' of which the apostle
says, in Eph. iv. 18 — ' that the Gentiles had their understanding so
darkened,, as to be alienated from the life of God on account of the
ignorance that was in them.' The first part, therefore, of this cast
ing off of the works of ignorance, consista in — ' acquiring a habit,
or inward custom of acting, such as befits the light, or knowledge
of God in Christ.'
13. " Let us walk orderly, as in the day." This is the second
part of the casting off of the works of darkness, having respect to
" walk," or 'outward action:' — ' the walk or carriage,' that is, ' every
outward action of the body, of us who are Christians, should be or
dered by, and conformed to the word of God, and such, as befits us
in the light and in the day.' " Not in re veilings." He again illus
trates each part of the preceding illustration by a contrast ; but by

304 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
hysterosis: for in the first member ofthe contrast he illustrates an
* orderly walk,' and such as is suited to the day, by an induction
of the particulars of a disorderly walk. Six particulars of a dis
orderly walk, or unbecoming outward action, are enumerated.
" Revelling, drunkenness, chamberings," are disorderly actions of
the body contrary to the third commandment of the second table
— " thou shalt not commit adultery." But "insolence"* is a me
taphorical expression, borrowed from the manners of brutes, which
insolently oppose themselves to those who make use of them : this
is therefore a fourth disorderly outward action of the body, opposed
to the first commandment of the second table. " Not in strife and
envy." These are the two remaining disorderly actions of the
body ; which are contrary to the second commandment of the se
cond table : for by " strife," I understand — ' every outward con
tention of the body, and controversy, such as is practised among
men ;' whUe " envy" is — ' the grudge of one against another, dis
playing itself in the body, either by gesture or language, or in any
other outward manner.'
14. " But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ." This is the se
cond member of the contrast ; in which the apostle Ulustrates that
" habit of light," which he has before enjoined (in verse 12) that
the Christian should put on. The " habit" here contains two
parts, the first of which consists in — ' putting on Christ.' " To put
on Christ" is — ' to be so clothed with Christ, that he may be to us
a garment, at once most safe and most glorious ;' for the use of a
garment is twofold — first, it is a defence to him who puts it on
against external injuries from the air ; and, secondly, it is a grace
and an ornament to the person of him who is clothed with it.
When the apostle, therefore, enjoins us to put on Jesus Christ, he
sends us back, first of all, to the consideration of ourselves, and to
reflect upon our condition by nature, viz., that we are, as it were^
'infants cast out and exposed to injury from many external things/
* Protervia from protero, ' to tread under foot ;' Gr. IwiXyua, " brutal insolence.' (Fas.-
sow). (Tr.) '-.•:'

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 305
as God taught the ancient Church also, by his prophet Ezekiel,
(chap. xvi. 5) ^ and further, that we are ' in disgrace,' as he inti
mates in the same place : both of which are true of us naturally,
and as we are under sin ; for the justice and anger of God, and the
consequent threatening of the execution of his just anger and judg
ment, are aU against us by nature (rri <pveei), from which nothing
but dishonour and disgrace can proceed. By this injunction the
apostle recommends us, in the second place, to put on Christ,
as weU against external injuries, as to ward off dishonour ; both
of which the Lord Jesus Christ effects for all those who put him
on. For, in the first place, he has both satisfied the justice, and
appeased the anger of God, and subdued our foes, both angels
and men, whoever would execute the anger of God upOn us —
yea, aU the judgments which were justly due against us, having
been transferred to himself, he has taken out of the way, (Isa.
liu. 5) ; and has thus rendered us safe against the evUs that
threatened us. Secondly, as he himself is glorious, so he glorifies
those who put him on, and wiU fuUy glorify them on " that day."
This, therefore, is the first part ofthe habit of Ught. The second
is — ' the laying aside of the care of the flesh,' whereby Christians
strip themselves, as it were, of the flesh ; for to be clothed with
Christ and the flesh at the same time is both impossible, and, if it
were possible, would neither be safe nor honourable to him who
should put them on. He who wishes, therefore, to be clothed with
the habit of light, so as to put on Christ for defence and glory,
must put off the flesh, as that which brings disgrace, and is accom
panied with very many judgments. ' To put off the flesh,' the
apostle defines to be — ' so to lay aside the care of the flesh, as by
no means to desire to fulfil the lusts thereof; nay rather, to strive
against the flesh, in order that we may walk in the Spirit :' for 'to
fulfil the lusts of the flesh,' is — to " walk after the flesh," (xara
ffdgxa,) 'to do whatever the flesh desires should be done;' these
two, the Spirit and the flesh, being contraries,, and coveting con
trary things, (Gal. v. 17.) Although, therefore, the remains of
the flesh, opposing the Spirit, survive in the children of grace, or
u

306 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
true Christians, as long as they are here, so that, on account of our
weakness, we cannot be free from the thoughts and works of the
flesh ; the apostle nevertheless enjoins us, so to lean to the side of
the Spirit, and so to resist the flesh, as at no time to be found ful
filling the lusts of the flesh, or giving ourselves up to the service of
sin : because the Spirit is thus provoked to desert us, or at least
so to, hide himself for a season, that that brief walk according to
the flesh, ends in immeasurable sorrow ; as we read happened ao
severely in the case of David.

CHAPTER XIV.
Thus far the apostle has enjoined upon the Christian the duties
to be performed by him in the common body ; both such as are
common to aU, and those that are relative, according to the rela
tion, or particular state and condition of those by whom they are
to be performed : and as the body in which the Christian lives as
a member, is twofold ; so the injunctions concerning these duties
to be performed in the common body, have been seen set forth in
two chapters, viz., xii. and xiii. Next come, in this xiv. chap.,
injunctions to be performed, not to the body, but to certain per
sons approaching the body, according to their state and condition :
these are-—" the weak in faith," yet approaching the body of the
Church, and living in the same state, or body poUtic, with our
selves. Consequently, the injunctions which foUow in this chap
ter are in one aspect more common than the preceding, since
they are to be performed to those who are members of one and
the same Church, as weU as state, with ourselves ; but, in another
view, they are more particular, inasmuch as they are to be per
formed to those approaching the body, according to the condition
of those that approach, but not, like the former, to the body, or in
the common body, according to relation. For ' the weak in faith *
are neither the ecclesiastical nor the civil body, but certain mem-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 307
bers of the same state, or civU body, approaching the common
body of the Church ; and it seems to be the intention of the
apostle to Intimate this, when he says, in the commencement of
the chapter — ' that they are to be received ;' since ' to be received]
is properly a duty performed to those who approach. Concern
ing this duty of receiving the weak, the apostle, in this chapter,
and the beginning of the foUowing, lays down three injunctions :
the first relates to ' the act of reception itself,' from v. 1 to the
latter part of v. 13 ; the second is about ' not giving cause of
offence to the weak brethren whom they receive,' thence to the
close of the chapter ; the third is in the beginning of chap, xv.,
where he enjoins us ' to humour those who have been received :'
and from the 5th verse of chap. xv. 'o the 15th verse ofthe same,
he concludes these injunctions touching the duty to be performed
to the weak.
1. " Him, moreover, who is weak in faith receive ye." The
apostle therefore addresses the strong in faith ; whence it foUows,
that of those who believe on Jesus Christ, some are ' strong,' others
" weak In faith :" and in these words the apostle prescribes to both
a Christian duty ; to ' the strong,' indeed, expressly, but to ' the
weak,' analogously and by consequence. The duty of the strong
is — ' to receive the weak,' as AquUa and PrisciUa received Apollos
at Ephesus, when he knew nothing except the baptiam of John
(Acts xviU. 26). The duty of the weak, on the other hand, is,
analogously and by consequence — ' to give themselves up to be
received by the strong,' that is — ' not to refuse, but to acknowledge
this duty of reception, as proceeding from God, and extended to
them from the mercy of God ;' since it would be in vain for any
one to receive those who refused reception. I caU those ' strong in
faith ' — ' who, as they have embraced the faith ofthe gospel, so have
been taught the Uberty in Christ of those who believe,' namely)
' that to the pure aU things are pure, and that nothing is impure
to him who is pure, unless he considers it to be impure :' for Christ
has sanctified aU thinga to believers by a new right in himself;
u2

308 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
whence, in 1 Tim. iv. 4, this same apostle says — that " every
creature of God is good, and none to be refused if it be received
with thanksgiving." This ' strength of faith,' or Uberty in Christ,
Peter, who was also an apostle of Jesus Christ, is divinely taught
whUst yet weak in faith, (Acts.x.) : for, having been shewn that
divine vision concerning things which, under the law, were impure,
but now are sanctified, and when, froiri that weakness of faith, and
conscience* of the law, he replies to the command to slay and eat
promiscuously, that he cannot do so, because most of the things
presented in the divine vision are impure according to the law,
and such as, up to this time, through conscience of the law, he has
touched, slain, or^eaten none of; he is divinely told that aU those
things which were impure according to the law, are sanctified to
believers now under the gospel, so that they may be received with
thanksgiving, for lawful use, without any consciousness ofimpurity.
I call " weak in faith," on the other hand — ' those who have indeed
made a beginning in Christ, but have not yet been taught the way
of the Lord fully ;' such as was ApoUos, when received by Aquila
and Priscilla at Ephesus. And I caU those " weak in faith" — ' who,
though they have embraced the faith of Christ, have not yet so
learned the liberty of believers in Christ, as to prevent their being
fettered by a conscience of some former religious bondage, which
went before the revelation to them of the doctrine of faith : so,
those of the circumcision at Jerusalem who believed, from this
same weakness of faith, contended with Peter, as transgressing
against duty, because ' he went in to the Gentiles and ate with
them' (Acts xi. 2) ; which contention -arose from a conscience of
bondage under the law, going before faith, and whereby it was un
lawful for Jews, either to eat in common with the Gentiles, or to
keep company with them. The apostle, sharply rebukes the Gala
tians for both kinds of weakness : first, because, from this weakness
of faith, ' having begun in the Spirit, they desired to be made per
fect in the flesh' (Gal. iii. 3), and that contrary to the liberty
which believers enjoy in the Lord Jesus Christ (Gal. v. 1) ; se-
* i. «. Conscientious regard for, or scruples about.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 309
condly, because, although they had embraced Christ, such was the
effect of their weakness, that Christ was not yet formed in them,
so that the apostle says (in chap. iv. ver. 19)—' that he travaUs
again with them) until Christ should be formed in them.'
This is, accordingly, the first injunction in this division, in which
the apostle prescribes their duty both to the strong and to the
weak in faith : to the former indeed, expressly — ' that they should
receive the weak in faith, of both kinds ;' but to the latter, namely,
the weak of either sort, by consequence—' that they should give
themselves up to be received by the strong.' ' To receive a weak
brother,' moreover, is — ' to embrace him as a brother in Christ,
notwithstanding his weakness, and to endeavour to remove his
weakness by gently instructing him ;' as Aquila and Priscilla,
having embraced ApoUos as a brother, taught him with gentleness
the way of the Lord more perfectly. ' To give themselves up to
be received,' on the other hand, comprises the two following things :
first — ' that they should acknowledge, with thanks, the favour of
their being so received and embraced as brethren by the strong f
then — ' that they should willingly give themselves up to be in
structed by the strong, for the removal of their weakness, and sup
plying the defect which has been in them :' and if, in either of
these, the weak shaU sin, they are guilty of a violation of Christian
duty, and of sinning against that very beginning which they have
made in Christ. Hence the apostle at length severely reproves
those who do not receive instruction, (Gal. iii. 1) ; yea, contends
against them, (Acts xv. 1) ; yea, caUs them " false brethren,"
' messengers of Satan,' ' false apostles,' ' seducers,' (2 Cor. xi. 12 ;
Gal. U. 4). From this it appears, that those things indifferent, in
which we are to bear with our weak brethren, are not indifferent
simpliciter ''and absolutely, but secundum quid, and as regards time ;
that is, with respect to the weakness of those who believe — concern
ing whom the expectation is, that they may be strengthened by gen
tle instruction — and only so long as they suffer themselves to be so
instructed : for if they persist in rejecting the duty of the strong in
receiving and instructing them, they cease to be weak in faith ; and

310 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
those very things which formerly were indifferent, at length be
come heresies, which the strong in faith must oppose. So, after
Paul had circumcised Timothy for the sake of the weaker, he op
posed circumcision in the case of Titus ; the defenders of which,
as has been said, he caUs ' emissaries of Satan,' and the professors
of which he informs, that if they persist in their profession of cir
cumcision, " Christ" offered in the gospel " wiU profit them no
thing" (Gal. v. 2). Hence an answer may be returned to those
who, from verses 2 and 5 of this chapter, accuse of an infringement
of the duty to be performed towards weak brethren, those who too
sharply rebuke and censure the keeping of other feast-day a in the
Christian Church, besides the Sabbath, the substitution of a hierarchy
for ecclesiastical synods, and other things of the same kind, which
they themselves haughtily affirm to be indifferent ; ' in which,' say
they, ' if there be any fault, it is only a sin of weakness, and such
that the peace of the Church is not to be disturbed on account of
it by too bitterly censuring the weak, but that the individuals
themselves who thus err are to be received and embraced as breth
ren in Christ.' The answer to be returned to these persons is to
this effect : — that aU that they say is true, so long as the things
which they caU indifferent, are indifferent, and the brethren whom
they caU weak, are weak ; but if, after these weak brethren have
been received, and affectionately taught their weakness from the
word of God, they are nevertheless unwilling to forsake the path
of weakness — then neither are they themselves any longer weak,
but obstinate and heretical ; nor are those things which they obsti
nately defend, and which at firat indeed, so long as they themselves
were weak, were indifferent, any longer to be regarded as indiffe
rent, but as heresies to be most strenuously opposed by the stronger
or more sincere in faith, and the defenders of them to be rejected
as false brethren : and in so doing, the stronger neither sin, nor
disturb the peace of the Church censuring the weak ; but the
whole fault in this case lies with the individuals themaelves who
wish to be considered weak, inasmuch as they obstinately refuse
to surrender themselves, either to God, or to the word of God, or

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 311
to be received by their brethren gently teaching them from the
word of God, which is their duty, as it is that of the stronger to
receive them. Thus, Paul rebuked, as heretics in Christianity,
those who contended for circumcision (which, nevertheless, he
practised himself, for the sake of the weak, in the case of Timothy),
and, in so doing, declares that this was the sole ground of his con
troversy with them — " moreover I, brethren, if I preach circumci
sion, why do I stUl suffer persecution ?" (Gal. v. 11) ; as much as,
to say — ' my controversy is not with those who deny the faith, and
are the open enemies of Christ, but with hypocrites, who, while
they both profess and teach Christ and the faith, yet, in their ob
stinacy, mix up with the preaching of Christ things which weaken
both Christ and the faith of Christ.' And so (Gal. iv. 10, 11) he
says concerning those very things indifferent, of which we are now
speaking — " Ye observe days, and months, and seasons, and years.
I fear concerning you, lest I have laboured amongst you in vain
(preaching Christ and the gospel.) " " Not (however) to strifes of
disputings." This is an epanorthosis ofthe first injunction, wherein
he anticipates those, who indeed receive weak brethren amongst
them, but in such a mistaken manner, that that reception is not
less an infringement of divinely commanded duty, than if they had
not received them ; nay more : for to receive a weak brother to
strifes of disputings, is a greater hindrance to that weak brother
than if he were not received ; and consequently the infringement
of duty is greater in the former case, than in the latter. " Strifes
of disputings." By this expression he intends — ' wrangUng and
contentioua diaputinga, wherein the diaputanta on both sides so
defend their own opinion, and that often without evident reason,
as to make it plain that neither party ia seeking the truth from
the soUd foundations of truth, for mutual edification, but each
the victory over the other, to the vainglorying of the victor, and
disgrace of the vanquished. Such strifes of disputinga would
be a short method of proceeding, if any one wished to render a
weak brother obstinate, and therefore the apostle, as if correct
ing the words of his own injunction, prohibits the stronger from

312 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
such contentions, and charges them not to receive the weak to
such strifes, because duty is thus more infringed than it is per
formed. 2. " One indeed believeth that he may eat every thing." He
explains both the foregoing epanorthosis, and the injunction con
cerning receiving weak brethren, by an induction of examples,
which consists of two parts : the first is contained in verses 2, 3,
4; the second in the 5th, and subsequent verses. In the first
part he observes the foUowing order : first of all, he proposes an ex
ample of a strong brother who should receive, and of one weak in
faith who should be received, in verse 2 ; he then subjoins an in
junction to each concerning his duty, in verse 3 ; in the third
place, he adds, at the close of verse 3, and in the 4th verse, an
argument for the duty to be performed by the weak. This first
example is concerning eating or not eating, ' in which' — the
apostle would teach us, as' he afterwards teaches in the 17th verse
of this very chapter — ' the kingdom of God does not consist,' and
consequently, that both are in themselves indifferent, and continue
to be so as long as any one who is weak in faith eats nothing but
herbs : but if, after having been taught his weakness,he does not
repent, but obstinately maintains that the kingdom of God con
sists in not eating, or in eating this, but not that ; then this same
' eating and not eating' is no longer indifferent, but a heresy and
corruption of the purity of the gospel. This example is borrowed
from those Jews who, although they had believed, yet, from a con
science of their worship under the law, thought that it was not
lawful to eat every thing, but that it was necessary to obey the
prohibition of Moses concerning things that were not to be eaten..
These the apostle calls — "weak (in faith)" on account of their
ignorance of the liberty of the gospel ; and, on the other hand, he
calls those—" beUevers," (iriorovg,) or ' strong in faith,' who, hav
ing embraced the faith of Christ, firmly believed, that in lawful
use, they might lawfully eat every thing, since aU things are pure
to the pure, for lawful use.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 313
3. " Let not him that eateth, make light of him that eateth not."
Next come the injunctions ; the first of which. is given to the " be
lieving," or ' strong in faith :' — ' that they should not make light of,
or despise, because of their weakness of faith, those who do not
eat.' From this I would have you learn — that the despising of
weak brethren, whereby these weak brethren are made light of, is
contrary' to that reception of the weaker, which he had enjoined
upon the stronger, in the first verse ; whence it' follows, that that
reception, as has been already said, consists chiefly in a due regard
for our weak brethren. " And let not him that eateth not, con
demn him that eateth." This is the second injunction appertain
ing to the weak ; whence it foUows, that the injunction laid down
in the first verse, although it expressly binds the strong in faith
only, yet, analogously and by consequence, relates also to the
weak in faith. Moreover, in making the duty of the weak to con
sist in ' not condemning,' the apostle would teach us : — ' that the
breach of duty in the weak consists in condemning the stronger;
and, consequently, that an arrogant condemnation, without reason, is
the ground of their not giving themselves up to be received by the
strong in faith, teaching them in gentleness, and from the word.'
" For God hath received him." We have next the arguments for
the second injunction, and why he that does not eat should not
condemn him who eats ; from which the apostle wishes to teach us
— ' that although it be a grievous sin to make light of weak breth
ren, yet for the weaker to condemn the strong in faith, is a sin more
grievous stUl.' The arguments are two in number. The first is taken
from the effect of God : —
' Man should not condemn him who eats, and, in the exercise of
his Christian liberty, eats everything, if God has received him,
that is, approved him in Christ apprehended by faith ;
' But God has received him who eats everything :
' Therefore the weak in faith, who does not eat every thing,
should not condemn him who eats every thing.'
And here I would have you observe, in passing, that although
the apostle is reasoning expressly with the weak in faith, for the

314 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
performance of duty, yet the argument tacitly binds the strong
likewise to perform their duty to the weaker ; for if God has re
ceived the strong, why should not they also receive the weaker ?
4. " Who art thou that condemnest the servant of another ?"
The second argument is from disparates : —
' No man should condemn the servant of another ;
' But he that eats everything is God's servant, and not youra
who, from weakness of faith, eat herbs :
' Therefore you who do not eat, should not condemn him who
eats.' " To his own master he standeth or faUeth." This is the rea
son of the proposition, or why the servant of another is not to be
condemned : — -jr
' If he stands, he stands to his own master ; if he falls, he falls to
his own master :
' Therefore it belongs to the servant's own master, either to con
demn him falling, or to justify, or establish him standing.'
" But he shaU be estabUshed." This is an epanorthosis of the
preceding disjunctive — " he standeth or faileth ;" and not only of
it, but also of the conclusion — ' it is not for you, therefore, who are
weak in faith — to condemn him that eats, even if he deserved con
demnation — but for his own master.' The apostle corrects both
statements, thus : — ' he shall not faU, but shaU be estabUshed ; he
shaU not be condemned by his own master, but justified.' " For
God is able to establish him." This is the reason of the epanor
thosis, from the abiUty of God : —
' God is able to establish him :
' Therefore he shall be established.'
But you wiU say that the argument from ' being able' to ' be
ing,' is not valid. I answer — that that is true, except when justice
demands ' being:' for, if it be granted that any one ought to do
such a thing, the argument from ' being able' to ' being,' and that
he will perform that which he is able to perform, is valid, if he be
just. Although, therefore, God ia, and can be a debtor to no crea-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 315
ture, yet — as it is a just thing with him to justify those who firmly
believe on Christ Jesus, for the sake of Jesus Christ on whom they
beUeve — that justice is agreeable to the wiU of God, and haa the
the testimony ofthe law and the propheta (c. iii. 21).
5. " One man esteemeth one day above another; another es-
teemeth every day (alike.)" This is the second example, or latter
part of the induction whereby the injunction given in the first
verse, with its epanorthosis about ' not receiving weak brethren to
strifes,' are iUustrated.
This example, likewise, is borrowed from the law, by the require
ments of which the new-moons and various feast days were sepa
rated from other days among the ancient people; the remembrance
of which so affected even those Jews who had been converted to
the faith of Christ, that, in their weakness, almost all who believed
retained their zeal for the law and ancient feasts : so James and
the elders at Jerusalem (Acts xxi. 20) acknowledge — " thou seest,
brother," addressing Paul, " how many thousands of JeVvs there are
who have beUeved, and they are aU zealous of the law.' One part
of this perverted zeal was — 'the esteeming one day above another;'
in which, indeed, the beUeving Jews at length reached such a pitch
of obstinacy, that they even urged the keeping of the Jewish feasts
upon the Gentiles, as may be seen from Gal. iv. 10 — " Ye observe
days, and months, and seasons, and years. I fear concerning you,"
&c. : — this, Paul points out to the Galatians ; and this evU had
crept into that Church through the zeal of those caUed " Judai
zers." As therefore, in the previous example, ' he that eats herbs'
is called " weak," so here, the " weak" is ' he that esteems one day
above another ;' and as, hj the former case, he is caUed " believing,"
or ' strong in faith,' who, being persuaded of the liberty of Christ,
' knows that it is lawful for him to eat aU things,' so, in this verse,
he is ' strong in faith' who, being persuaded of Christian Uberty,
' esteems every day alike, and gives no preference, on account of
the ceremonies of the law, to one day over another.' " Let every
one be fuUy persuaded in his own mind." This is an admonition

316 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
given by the apostle to both parties in common ; both to him who
esteems one day above another, and to him who esteems every day
alike : the admonition is this : — ' that every one of either party
should act according to his measure of faith ; and in such a way,
that what he does shall be what he believes to be pleasing to God.'
By this admbnition, the apostle shews both those who esteem,
and those who do not esteem the day, how very near they are to
evU, unless they take heed to themselves. For if those who
esteem one day above another, have been taught the liberty which
is in Christ, they can no longer esteem one day above another, in
the Lord, and with assurance of faith ; because they are adverse
to known truth, and so are no longer weak believers, but opposers
of known faith and unbelievers : the apostle therefore admonishes
such, that so long as they esteem one day above another, they
should examine the strength of their faith, lest acting against light
and faith, they be found unbelievers, and obstinate in a lie. In
like manner, he admonishes the strong, not to found their liberty
on implicit faith, or the authority of others, so as to have no assu
rance of their Uberty in themselves : for in this way, even they will
not be strong, but weak, yea, acting amiss ; since they do what they
do, without faith or assurance in themselves. The apostle there
fore wishes, that both the strong and the weak should do what
they do, according to their measure of faith, and in such a way,
that neither he who esteems one day above another, should do so
any longer, than until such time as he may be taught the Uberty
of Christ, and that every day is to be esteemed alike ; nor he who
esteems every day alike, should so "esteem it, unless, having been
taught the liberty of Christ, he be sure in his own mind, that in
esteeming every day alike, he is acting rightly : whence it most
clearly appears, that in the judgment of the apostle, whoever be
lieves, whether he be strong or weak in faith, should have assur
ance, and be fuUy persuaded concerning that which he beheves.
From this it is manifest, that if the advocates of Popery would
take their stand upon the divine testimony, the controversy be
twixt the Papists and the Church of Christ concerning the assur-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 317
ance of justifying faith, or the persuasion of grace, might be
brought to a termination ; but from this passage, and a great
many others simUar to it, the Church of Christ asserts that assur
ance, in opposition to the Papists.
6. " He that regardeth the day, regardeth it to the Lord." This
is a prolepsis, or anticipation of an objection to the foregoing admo
nition. Some might say: — 'that in controversies concerning religion,
it is impossible for both the opposing parties to be sure that they are
pleasing God, the one in doing, and the other in not doing : this,
therefore, being impossible, that it is of no use to admonish both
him that eats, and him that does not eat, him that observes the
day, and him that does not observe it, to be sure, each in his own
mind, that is, persuaded by faith, that he is acting rightly, and
pleasing God — the one in eating, the other in not eating ; the one
in esteeming one day above another, and the other in esteeming
every day alike.' To this objection the apostle, in the verse be
fore us, repUes : — ' that the antecedent of the argument is false ;
and that so long as the things remain indifferent, and he who be
heves continues weak in faith) even he who believes in weakness
may have assurance concerning that which he believes, just as he
who is strong in faith, and in regard to whom it is most evident
that he has such assurance ;' and he establishes his reply, in this
verse, by two arguments. The first is borrowed from the end : —
' He who does not eat, and esteems one day above another, from
weakness of faith, as well as he who eats, and esteems every day
alike, because he is strong in faith, does or omits, whatever he
does or omits, to the Lord, that is, so that the Lord may be glo
rified in his doing or omitting.'
The second argument is borrowed from the effect of assurance
of faith, both in him who regards, and in him who does not regard,
in him who does not eat, as weU as in him who eats ; which effect
is — ' the giving of thanks :' —
' In regarding or eating, he who does, as well as he who omits,
gives thanks to God concerning his deed or omission :

318 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
' Therefore each is sure in himself, that he is pleasing and serv
ing God, whether in doing or omitting.'
7. " For none of us liveth to himself." By " us," he means
here — 'us who believe,' whether we be strong or weak in faith;
and consequently, " none of us " is here equivalent to — ' none of
us who believe :' in this verse therefore he proves, from the genus
itself, the end from which he has just reasoned. The argument of
the proof runs thus : —
' Whoever Uves to the Lord, does or omits to the Lord, what
ever, in living, he does or omits ;
' But aU we who beUeve live to God :
' Therefore we who believe, whether we eat or do not eat,
whether we regard the day or do not regard it, do it or omit it, to
the Lord, or in order that the Lord may be magnified.'
This 7th verse contains an iUustration of the assumption, taken
from the contrary end : —
' None of us who believe lives to himself, that is, in order that
he himself may be glorified, or that he may serve himself :
' Therefore, all of us who believe Uve unto God.'
' To live to God,' and ' to live to one's self,' are contrary oppo-
sitea : for whether a man Uvea to sin, or to Satan in sin, or to his
own pleasures, or to covetousness, (each of which is found in the
Scriptures,) they are all summed up in one, when he is said — ' to
live to himself;' since whatever a man Uves to, who does not Uve
to the Lord, he is deceived by appearances, and is induced so to
live, because, under this pretext, he Uves to himself, that is, to his
own advantage and glory. ' To Uve to one's self,' therefore, and ' to
live to God,' are here opposed to each other by the apostle, as two
contraries. " And none dieth to himself." He next explains the
contrary state, by what equally follows in the case of privative op
posites : —
' None of us who beUeve dies to himself :
' Therefore,' by parity of reasoning, ' none lives to himself:'
unless you prefer to say, that as the apostle illustrates state by

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 319
state, or ' standing to the Lord ' by ' living to the Lord ;' so he
illustrates privation by privation, or 'faUing to the Lord,' (rd
vriTrrsiv K-vpiSji,) ' by dying to the Lord,' (ro Kup/^ uvrodvfjtrxsiv.)
8. " For whether we live, we live unto the Lord, or die, we die
unto the Lord." This is the assumption itself, amplified by what
equaUy foUows in the case of privative opposites, just as the Ulus-
tration of it in the previous verse was taken from the contrary.
Moreover, 'to live to the Lord,' is — 'so to live,' and 'to die
(aico&vfoxsiv) to the Lord,' is—' so to die, as that the Lord may
be glorified, and the honour of his name may be present to our
minds, both in our Ufe, and in our death.' " Whether we live,
therefore, or die, we are the Lord's. This is an inference, or ulte-
/ y
rior conclusion, instead of the proper conclusion of the foregoing
syUogism. The proper conclusion of the foregoing syUogism is— =-
' therefore, he who eats or does not eat, he who esteems the day or
esteems it not, whatever he does or omits, in Uving, does it to the
Lord.' From this the apostle infers, as an- ulterior conclusion —
' that in Ufe, and in death, we are the Lord's,' that is, ' to be
judged by him alone, and not by one another, nor by ourselves ;'
because, as no man lives either to himself or to another, or dies
either to himself or to another, so no man is either his own or
another's, but the Lord's alone : for we are his to whom we Uve,
to whom we die, and whom we serve, and to be judged in our Ufe,
death, and service, by him only ; as the apostle teaohea us in 1st
Cor. iv. 3, 4.
5. " For Christ both died and rose again, and revived for this
end." The apostle goes on to prove the preceding inference, viz.,
— 'that whether falling or standing, living or dying, we are the
Lord's,' by a new. argument,^taken from the end of the death, re
surrection, and subi&Jngnt eternal Ufe of Jesus Christ : —
* ' Christ both died, and after death rose again, and since his re
surrection Uvea for ever, for the end, that he might be Lord at
once of the dead, and of the living :

320 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
' Therefore he is Lord of all, and all are his servants, in life and
in death.'
By " the living," I understand here, as above — ' believers,' the end
of whose life is the glory and honour of God. The apostle seems also
to use the term " death" here, in a wider acceptation, extending it
not only to believers in death, but also to the spiritually dead and
dying ; of whom the apostle says, that ' they die to the Lord,' inas
much as it is the Lord, and none else, from whom those who -die
spirituaUy faU away in their death, and consequently, by whom
alone, as sinning against him only in so dying, they are to be judgedv
10. Thus far, from the 4th verse, the apostle has interdicted any
one in the Church from judging or condemning another, by an argu
ment drawn from the right of Jesus Christ alone, who is Lord of
all, and whose servants we all are, and, consequently, whose prero
gative alone it is to judge all, to condemn those who are to be con
demned, and to justify those who are to be justified. He now
proceeds in this, and the foUowing vv. as far as the latter part of
ver. 13, to interdict the same by an argument drawn from our
selves, and that twofold. The first argument is taken from this —
' that we are aU to stand before the judgment-seat of Christ the
judge, none of us before the judgment-seat of another ;' and the
apostle thus reasons : —
, ' If we are all to stand before the judgment-seat of Christ the
judge, none of us, as judge, should either condemn or make Ught
of his brother ; , ,-. ,
' But the former is true :
' Therefore, so is the latter.'
" But thou, why dost thou condemn thy brother ? or even thou,
-why dost thou make light of thy brother ?" This is the conclusion
of the syllogism, adorned with a rhetorical interrogation, whereby
the apostle' extorts from all who believe, the confession — 'that
none should condemn, and none despise his brother.' " For We
shaU all stand before the judgment-seat of Christ." This is the
assumption of the syllogism.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 321
11. " For it is written, I live, saith the Lord." He further
estabUshes the assumption by the testimony of the Holy Spirit,
announced by Isaiah, (chap. xiv. ver. 23). The ' bowing of the
knee' betokens — ' the subjection of him who bows the knee, due
to him to whom he bows it ;' and ' the confession of the mouth' — ¦
* the acknowledgment by him, who bows the knee, of that subjec
tion,' By this testimony ofthe prophet, therefore^ he teaches these
two things : — (1.) ' that aU are to be subjected to Christ the
judge ; (2.) that all, even the most ungodly themselves, shall be
forced to acknowledge that subjection to be just and legitimate.
12. The second argument is taken from ourselves, or from the
account which each of us shaU give to the judge, for himself, when
we shaU aU stand before the judgment-seat of Christ ; and the
apostle thus reasons : —
' Whosoever is to give an account of himself when he stands be
fore the judgment-seat, should not judge another before the time,
but should be solicitous, in time, how he shall answer concerning
himself; >
' But we are all, every one of us, to give an account of ourselves
when we stand before the judgment-seat of Christ :
' Therefore, none of us should judge another before the time,
but every one should rather be soUcitous, in time, how he shall
answer to the judge concerning himself.'
" So then, every one of us shall give an account of himself to
God." This ia the aasumption of the syllogism.
13. " Let us no longer, therefore, judge one another"— is the con
clusion. Thus far the injunction concerning the ' reception of weak
brethren.' Next comes the second, about — ' not putting a cause of
offence in the way of those who have been received ;' which is
iUustrated by a finite * effect, and amplified by a rhetorical correc
tion iUustrated by a comparison of majority. " But" is the note of
correction and contrast ; " rather" — the note of the comparison
* i. e., having a (definite) end. j
X

322 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
whereby the correction is amplified ; " exercise judgment" — the
finite effect whereby he Ulustratea the injunction ; " that" — the
note of the end of the finite effect. " Ye may not put a stumbling-
block, or cause of offence, in a brother's way" — is the proposition
of the injunction ; wherein the apostle makes use of two terms to
express that from which he prohibits the stronger in the Church :
the first of these, "Xgoaxo^a, denotes — ' that on which the feet of
those walking on a journey stumble, so that it is a hindrance to
their progress on their journey ;' whUe " cause of offence," on the
other hand, has more a reference to the mind. The import, there
fore, of the injunction which the apostle here gives to the stronger,
is this : — ' that they should not put an obstacle or hindrance in
the way either of the inward or outward actions of their weaker
brethren, whUe they are advancing in the path of salvation.'
They put. an obstacle in the way of the inward actions [of their
brethren] by inspiring doubt ; and of their outward actions, when
they induce them, by their example, to do what they otherwise
would not do, or to omit what they otherwise would not omit;
each of which, the apostle pronounces evil, or a sin, as being done
without faith. The apostle is not content with simply propound
ing this injunction ; but to shew the difficulty of obedience, he says
— ' that we must exercise judgment for this end, that we may not
put a stumbling-block in the way either of the mind or outward
actions of a weak brother ; and that that judgment of ours is to be
exercised in this, rather than in judging others, whether stronger
or weaker.' •¦',
14. " I know and am persuaded." He explains, proleptically,
'the judgment' which he has said we are to exercise for this end,
that we may not give cause of offence to a weak brother ; and the
prolepsis consists of two parts. The first prolepsis is this : — the
stronger might say — ' that they had been taught by the liberty of
the gospel, that nothing is impure in lawful use ; and, consequent
ly, that they ought to follow the doctrine of Christian liberty in
eating all things, only using them religiously, and not to stop or

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 323
cease from the lawful use of things, on account of the ignorance
or weakness of another on that point.' The apostle replies to the
antecedent of this objection by a distinction — " that nothing is
impure in itself," that is, ' in lawful use ;' which member of the dis
tinction the apostle amplifies by the adjuncts of his own knowledge
and persuasion, and the efficient cause of both : — ' I know that
, nothing is impure in itself, and I am persuaded of it; and the effi
cient cause of both this knowledge and persuasion of mine is Jesus
Christ, who has procured for me a right to aU things, so that aU
things are clean for lawful use-' " But to him who esteemeth any
thing to be impure, to him it is impure." This is the second mem
ber of the distinction : — ' some things, however, are impure for use
secundum quid, with respect to the state of the weak ; and inciden
tally, on account of the opinion of him who considers them im
pure : for to him who considers any thing impure, his very opinion
of it renders it impure ; not simpliciter, but because he himself re
gards it as impure.'
15. " But if, on account of food, thy brother is grieved, now
walkest thou not lovingly." This is the second prolepsis ; the
strong might say : — ' if it be true that nothing is impure in it
self, but only incidentaUy and with respect to the opinion of the
weaker, the whole fault lies with the weak, and none with me, who,
using my Christian Uberty, eat all things as pure.' To this objec
tion also, as. to the former, the apostle replies by a distinction,
namely : — ' that the fault indeed lies with the weak, but in such a
way, that there is some also in the free use of things pure, viz.,
that whUe using their liberty, they grieve the weak : for, having
no respect in this matter to their weakness, they offend against the
common law of love, which commands us to love our neighbours
as ourselves ; in which love, if the strong do not walk, they grieve
their weak brethren by abusing their Uberty.' " Destroy not him
by thy meat for whom Christ died." Thus far the explanation of
the judgment ; now come the arguments by which the injunction
is established. The first argument is taken from the effect of giv-
x2

324 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
ing cause of offence to weak brethren ; which effect is — ' their de
struction.' The apostle, therefore, here reasons thus : —
' If any one is not to be destroyed by meat, we must not, by
eating every thing, put a cause of offence in his way ;
' But a weak brother is not to be destroyed by meat :
' Therefore we must not put a cause of offence in his way by
eating every thing.'
The assumption is given in the text, being proved by the ad
junct of the price of t-he redemption of the weaker : —
' Christ died for our weak brethren :
' Therefore a weak brother is not to be destroyed by so worthless
a thing as meat.'
16. " Let not therefore your good be evil spoken" of." The
second argument is taken from the end of not putting a cause of
offence in the way of weak brethren : — ' we must not put a cause of
offence in the way of our weak brethren, in order that our good
may not be evil spoken of.' By "our good" he means — ' the be
nefit of Christian liberty :' ' we are freely to use our Christian
liberty in such a way, that the benefit of that liberty may not be
evil spoken of by our free use of the same.' Hence the apostle
thus reasons : —
' We must not, by the use of our Christian Uberty, expose the
benefit of that liberty to evil- speaking;
' But the benefit of Christian liberty is exposed to evil-speaking,
when, in the use of that liberty, we put a stumbling-block in the
way of our weak brethren :
' Therefore we must not put a stumbling-block in the way of a
weak brother by the use of our Christian liberty..'
The proposition is given in the text.
17. " For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink." By
" the kingdom of God" I understand here — ' the service of God,
wherewith the Godly serve him, and whereby it becomes manifest
that he reigns in them as their King.' This is, accordingly, a third

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 325
argument for the injunction, from the subject-matter of the king
dom of God, set forth prolepticaUy, and by contrast : for the strong
might say : — ' we must hold fast the liberty of the kingdom of God,
whatever be the consequence ; nor are we to be stopped by the
destruction of any, or by our good being evil spoken of, but must
consider what the liberty of the kingdom of God demands, so that
God, our Lord arid King, may be glorified in the use of our liberty.'
To this objection the apostle replies by arsis and thesis, shewing :—
' that the kingdom of God does not consist in the things in ques
tion, viz., in meat, drink, and other things indifferent,' that is)
' that the service of God is neither attended to by attention to
these things, nor neglected by the neglect of these things, considered
in themselves ; but that the service of God, whereby it becomes
known that God is our King, and we his kingdom, consists in
righteousness, peace, and the joy of the Spirit.' By " righteous
ness" I understand — both ' imputed' and ' inherent righteousness :'
for we serve God, and God reigns in us, through faith, by which
we lay hold of God's righteousness — that is, righteousness imputed
through faith in Christ — unto sal vation; and new obedience, whereby
we grow daily in inherent righteousness, as the effect of righteous
ness imputed, untU we be also perfected, and completely renewed
after the image of God. By " peace " I understand — ' that sere
nity of a pacified conscience which flows from the imputation of
Christ's righteousness ;' and I further understand by the term
" peace" here — ' the desire, as far as in us lies, of being at peace
with all men.' The "joy ofthe Spirit" is the effect of both, viz;,
of the " righteousness" and the " peace." And the kingdom of
God is said 'to consist in' these things, because it is from these
things that it becomes known that God is our King, and we his
redeemed. Such is the way in which the apostle replies to the
prolepsis. The argument hence drawn for the establishment of
the injunction, is as follows : —
' If the kingdom of God, or that service whereby it becomes
known that God reigns in us, does not consist in meat, food and
drink, and other things indifferent, these things indifferent are

326 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
either to be used or omitted for the purpose of gaining over the
Weak to God;
' But the former is true — the service of our God does not consist
in these things :
' Therefore they are to be used or omitted for gaining over
weak brethren to God.'
The assumption is given in the text. " But righteousness, and
peace, and joy through the Holy Spirit." He illustrates the as
sumption by a contrast, consisting of three parts, in which he says
that the spiritual service of God, or that which is in spirit and in
truth, consists ; and that service he also illustrates here by its effi
cient cause — " the Holy Spirit," through whom it is that we have
righteousness, and peace, and joy : for as Christ has procured these
for us by his blood ; so it is the Holy Spirit that seals righteousness
in us by faith, and works peace in us through righteousness, and
joy through both. Since these three things, ' righteousness, peace,
and joy,' are increased within us, not by the rigid use of our Chris
tian liberty, but rather by accommodating ourselves to the edifi
cation of our weak brethren in the free use or omission of those
things in which, through Jesus Christ, we are free ; the apostle
wishes us not to put a cause of offence in the way of the weak, by
rigidly exercising our liberty : and in this he has himself set us an
example, (1 Cor. ix. 20, 21, 22).
18. "For he that by these things serveth Christ, is acceptable
to God, and approved of men." He proves the latter member of
the contrast, or — ' that the spiritual service of God consists in
righteousness, peace, and joy, through the Spirit, from "the two
fold adjunct [of that service], thus : —
' He that serves God by laying hold of the righteousness of
Christ, and living righteously, having peace of conscience and the
joy ofthe Spirit, is both acceptable to God, and approved of men:
' Therefore the spiritual service of the kingdom consists in righ
teousness, peace, and joy through the Spirit.'
The apostle does not, however, here claim merit for man, either

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 327
from God or from men ; for as regards God, imputed righteous
ness alone works acceptance with him. By " men" I understand
here — ' the Church of God,' which, being endued with the Spirit,
is both able to discern, and does discern, spiritual things, and
through the Spirit acknowledges that all things are rightly done,
and omitted, which are freely done or omitted for the edification
of even the weakest members in the Church : unless you prefer)
by the term " men," to understand — ' men in general,' whether in
the Church or out of the Church, in whom it is innate, and to
whom it is given by the remains of a common disposition in our
nature, to esteem the peaceful more highly than those who are the
occasion of offence) or stumbUng, to others.
19. " So then, let us foUow the things which tend to peace, and
the things which tend to mutual edification." By " peace" he
means — ' the friendly intercourse, in Christ, of the strong with the
weak, and the weak with the strong ;' and by " mutual edification"
— ' the forbearance and instruction, in Christ, both of the strong
and of the weak.' This is, accordingly, a fourth argument for the
second injunction, taken from the subject of Christian duty, which
is also the disparate of stumbUng and offence, thus : —
' The Christiari must foUow and do the things which tend to
peace and mutual edification ;
' But to put an occasion of stumbling in the way of a weak
brother, in the rigid use of Christian liberty, does not tend to peace
and mutual edification, but puts a cause of offence in the way of
a weak brother :
' Therefore,' &c.
20. " Destroy not, for the aake of food, the work of God." By
" the work of God," I understand here — ' the beginning of the
good work in Jesus Christ which God works in weak brethren;'
concerning which the apostle recommends to the strong, not to de
stroy that work of God, by inciting the weak to do things which
to themselves appear evil, and, consequently, to fall back from that

328 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
beginning of the good work : this is accordingly a fifth argument
for the injunction concerning cause of offence : —
' We must not do that whereby the work of God in a weak
brother is destroyed, and the weak brother himself caused to faU
back from the beginning which he has made in Jesus Christ ; ,
' But to put a cause of offence in his way by the free use of
food, drink, and the Uke, is to destroy the work of God in him,
and to cause him to faU back from the beginning which he has
made in Jesus Christ :
' Therefore, we must not put a cause of offence in his way, by
that free use of things indifferent.'
" All things indeed are pure ; but it is evil for the man who
eateth with occasion of stumbling." This is a prolepsis, whereby
the apostle refutes an instance against the foregoing assumption : —
' All things,' he who is strong might say, ' are pure to me for law
ful use ; therefore, although he who is weak may stumble, I do not
destroy the work of God in him by my liberty, since, using pure
things purely, I do weU.' The apostle replies by a distinction : —
' I admit the genus, and that aU things are pure, and aU things
lawful to you ; yet in another respect they are not lawful, inas
much as there is evU in your eating and use of your liberty, on
account of the adjunct of your causing a weak brother to offend :
therefore that which, absolutely and simply, is to do well, becomes
sin to you, if you do it to the stumbling of a weak brother.' This,
accordingly, is the same thing which the apostle elsewhere says of
himself (1 Cor. vi. 12).
21. "It is good not to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor (to do
any thing)." He next proves the foregoing reply, viz. — ' that to
eat aU things, although, absolutely and in itself, pure and lawful,
yet, incidentally and when attended with occasion of stumbling,
is evil ;' this reply, I say, he proves by what equaUy follows in the
case of contradictories, thus : —
' Not to eat, not to drink, not to do any thing,' whereby a brother
stumbles, is offended, or is made weak, is good :

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 329
' Therefore, to eat that whereby a brother stumbles, incidentally,
at least, and with respect to his stumbling, is evil.'
The antecedent is given in this verse, in which the three contra
dictories — " not to eat," " not to drink," " not to do," are each U-
lustrated by their subjects ; the subject of ' not eating,' being —
" flesh ;" of ' not drinking,' — " wine," and of 'not doing,' — " any
thing." " Whereby thy brother stumbleth," &c. In this, the re
maining part of the antecedent, the apostle expresses the cause of
offence put in the way of weak brethren, by. a striking gradation
from the less : ' to stumble' being the least; ' to be offended,' greater;
and ' to be made weak,' among the greatest. For " to stumble"
is — ' to faU by imitating the example of another,' or ' to do any
thing without faith, and the consciousness of doing weU, which,
nevertheless, would be weU done, if faith, and therefore conscience,
were strong? " To be offended," again, is — ' to be inwardly
grieved on account of that faU, which would yet be no faU, if faith
were strong, and conscience free.' Lastly, " to be made weak" is —
' for faith itself, previously weak, and conscience, incidentaUy defiled,
to lose strength by degrees ; so that, unless help arrive from God,
they at length become altogether extinct.' Or you may choose
rather to refer these three things to different objects, and to con
sider the weak as stumbling at his own deed, viz., what he does in
imitation of the example of the stronger ; as offended by the deed
of the stronger ; and as contracting weakness of faith from both.
22. " Thou hast faith." This is the conclusion of the second in
junction, embeUished with a rhetorical concession and epanorthosis :
— ' I willingly grant you, that you have faith ; nevertheless, have
it to yourself, and before God, not openly, to the stumbling of your
brethren.' The term " faith," is here used for — ' the full persua
sion (vXrigotpogia) of Christian liberty ;' so that the meaning of the
apostle is the following: — 'of this my injunction, whereby I en
join you to exercise judgment for this end, that you may not put a
cause of offence in the way of a weak brother by your deed, the
sum and conclusion is this, that I grant and acknowledge to you,

330 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
that you have the persuasion of Christian liberty ; yet, let it be
enough for you to have that persuasion before God, that is, to be
thereby approved before God in the use of your liberty, and take
care not to make a boast and a display of that persuasion, to the
stumbUng of those who have it not.' " Happy," &c. The apostle*
establishes the conclusion which he has deduced, especiaUy the
latter part of it, or the epanorthosis, whereby he has admonished
the strong to have his persuasion of Christian liberty to himself
before God, and not to make a display of it to the stumbling ofthe
weak — this conclusion, I say, he establishes by two arguments.
Of these, the first is taken from a common and universally ad
mitted maxim, which is this — " Happy is he that Condemneth not
himself, in that whereof he approveth ;" which the apostle thus ac
commodates to the stronger in faith : —
' If you make a display of your Christian liberty to the stum
bling of the weaker, you condemn yourselves in that of which you
rightly approve :
' Therefore, do not make a display of it, so as to cause your
weaker brethren to stumble, but have it to yourselves before God.'
The proof of the antecedent is from the foregoing discussion, in
which the apostle has granted that aU things are pure, and all
things lawful (whence it follows that he has rightly approved of
Christian liberty) ; yet that, incidentally, there is sin in eating, if
one should eat with an occasion of stumbling to the weak ; from
which it follows, that if any sinned against weak brethren by the
use of their liberty, they would condemn themselves by that very
liberty of which they rightly approved.
23. " But he that doubteth," &c. The second argument is from
the injury of a weak brother : —
' If, while you make a display, a weak brother shall eat in imi
tation of your example, that weak brother is condemned for eating :
' ' Therefore do not make a display of your persuasion before the
weak, so as to lead them to imitate your example without that
persuasion.'

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 331
"Because he eateth not from faith." The antecedent is here
proved : — ' because he does not eat, as you eat, with the persuasion
that he is doing right.' " And whatsoever is not from faith is
sin." This is the reason of the consequence ; which, along with
the preceding clauses of the verse, constitute a complete syUogism
thus : —
' Whatever is not from faith is ain, and he who does it is con
demned for doing it ;
' But he that eats, doubting, does not eat from faith ;
' Therefore, if any one eats, doubting, he sins, and is con
demned.' In both these arguments you are to understand this ' condemns
tion,' not of — ' the casting away of the reprobate by God,' but of — •
' the condemnation of the conscience from the commission of sin :'
so that the import of that first general maxim is — ' that he is
happy who does not contract a bad conscience to himself, in that
which he knows to be rightly done ;' and in the second argument,
the import of the conclusion is — ' that he who eats, doubting, con
tracts a bad conscience to himself, because he sins in eating.'

CHAPTER XV.
We have next, in the first four verses of this chapter, the third
and last injunction given to the strong, concerning their duty
towards the weak; for which the apostle brings forward two
arguments : the first from the adjunct of debt, in the 1st verse ;
and the second from the example of Christ, in the 3d verse ;
betwixt these comes in the conclusion, in verse 2 ; and in the 4th
verse, he meets an objection arising out of the proof of the second
argument. 1. " Moreover, we that are strong ought," &c. This is the first
argument, which is to the following effect : —

332 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
' The strong ought to apply themselves, and to do their utmost
to perform that which they are bound to do by debt, on account
of the benefit of strength which has been conferred upon them ;
' But we who are strong ought to bear the weaknesses of the
weak, that is, we are bound by duty, and as it were by debt, on
account of the benefit, of strength conferred upon us, not only to
bear with the weak, but even to help them in bearing the burden
of their infirmities :
Therefore, we who are strong ought to apply ourselves, and do
our utmost to perform this.'
The assumption is contained in the beginning of the first verse.
"And not to humour ourselves." This is an illustration of the
assumption from the contrary : — ' it is not the duty of the strong to
please themselves, or to humour themselves because of their
strength ;' where, obs'erve, that these two things — ' to bear the in
firmities of the weak,' and ' to please ourselves,' are put in opposi
tion after the manner of contraries : for ' to please ourselves,' and
' to bear the weaknesses of the weak,' are things inconsistent with
each other ; so inconsistent, indeed, that they cannot co-exist in
the same subject, nor can he be a Christian, who humours himself,
and does not bear the infirmities of his weak brethren.
2. " Therefore every one of us ought to please his neighbour."
This is the conclusion of the first argument, but so enunciated as
to stir up the weak, to check the strong, and to teach both that
they are bound to please one another ; having respect, however,
chiefly to the strong, as being in greater danger of pleasing
themselves, on account of their strength, than those who are con
scious of their weakness : so that the meaning is — ' whether we
be strong or weak, we ought to be prepared) not to ' please our
selves, but each other mutually ; and especially the strong to
please the weaker.' This conclusion is therefore directly opposed
to the evil which he here censures, namely — ' that he who eats
every thing should despise him who does not eat ;' and is of the
same import with the proposition in the 3d verse of chap. xiv. —

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 333
" let not him that eateth, make light of him that eateth not ; and
let not him that eateth not, condemn him that eateth." " For his
good." This is an epanorthosis of the conclusion : — ' Christians
ought to be zealous to please one another ; not however in every
thing, but only in those things which are for the good of those
whom they please.' " To edification." This is a definition of the
" good " which ought to be present to the minds of Christians in
pleasing others ; it is — " good to edification," i. e., ' to the edifica
tion in Christ of those whom we please.' From this the apostle
would have us to observe, in passing, that nothing is a benefit to
the Christian, nor can any good be conferred upon him, if he is
not thereby edified in Christ ; for these two things — ' to be good
for the Christian,' and ' to serve to his edification in Christ,' are
here set forth by the apostle as co-extensive and reciprocal : what
ever good happens to the Christian is his edification in Christ ;
whence the apostle would infer and conclude, in the second place
-. — ' that nothing is good for the Christian, which is not subservient
to his edification in Christ.'
3. " For Christ indeed pleased not himself." This is the second
argument for the foregoing conclusion, from the example of Jesus
Christ : —
' We ought to conduct ourselves in the same manner towards
each other, as Jesus Christ conducted himself towards us ;
' But he did not please himself, but carried our burdens alone ;
' Therefore we ought to bear one another's burdens, and not to
please ourselves.'
The assumption is given in the commencement of this third
verse. "As it is written." This is the establishment of the as
sumption from the testimony of scripture. The written testi
mony is adduced from\Psalm lxix. 10 (9) ; where, after David, as
the type of the Son of God, had professed his zeal towards the
house of God, he complains that the reproaches of those who re
proached God feU upon him, and that he himself was reproached,
through his zeal for God's house, by those who despised God's

334 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
house, and reproached God : this scripture therefore testifies, that
first David, typicaUy, and afterwards Christ, properly, did not
please himself, but endured aU the blasphemies of the ungodly, or
of an ungodly world, despising God's house, and reproaching God,
4. " For the things which were written." This is a prolepsis,
whereby the apostle anticipates what he foresaw might be objected)
and would be objected by his opponents against the scripture just
quoted. ' Let it be granted,' the opponents might say, ' that that
scripture which David originally uttered concerning himself, is
properly to be understood of Christ ; yet that scripture wiU not
prove that Christ did that, which from his example you conclude
that we should do — namely, that he bore the weakness of weak
brethren, so that we who are strong ought to do the same, after
his example — but that, through zeal for his Father's house, he en
dured the reproaches of a wicked world, despising God and God's
house : wherefore it does not follow from that act, although the act
not merely of David, but of Jesus Christ, that we ought to humour
our weak brethren, or to bear their weaknesses; but rather to
please ourselves in the free use of our Christian liberty.' To this
objection the apostle replies: — 'that although the subject is changed)
and it is true that, according to that scripture, Jesus Christ en
dured the reproaches of a wicked world, despising God and God's
house ; yet the force of the argument remains, and it rightly fol
lows from the example of Jesus Christ not pleasing himself, but
enduring reproaches on account of God and God's house, that we
ought to bear the weaknesses of our weak brethren, and not to
please ourselves :' and he proves his reply from the end of the scrip
ture quoted, as well as of aU those things which were written afore
time concerning Jesus Christ ; namely this — ' that they were
written for our instruction, and that we might become wise in a
holy manner, after Christ's example.' Moreover the apostle seems,
by this quotation of scripture, although apparently foreign to the
purpose, to have taken occasion for a further argument: for if
Jesus Christ, through zeal for his Father's house, which was out-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 335
ward and material, patiently endured the reproaches of a wicked
world ; so, much more should we, through zeal for the salvation of
our weak brethren, who are God's spiritual building, bear with
their infirmities, and as Christ pleased not himself, so should we
not please ourselves. " That through endurance." The apostle ex
plains the foregoing end, or ' the wisdom which we should learn
from those things which were written aforetime concerning Jesus
Christ,' by its parts, and more remote end. The parts are two
in number. The first is — " endurance," or ' that holy patience
whereby we are to bear not only with our brethren, for their edifi
cation ; but also with a wicked world, lest we become Wicked with
the wicked, and be overcome by their evil,' as the apostle has be
fore admonished us (c. xii. 21) : for Christians 'have need of endu
rance,' as the same apostle teaches (Heb. x. 36), ' that, obeying the
wiU of God, they may receive the promise.' " And comfort of the
scriptures." The second part of the wisdom to be learned from
those things which were written aforetime concerning Jesus Christ,
is — " comfort," or " the joy of the Spirit even in the midst of suf
ferings,' concerning which the apostle has before said (c. v. 3) —
" we even glory in tribulations." This is here set forth as a part
of Christian wisdom ulterior to endurance ; for we first suffer holily,
and then glory holily in our sufferings : and these are said to be
parts of Christian wisdom, because there is no man who knows
either how to suffer holUy, or to rejoice holily in his sufferings, ex
cept he who is truly a Christian, and has learned of Christ. This
" comfort" is said to be — " comfort of the scriptures," for two rea
sons : first, because, as the apostle has said in the beginning of
the verse, it is learfied from all the things written aforetime con
cerning Christ ; and secondly, because true and solid comfort is no
where to be found except in these things. " We may have hope."
This is the second branch of the exposition, or the more remote end,
whereby the apostle explains ' the wisdom' which we learn from
the things written aforetime concerning Chriat, and which he has
spoken of as consiating in its parts — ' holy patience,' and ' joy of
the Spirit.' This more remote end is — " the hope that putteth not

336 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
to shame," (c. v. 5.) Observe therefore here, that, according ttf
the apostle, the twofold end of aU scripture is : — ' holy wisdom ;' and
' hope that putteth not to shame»
5. From this to the 15th verse, we have next the conclusion, and
that twofold : the one special, having a particular respect to the
duty of strong and weak brethren, concerning which the apostle
has heretofore treated in c. xiv. ; the other common,' having respect
to the whole discussion from the 16th verse of c. i. up to this place.
The first conclusion is contained in the three verses, 5, 6, 7, am
plified by the adjunct ofthe wish, or holy desire, of the apostle; and
this wish he amplifies in a threefold manner. " The God of endur
ance and of comfort." This description of God is borrowed from
the parts ofthe instruction'* of Christians in the preceding verse :
and Jehovah is caUed — " the God of endurance," not only because
he is long-suffering and slow to wrath, ' enduring with much long-
suffering the vessels of wrath framed for destruction ;' but stiU
more and especially, in this place, because it is he alone who,
through his Spirit, works in his own people those parts of Chris
tian wisdom of which we have spoken. " Grant you." This is
the wish or desire of the apostle — ' God grant you to be similarly ;
affected one towards another :' he desires, both for the believing
Jews who were at Rome, and for the GentUes, whether strong or
weaker — ' a holy unanimity,' or ' mutual concord,' so that neither
the weak should be offended by the strength of the strong, nor
the strong by the weakness of the weak ; but that each should per
form their duty to the others — the strong by bearing with the
weaknesses of the weak, and the weak by pleasantly lending them-.
selves to be instructed by the strong. " According to Jesus
Christ." This is the second amplification of the wish, from the
adjunct of the manner in which he desires that they should be of
the same mind one towards another : the apostle desires that they
should be of the same mind, not in any manner they pleased, nor
in any other manner than that which is according to Christ Jesus*
* AiSeco-xakisos.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 337
Moreover, " to be of the same mind," * or ' to be mutually concord
ant,' is nothing else than — ' that as many as belong to Christ
should believe the same thing, and act with unanimity according
to the acripturea ;' so that the concord of Christians in Jesus
Christ, wholly consists in — the holy agreement of aU, in the faith of
Christ, and the obedience of faith according to the scriptures.
6. " That, with one accord, ye may, with one mouth, glorify God."
This is the third amplification of the wish, from the holy end of
that ' unanimity' or ' concord ;' which end is — ' the glorifying of
God by aU, with one accord, in- the same manner, or, as it were,
with one mouth.' " The Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." This
is a description of God, whom he wishes them to glorify with one
accord, taken from the relative opposite — ' the God whom I wish
you to glorify is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.' He adds
this description, not only, to divert the minds of Christians from
the polytheism, or multitude of gods of ancient Rome, which the
Romans, Uke other Gentiles, had formerly worshipped ; but still
more, in order that he may stir them up to glorify God with one
accord, by reminding them of the distinguished benefit which all
who belong to Christ enjoy from God ; for all who belong to
Christ Jesus are assured that God is also their Father in Jesus
Christ. 7. Hitherto we have had the amplification of the first conclusion,
or the wish of the apostle : here we have the conclusion itself,
concerning ' receiving one another,' viz. — ' the reception of the
weak by the strong, and the foUowing of the strong by the weak,
with one accord.' " Even as Christ also hath received us to the
glory of God." This is an illustration of the conclusion from the
like : the simUitude, first and more especially, having respect to the
stronger, and admonishing them; next and secondarily, to the
weak also. The similitude is taken from ' our own reception by
Jesus Christ our Saviour ;' and is amplified from the end of that
* Ta aura Qgoveiv.
Y

338 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
reception, which is : — ' that as he himself ia glorious, so we may be
come partakers in him of the glory of God ;' of that ' glory,' namely,
*¦ which God gives, in Christ, to those whom he foreknew, in order
that he may be worthy to be admired, in the glorification of his
saints, on that day.' This similitude, I say, has respect, first of
aU, to the stronger ; who are thereby admonished to receive the
weaker, as Christ — who, in every view, is incomparably our supe
rior — has received us, that in him, and through him, we may be
come partakers of the glory of God. Then it has respect to the
weak ; because as the Church, received into grace, follows Jesus
Christ, so the weak should follow their stronger brethren, untU they
themselves also are perfected in grace. From this I would have
you observe, that the grace displayed by Jesus Christ to us, and
the obedience of faith which, through his Spirit, he works in us
who believe, ought to be, and always has been the model, or pat
tern, of every duty which we owe one to another, both the strong
to the weak, and the weak to the stronger. Accordingly, this ar
gument from Christ and the Church is one which is very famUiar
to thia apostle ; as in Eph. v. 25 — " Husbands, love your wives,
even as Christ also loved the Church ;" and in the preceding
(24th) verse — " Therefore, as the Church is subject unto Christ,
so (let) wives also (be subject) to their husbands in aU things :" so,
in Philip, ii. 5, when he exhorts them to be " unanimous," and that
every one in the Church should be attentive to the good of another,
he employs this same argument — " Let the same mind be in you,
which was also in Christ Jesus."
8. " (This) I say, moreover, that Jesus Christ was the minister."
Now follows the common conclusion of the whole preceding dis
cussion ; adapted, however, to the foregoing conclusion concerning
the particular duty of the strong and the weak, as appears from
this, that in the present conclusion, he caUs Jesus Christ— a " minis
ter," ' the minister,' namely, ' of that reception of us to the glory
of God,' which was spoken of in the ampMfication of the foregoing
conclusion. Accordingly, in these words — " (this) I say moreover,"

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 339
is contained the transition, whereby the apostle passes from the
foregoing particular conclusion to the. common conclusion of his
whole discussion, thus far, in this epistle ; so that the meaning of
the words is : — ' what I say in the conclusion just given, and in the
whole preceding discussion, from the commencement, is this — that
Jesus Christ is a minister, and that of God ;' whence, in Isaiah xiii.
1, God says of Christ, — " behold my servant." The general con-
elusion, therefore, of the whole discussion, thus far, is this — ' that
Jesus Christ, and he alone, is the minister of God to our salvation :'
so the apostle has commenced the whole discussion — ' the gospel
of Jesus Christ is the power of God unto salvation to those who
beUeve ;' and so he now concludes it — ' Jesus Chriat, ainounced
in the gospel, is the minister of God unto salvation to those who
believe, that we may be ministers unto salvation to one another.'
" Of the circumcision." Jesus Christ never circumcised any man
ministerially, nor was he ever minister of any sacrament, except
the" sacrament of the Lord's Supper, of which, as of aU the sacra
ments, he is the author, and of which, as his proper function, he ia
the minister : when he is here called — "the minister ofthe circum
cision," therefore, it is by metonymy of the adjunct for the subject ;
so that the meaning is—' he was the minister of God to the cir-
eumcised,' that is, ' to the legal cbnicb, or the people of God un
der the law.' For if any one prefers to say, that there is here a
synecdoche, and that the part is put for the whole, viz., " circum
cision," a part of fhe legal service, for ' the whole serviee ofthe law/
I do not see how that can be correctly asserted ; since Jesus Christ
came, not to give the law, but to announce the gospel, as he him
self says, Isaiah lxi. 1. It is true that he came to keep the law,
aud to keep it fuUy, as he himself teaches us, Matt. v. 17 ; but not
to be a minister of the law, but the minister of God, unto salvation)
of the people of the law : Jesus Christ, therefore, came to be the
minister of God unto salvation of as many of the circumcised as
should believe ; as Paul has spoken at the outset. Accordingly,
in this and the following verses, as far as verse 13, he amplifies this
' ministry' of Jesus Christ, whereby he is ' the minister of God
y2

340 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
unto the salvation of those who believe,' and that by distribution
according to its objects : Jesus Christ is the minister of God unto
salvation 'to the circumcised,' in this verse ; and 'to the uncircum
cised,' in the verses that follow. " For the truth of God." He
here Ulustrates the first particular of the distribution, viz. — ' the
ministry of the circumcision,' or ' the ministry of Christ to the cir
cumcised ;' the argument of illustration being taken from the end : — r
Christ was sent to the circumcised " for the truth of God ;" that is — »
' that the truth of God, or that God is true in aU the promises
which he promised to the circumcised, or the people under the law,
might become known and be made manifest to aU, both Jews and
Gentiles.' " That he might perform the promises of the fathers."
The sense which we have given, viz. — ' that the truth of God is
to be manifested by this ministry, whereby Christ is the minister
of the circumcision,' is plain from this exposition subjoined to the
foregoing end : for to be " minister of the circumcision for the
truth of God," is nothing else, according to the exposition of the
apostle, than — ' to be the minister of the circumcision that he might
perform the promises ofthe fathers,' that is, ' made unto the fathers.'
9. " And that the Gentiles may glorify God for his mercy."
He scrupulously suppresses the second particular of the distribu
tion, which is this — ' Jesus Christ is the minister of God unto sal
vation to the uncircumcised Gentiles,' and which he expresses in
chapter iii. verses 29, 30 ; whence, in chapter iv. verses 11, 12,
Abraham is called — " the father" both " of those that believe in
uncircumcision, and of the circumcision." For this scrupulous sup
pression, there seem to be two reasons. ' The first is, that he might
avoid offending the Jews, to whom nothing was more incredible,
and even offensive, than that it should be said that God was the
God of the Gentiles also, or that the Messiah was to be sent to
them unto salvation : as clearly appears, both from the hesitation of
Peter, who would not go to Cornelius until the mystery of the caU
ing of the Gentiles had been revealed to him by God, in a vision ;
and from the accusation against him, when he returned to Jeru-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 34 1
salem, (Acts xi. 2.) The second is, because there was no ministry
of the uncircumcision, as there was of the circumcision, until Christ
himself, the shepherd of the sheep, came to gather Into one body
with the people of the circumcision, the GentUes, scattered and
Btraylng without a shepherd ; as he himself teaches the circumcised,
John x. 16. Thus, therefore, he suppresses the second particu
lar of the distribution. In these words, however, we have his illus
tration of it, which is taken, like that of the first particular, from the
end ; so that the fuU meaning ofthe passage is this : — Jesus Christ is
the minister of God unto salvation to the GentUes, in order that
the GentUes may glorify God :' and this glorifying of God by the
Gentiles is here explained by its efficient, cause, which is — ' the
mercy of God appearing in the mission of his promised Son, as
minister unto salvation to them also.' " According as it is written."
He proceeds to prove, by the authority of the scriptures, the second
particular of the distribution, viz. — ' that Christ is the minister of
God unto salvation to the GentUes,' from the end whereby he has
Ulustrated it, namely — ' that the Gentiles may glorify God for his
mercy towards them.' Four scriptures are adduced by him to prove
it : the first is Ps. xviii. 49 ; the second from Deut. xxxii. 43 ; the
third from Ps. cxvii. 1 ; the fourth from Isaiah xi. 10. As to
the first scripture, ' David' appears as a type of Christ, and that
in the two following respects : first, in his victory over aU his
enemies, even the most deadly ; secondly, in the effect of his vic
tory, which is expressed by a sort of rhetorical climax : — " I will
confess unto thee (because thou hast given me the victory) ; I wUl
sing unto thy name (because thou hast given me the victory) ;" that
is — ' I wUl glorify thee, not only by confessing the benefit with my
mouth, but also by singing and exultation.' Lastly, the subject
of these effects of the victory is added : — ' I wiU confess and sing,
not among thine ancient people only, but among the Gentiles also,
and these the most distant in the earth.' The contest of David
was with Saul, by the removal of whom God had given him the
victory, and fulfilled his promise ; wherefore he pledges himself to
his God to two things : to — ' the confession of Jehovah as the one

342 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
true God,' and ' exultation in him as his sole deliverer ;' and these
not only in the kingdom already given to him} or within the terT
ritories of the people of God, but also among the neighbouring
GentUes whom God had subdued under lum. This is the type.
The thing signified by the type is — ' the man Christ Jesus,' who had
to contend, for man's deUverance, with the old serpent, and aU his
power ; over whom his Father gave him the victory, through the
deity that dwelt in him : and, Uke David, so he too promises con
fession with the mouth, and exultation; and these, not merely
among God's aneient people, but also among the Grentiles to fhe
utmost ends of the earth. There is, however, an observable dif
ference between the type, and the Lord himself who was signified
by the type. David promises the confession of his own mouth,
and the exultation of his own heart ; that is — ' that he would
both confess Jehovah as his God, and exult in him whither
soever he went :' but when the simUitude is applied to the man
Jesus, the meaning is : — ' that the man Jesus Christ, having been
exalted by the power of God above the old serpent, and aU his
crew, wiU invite the world to the confession of God, and exultation
in the Lord ; not with his own mouth merely — because he was
about to ascend to his father — but with the mouths and hearts pf
those who should reap spiritual advantage from his victory ; and
these, not only IsraeUtes,— who should confess and exult from a con
sciousness of the imputation of Christ's victory to themselves — but
the elect of God from among all the Gentiles, to the utmost ends
of the whole earth,' By this effect of ' the confession and exultar
tion of the GentUes,' therefore, the apostle here proves their
effectual calling, and the end of their calling, viz. : — ' that God, in
Christ, has given remission of sina unto salvation to them also,
that they too may extol Jehovah for hia mercy in Christ Jesus.'
10, " Rejoice ye GentUes with hia people." This is a common
exhortation to Israel, and the GentUes, to rejoice in Jehovah on ac
count of the commdn salvation, bestowed upon both after long de
solation iinder the vengeance of God, which the Israelites, as well as

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 343
the Gentiles, had brought upon themselves by their transgressions
against Jehovah. And that this is the meaning is manifest from the
connection pf the whole song. For in the previous part of the
song, he has rehearsed the vast benefits of Jehovah to Israel ; and
from the beginnings observed under his own rule, he foreteUs, by
the Holy Spirit, the astonishing ingratitude of the IsraeUtes,
whereby they would afterwards provoke Jehovah, the God who
had bestowed these blessings upon them : hence, in the third place,
he warns them that, as hitherto, in the time of Moses, the other
nations had been rejected, so it would come to pass that God would
at length reject Israel also, for wickedness in them, similar to the
wickedness of the Gentiles : in the fourth, place, by way of epan
orthosis, he foreteUs, that the remnant of Israel will be gathered
again to Jehovah, in the Messiah, of whom he had spoken as a pro
phet, Uke to himself, to be raised up from the midst of the Israel
ites : and in order that he may shew that the Gentiles, who had
previously been rejected, would be partakers with Israel in this
benefit of gathering again, in these words he exhorts the Gentiles
also to rejoice in Jehovah, with Israel gathered again. Hence Paul
infers from the exhortation of Moses — ' the gathering again of the
GentUes in common with the Israelites, that Jehovah may be ex
tolled by both for his mercy in Jesus Christ.' One thing in thia
scripture must be noticed, which has perplexed many interpreters.
In Moses there is an asyndeton, or omission of the copula ; so that
the literal translation of the words is — " Rejoice, ye Gentiles, his
people," for — ' and his people ;' the copula being understood : thia
copula, Paul, here, as everywhere, assigning the precedence to
Israel in that effect of exultation, renders, consistently with the
idiom of the original, by the preposition ' with;' — " rejoice, ye
GentUes, witb his people (preceding you in that effect of exulta
tion.)" For, in the Hebrew language, both these things are ad
missible — both that the conjunction Vau may be frequently omit
ted; and that the same, whether expressed or understood, may be
rendered by the preposition ' with :' and both are here observed
and followed by Paul in this scripture, under the teaching of the

344 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
Holy Spirit, who spoke in Moses ; whence, under the guidance of
the same Spirit, he renders the words of Moses thus : — " Rejoice,
ye Gentiles with his people." *
11. In the third scripture, also, the apostle deducea the cause
from its effect, or the caUing of the GentUes to salvation in com
mon with Israel, from the fact — ' that the Holy Spirit, by the
psalmist, in Ps. cxvii., had long before exhorted the Gentiles, as
WeU as the people of Israel, to praise Jehovah for that salvation ;'
which ' praising' is the effect of salvation bestowed.
12. In the fourth prophetical scripture, Isaiah predicts two
things. The first is — 'that when Jesus Christ, the Messiah, should
come, he would reign over the Gentiles ; and as not only Israel, but
the GentUes also were subject to David and Solomon — each of
whom was in that respect a type of Christ — so not Israel only, but
also the GentUes should be subject to the sceptre of the kingdom
of Christ. ' The second thing which he predicts is — ' that the
Gentiles, being subject to Christ, would place their hope in him.'
And from these two things — viz., ' the extension of the kingdom
of Christ over the GentUes,' and ' the placing of the hope of the
Gentiles in him' — the apostle deduces the gathering again of the
GentUes to the kingdom of Christ.
13. " (I wish,) moreover, that the God of hope may fiU you with
joy and peace." The conclusion having now been established by
ampUfication, viz. — ' that Jesus Christ is minister to announce
the truth of God both to the circumcised and to the Gentiles,' —
this conclusion, I say, or rather the latter part of it, namely — ' that
Jesus Christ has been made God's minister to the GentUes,' having
been established by various testimonies of scripture ; he now com-
* Ingenious as this explanation is, it is more probable that the apostle quotes di
rectly from the Septuagint ; since he gives the passage in the ipsissima verba of that
version. In regard to the Hebrew text, one, at least, of Dr Kennicott's MSS. has fl8,
which signifies " with," before lny, " his people ;" and which may, after all, be the
true reading. — Transl.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 3£5
mends to God this same conclusion of his, thus amplified and
estabUshed, that he may work it in their hearts, and wishes — -
' that God may fiU them with joy and peace,' that is, ' so renew
them, that they may rejoice more and more every day, to live in
peace with one another unto God.' For ' to be filled with joy,' is
— 'to rejoice much,' and refers to an inward affection; to be
' filled with peace,' again, is — ' to attain a life of much peace,' and
refers to the outward behaviour. " To be filled with joy," there
fore, is — ' to rejoice daily, more and more, in a Ufe of peace with
one another, from feeling more and more every day, that the joy
of the Holy Spirit is increasing within them, as the result of their
own reconcUiation with God.' This benefit which he wishes for
them, the apostle variously amplifies : first, by Its primary efficient
cause, which is — " the God of (their) hope ;" next, by the adjunct
of the manner in which this benefit is effected for them, viz.-;-" in
believing," (ru icusrsvsiv) ; thirdly, by its end — " that ye jnay
abound in hope," &c. ; and fourthly, by the adjunct of — ' his own
•persuasion,' in the foUowing verse. As regards the first part of
the amplification, he caUs the author of the joy and peace of
Christians — " the God of (their) hope," that is, ' the God of the
completion oftheir peace with himself, in the life which is to come.'
The force of the argument is most convincing, therefore, from this
first amplification : for it arises both from authorship, because the
benefit is wished for from God ; and from a further benefit to
come, inasmuch as he is styled — " the God of hope," that is, ' the
God of the completion of the peace of aU who have been reconciled
to God in Jesus Christ, in the beginning of which here, they
should rejoice, and in the completion of which hereafter, they shaU
fuUy rejoice.' I come now to the second part of the amplification,
or the manner in which the benefit is enjoyed ; which the apostle
here intimates consists solely in — " believing," to teach us : — ' that
neither joy nor peace can either begin here, or be completed here
after, except in Christ apprehended by faith, and through Christ
apprehended by faith.' " That ye may abound in hope." Thia ia
the amplification of the wish of the apostle from its end : he wishes

346 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
that they may rejoice, and increase in joy and peace more and
more every day, or rejoice daily, more and more, in Uving at peace
with one another, from a consciousness of the joy of the Holy
Spirit within them, arising from a consciousness of their recon
ciliation and peace with God — this, I say, he desires for them, for
this end — ' that they may abound in hope ;' that is — ' that the hope
of the completion of their joy and peace, may increase within them
more and more every day.'. "Through the power of the Holy
Spirit." He iUustrates the end by the manner of effecting it ;
which he here informs us is — " the power "- — that is, ' the inward
working ' — " of the Holy Spirit :" for as we have neither joy nor
peace, either begun here, or to be completed hereafter, except
through faith and hope ; so have we neither any present faith, nor
any hope for the future, except through the power and inward
working of the Holy Spirit,
14. And I myself also am persuaded of you, my brethren."
This is the fourth Ulustration of the tbing wished for, from the
adjunct of ' his own persuasion.' .And here it should be observed,
In passing, that in these words he includes both the joy and the
peace under the one term of — " goodness," to teacK us : — ' that it
can be well with no one, either here or hereafter, except with him
who rejoices to live in peace here, in the hope of both his joy and
peace being completed through Jesus Christ.' Then, as for his
saying—' that he is persuaded they are full of it,' nothing is more
certain than that the ' fulness ' of which the apostle here speaks ia
to be understood of — ' the measure of grace which those who are
stronger attain in the present life :' since, otherwise, the fulness,
properly speaking, of every spiritual grace is only begun here, the
perfection of it being reserved for the future life ; as this same
apostle avows in regard to himself. " Being fiUed with all know
ledge." He next Ulustrates ' the fulness of goodness ' by its cause ;
which is both prior and superior, namely — ' the fulness of the
knowledge of God in Jesus Christ :' for, until the mind be Ulumi
nated with this knowledge, it is certain, not only that we cannot

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 347
be fuU of goodness, but that that goodness of which the apoatle
here speaks, whether joy in affection, or peace in life, could not so
much as be begun in ue. " Able also to admonish one another."
He further amplifies the fulness of knowledge by its effeet, which
effect is — ' mutual admonition, resulting from that knowledge, to
joy and peaee.'
15. Thus far, from the 16th verse of chap, i., the apoatle has
been engaged in discussing righteousness, and the life of those
who are made righteous, both that which is eternal, and that which
is begun here through new obedience ; and has wound up the dis^
cussion by a twofold conclusion, in the ten verses immediately
preceding.- Now follows the third part of the epistle ; in which,
as he commenced the said discussion concerning righteousness and
life with a lengthened exordium, in the first six verses of chap, i.,
so now he brings this same writing of his to a close by a multi
farious admonition and salutation, from this 15th verse of chap.
xv., to the end. It may therefore, without impropriety, be said,
that in this third part of the epistle, the general discussion having
been concluded, he proceeds to treat of particular matters ; all of
them however truly pious, and in keeping with the general dis
cussion. These, moreover, are twofold : for they are either such
as pertain to the apostle himself, in the remainder of this chapter ;
or such as respect others, in the chapter that follows. As regards
the former, viz., those which pertain to himself,, they are twofold ;
for, in the first place, he guards against the offence which, other
wise, that which he has previously written might perhaps give to
some of the Romans ; and, in the second place, as in the exordium,
so now in the conclusion of the epistle, he seeks to gain the good
will of the Romans to whom he writes. He guarda against the
offence in two ways : first, by a succinct and brief profession of
hia partnership with them ; and next, by the establishment of hia
authority. As regards his partnership with them, he professes
it when he affirms — 'that he writes to them as a brother to
brethren,' or ' that he esteems those to whom he writes as

348 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
brethren :' for those who are ' brethren ' must necessarily be con
nected together in a partnership of various kinds ; for they are the
chUdren of the same parent, they belong to the same house and
famUy, and have a share in the goods of the common family : these,
therefore, should least of all be offended with each other. The
second thing whereby he guards against the offence which the
Romans might take, is the establishment of his authority; to
which he approaches by a sort of pious invalidating of that autho
rity, and the assigning of a reason. For if the Romans should
be disposed to charge him with boldness in writing more boldly
to them, with a view to prevent their being offended by this
boldness, or freedom of his in writing, he first of all confesses
concerning himself — ' that he has written more boldly to them
in part :' he then assigns a reason for this freedom of his, which
they might perhaps call — ' boldness,' but which he confesses to
be — 'boldness in part;' both that they may see that it is- not
boldness, but pious freedom in Christ, and that he may be able
freely to profess it to them in future. " I have written more boldly
to you, brethren." This is the common proposition, both of the
profession whereby he professes his partnership with them, and of
the confession whereby he confesses that he is guilty. " In part."
This is an epanorthosis of his confession, whereby he mitigates his
boldness, and shows that there is nothing wrong in it, although
confessed : for " to have written more boldly in part," is — ' to have
written freely to them in Christ,' although as yet unknown to him ;
and that because of his persuasion concerning them, that they were
both in Christ, and " full of goodness" (as it is said in ver. 14),
that is — ' that they were such as he could write to in Christ.' ' If,
therefore, any of them should be obstinately bent on charging the
apostle with boldness in writing, he most effectuaUy convicts such,
by this epanorthosis, as well as by his own judgment concerning
them, of being destitute of the grace of Jesus Christ : for hitherto
he confesses the charge of boldness, only in so far as he has written
freely, not from knowledge — since he has not yet seen them— but
from the persuasion that grace has been bestowed upon them.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 349
"As reminding you together." This is a second epanorthosis of
hia confession and mitigation of his boldness, from the subject of
his writing; which subject is — a "reminding together ;" that is — .
' an admonishing, both of himself and them jointly, to lay hold of
offered grace :' for sva^i^sxsn is — ' to put in mind- others as
well as myself,' or ' others also besides myself;' the force of the
preposition viri in composition being such, that s-ffa^i^axsiv
is — ' to remind you together with myself,' or ' to put you in mind
along with myself.' The apostle therefore mitigates the charge
of boldness, in this second epanorthosis, in such a way as to make
it plain to them, that he has written nothing so boldly to them which
he has not also said to himself, and of which he would not remind
himself together with them. ' " Because of the grace which has
been given to me by God." Next comes the establishment of his
authority, which he has already proposed by a sort of pious invali
dating of it ; with a view to shew clearly that he is not bold at all,
but free in Christ, in thus writing to them. The arguments by
which he estabUshes his freedom are two. The first is contained
in the words quoted ; and is taken from the efficient cause of the
freedom, namely — ' the grace given to him from God.' By " grace,"
the apostle here means what, in 1 Cor. ix. 17, he calls — "a dis
pensation of the gospel committed to him ;" and which, in 1 Tim.
i, 12, he superadds, as a higher grace, to his own effectual caUing
to Christ. In 1 Tim. v. 17, he decrees to this, as a superior grace,
if added to a previous effectual caUing to Christ, a twofold honour
in the Church. From this grace, the foundation of twofold honour,
conferred upon him, he estabUshes his authority, and his freedom
in writing either to the Romans, or to any church whatever.
16. "For this, that I should be a minister." He now explains
the grace given to him from God, whereby he has established his
authority, by its general end. The general end is — '* the ministry :'
Paid asserts that grace has been given to him — " that he might be
a minister of Jesus Christ." The ministry he explains by its three
fold subject ; and particular end. The subject is threefold : the sub-

350 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
jecfc of which ; to which; and in which. The subject of which, is — '¦
' Jesus Christ :' grace has been given to Paul that he might be—" a
minister of Jesus Christ." The subject to which, is — ' the GentUes :'
Paul is — " a minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles." The subject
in which, is—' the gospel :' Paul is — ' a minister of Jesus Christ in
the gospel,' or " officiating in the gospel." The particular end is —
' the offering up of the Gentiles :' Paul is a minister of Jesus
Christ^' that the Gentiles may become an offering to JehOVah/
" Acceptable, sanctified." He iUustrates the offering up of the
Gentiles, whereby they are offered up to Jehovah through the-
gospel, by its two adjuncts : of which the first is — ' ita acceptable
ness' in Jesus Christ the Son of God ; and the second—' the sanc
tifying' of the same ' through the Holy Spirit' of the Father and
the Son.
17* "I have therefore whereof I may glory." This is the con
clusion of the first establishment ; where observe, that what the
Romans might erroneously term ' boldness,' but he himself has pro
fessed to be ' freedom in Christ,' he here calls — ' glorying in the
things which pertain to God.' The entire reasoning of the apostle,
therefore, is to this effect : —
' He who has grace given to him from God, has whereof he may
glory in the discharge of that grace, or can be free, although the
world may construe his freedom into boldness ;
' But I,' says the apostle, ' have grace given to me from God, that
I should serve Christ in the gospel, for the sake of the Gentiles :
' Therefore I have whereof I may glory in the things which be-1
long to God, or I can be free in preaching the gospel to the Gen-^
tiles, although some may construe my liberty into boldness.'
" By Jesus Chrisf." He next illustrates his ' glorying,' or ' free
dom, in proclaiming the gospel,' by its efficient cause and subject.
The efficient cause is—' Jesus Christ :' for as every one who enters
rightly upon, the ofiice of preaching the gospel, enters upon it by
Jesus Christ ; so unless he be sustained by Christ in preaching, he
must of necessity fail by the way. Therefore) as in 1 Tim. i. \%

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 351
the apostle acknowledges, that it was by Jesus Christ that he had
been put into the ministry, so he here ascribes it to Jesus Christ
alone, that he can be free, or may glory, in preaching the gospel.
" In the things which pertain to God." This is a second illustra
tion of his ' glorying' or ' freedom,' from its subject : ' Paul glories,
or is free, neither in sinning nor in any of the things of the world,
but in the things which pertain to God ; that is, in the business of
preaehing the gospel of God,' or ' the dispensation of the mysteries
of the kingdom of heaven,' as he elsewhere speaks, (1 Cor. iv. 1.)
18. Next comes the second argument for this freedom, drawn
from its effect. The effect is — ' the inducing of the Gentiles to
the obedience of Christ :' and this is ampUfied, first, by its primary
eause, which is — ' Christ ;' secondly, by the instrumental or sub
ordinate cause, the instrumental cause, or instrument of Jesus
Christ being — ' Paul :' —
'Through me, Paul, Christ has induced the GentUes to obedi
ence: ' Therefore I have whereof I may glory, or I can use freedom in
speaking and writing to the Gentiles.'
The antecedent of this enthymeme, which is given in verse 18,
is there also proved ; and, ia variously amplified from that verse as
far aa verse 22. " For I have not dared to speak of any thing ex
cept what Christ hath wrought through me." The proof of the
antecedent is taken from the adjunct of its — ' attestation :' —
' Jesus Christ knows that I speak the truth, and that I dare not
speak of what he does not work through me :
' Therefore, it is true that through me, Paul, Jesus Christ has
induced th^ GentUes to obedience.'
" In inducing the GentUes to obedience." This is the consequent
of the last enthymeme, and antecedent of the second argument : —
' Jesus Christ has induced the GentUes to obedience through me
Paul.' But, ' for the Gentiles to be induced to obedience,' denotes
these two things :— both ' faith ;' and ' the obedience of faith.-'
Therefore, such ia the work which Jesus Christ wrought. through

352 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
Paul; or it consists of two parts : first, he effects that they should
beUeve the gospel ; then, that they should Uve in a manner worthy
of the gospel — both of which are included by the apostle under
the one head of ' obedience to Christ.' " By words and deeds."
Here foUows a threefold Illustration of the antecedent, or ' the in
ducing of the GentUes to obedience.' The first Ulustration is taken
from the adjunct of the means, which, it is here intimated, was
threefold : for Paul induced the GentUes to obedience, first — " by
words ;" then — " by deeds ;" thirdly — " by the power of the Holy
Spirit." By " words" I understand — ' the preaching of the gospel.'
19. " By the power of signs and wonders." The apostle himself
explains the deeds by which he induced the GentUes to obedience,
by their three adjuncts : they were — " signs ;" they were — " won^
ders ;" and they were — effected " by power." In caUing them
" signs," he intimates — ' that these works signified to the GentUes
that God was with him ; that he was the messenger of God ; and
that the word of his preaching was the gospel of salvation (as is
acknowledged by the Pythoness, Acts xvi. 17).' They are caUed
" wonders," inasmuch as they were ' strange, unusual, and truly
miraculous.' In saying that- they were " (effected) by power," he
would teach us — ' that they were effected, not by the might of
man or of any creature, but of God alone, with this intent, that
they should sign and seal the preaching ;' as Peter teaches, Aots
iii. 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, where he shews that the miraculous cure of
the lame man was effected by divine power, that it might be a
sign to confirm their preaching concerning Christ. The " deeds,"
therefore, of which Paul here speaks, are — ' the miracles wrought
through him among the Gentiles ;' and these, by the peculiar might
and power of God, in confirmation of his " words," or of ' the gos
pel which he preached.' " By the power of the Spirit of God."
This is the third means whereby the inducing of the Gentiles to
obedience is amplified. By " the power of the Spirit of God,"
moreover, I understand here — ' the gifts of the Holy Spirit con
ferred upon the Gentiles, by the same might and power of God, in

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 353
confirmation of Paul's preaching.' If, therefore, you inquire con
cerning the means 'by which the Gentiles were induced to obedi
ence, Paul himself replies — ' that it was by means of the preaching
Of the gospel, confirmed by miracles and the gifts of the Holy
Spirit ;' on account of which confirmation, and efficacy in inducing
the Gentiles to obedience, the apostle, in 1 Cor. i. 18, calls " the
preaching of the cross," to those that perish — " foolishness," but to
* those who are saved — " power," namely, from its powerful confir
mation, and powerful operation. " So that from Jerusalem." This
is the second Illustration of the inducing of the Gentiles to obe-
. dience, from the subject-place : — ' everywhere, from Jerusalem to
IUyricum, Christ, through me, has induced the Gentiles to obedi
ence.' Tbis subject-place, again, is amplified by a comparison of
simUarity : — ' I have so induced the GentUes to obedience in these
places, that in them aU I have fulfiUed the office of preaching the
gospel of Christ.' Moreover, ' to fulfil the office of preaching the
gospel,' is — ' to effect ihat the gospel should be preached, not
partly, but fuUy.' The apostle therefore says — ' that in aU these
places, from Jerusalem to IUyricum, he had not only planted, but
fuUy estabUshed churches, by the preaching of the gospel ;' as we
read was done at Ephesus, at Corinth, and in Crete, where, by
means of his assistants, the evangelists Timothy, Titus, and
ApoUos, he watered, untU he had fully established the churches
originaUy planted by himself.
20. " Eagerly desiring, moreover, so to preach," &c. This is the
third Ulustration of the inducing of the GentUes, from the adjunct
of the former ignorance of these same Gentiles who had been in
duced^ through Paul, to obedience : — ' the GentUes whom Christ,
through me, has induced to obedience, had not even heard of Jesus
Christ before.' That ignorance is also amplified by a comparison
Of similarity between Paul's desire to preach, and the ignorance of
the GentUes : — ' As the Gentiles had not even heard of Christ, so
was I eagerly desirous to preach Christ where he had not been even
named before.' The apodosis of the comparison is contained in
z

354 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
this 20th verse, being amplified by the end, which is — ' that Paul
might not buUd on another man's foundation.'

21. " But according as it is written." This ia the protaais of
the comparison, established by the testimony of scripture, concern
ing — ' Christ never having been announced to the GentUes, before
they saw and understood through my preaching.'
22. " For which cause, also, I have been often hindered from
coming to you." This is a proleptical transition from the first part
of the particulars respecting himself — or his account of the fruit of
his labours in the gospel, whence he has said that his confidence
in writing more boldly to them, arose — to the second part, in which
he endeavours to gain the good wiU of the Romans, to whom he
has written with holy confidence. The objection which he antic£
pates is this : — ' seeing that Illyricum is a maritime state of Greece,
on the south-eastern coast of the Adriatic Sea, separated only by a
smaU intervening space from Italy ; why have you not come to ua
who are in Rome, the chief state of aU Europe, that you might ex
tend your labours in the gospel there, especiaUy considering the
importance of the place ?' The apostle repUes — ' that he had pur
posed to come to them, and that often, but that hitherto he had
been hindered from coming.' There is a similar prolepsis, as we
have seen, in the exordium of the epistle, chapter i. verse 13, where
he seeks to gain the good wUl of the Romans ; as he also does in
the verses that foUow, to which he makes a transition by this pro
lepsis. 23. In the subsequent verses, on to' the close of the chapter, he
seeks to gain the good wiU of the Romans. The arguments which
he employs for this purpose are three. The first is taken from his
promise to come to them, as far as verse 30. This promise, which
is proposed in the 24th verse, he both confirms and ampUfies. The
arguments by which he confirms it, in this 23d verse, are two. The
first is taken from what equally follows in the case of 'disparates,

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 355
or contraries, these being here indicated by the terms ' hither,' and
thither,' or ' into those regions.' But if we may be allowed to dis
pose the argument in full syllogism, he reasons thus : —
' If I have no longer a place here, I must come thither to preach
the gospel ;
' But the former is true :
' Therefore so is also the latter.' •
" But now, having no longer a place in these regions." This is
the assumption of the syllogism, or antecedent of the enthymeme.
By " these regions," he means — ' all those, from Jerusalem and the
surrounding districts, to IUyricum.' " But having had a longing for
many years to come to you." This is the second confirmation of
the promise, from the adjunct of his — " longing :" and this again is
ampUfied by the adjunct of the time ; he had now had this longing.
— " for many years." The apostle therefore thus argues : —
' It is many years since I longed to see you :
' Therefore I wiU come to see you at length.'
The antecedent is contained in the words quoted.
24. Next comes the amplification of the promise, and that four
fold. " Whensoever I take my journey into Spain." The first
amplification of the promise is from the adjunct of the time : —
' when I travel into Spain, I wiU come to you.' " I,wiU come to
you." This is the proposition of the promise, and conclusion of each
of the arguments contained in verse 23. " For I hope." This ia
the third argument in confirmation of the promise, from the adjunct
of — ' the hope which he had of coming to see them.' This ' seeing
them' (ro ISsTv), he also ampUfies, first, by the occasion of it, or, if
you please, by its efficient cause ; which is — ' his passing through
them into Spain.' " Aud that I shaU be brought on my Way
thither by you." This is a second amplification of his ' seeing them'.
(rov iMv) from the kindness which he expected from them in re
turn, namely — ' to be brought by them on hia way into Spain.'
" If, however, I shaU first be in part satiafied with your company."
This is an epanorthosis of his departure from them and being
z2

356 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
brought on his way into Spain : — ' before however I depart, or be
brought by you on my way into Spain, I shall be satisfied with your
company :' which satisfaction from his company with them, he in
deed again corrects, when he adds — " in part ;" thus intimating —
' that our joy from company with each other, yea, even that which
springs from mutual comfort, and the bestowal of the grace of the
gospel, shaU not be fully, but only somewhat satisfied, so long as
we are together here on the earth.'
25. " But now I journey to Jerusalem." This is a second Ulus-
tration of the promise, from his present journeying in the contrary
direction : ' I now take my journey, not towards the west, or into
Spain, so as to see you now in this journeying ; but contrariwise,
towards the east, or to Jerusalem.' " Ministering to the saints."
This is an iUustration of his present journeying, from its end, which
is — ' to minister to the saints.' Moreover " to minister to the
saints" here is — ' to 'convey, for the necessary uses of the saints,
the subsidy which had been contributed and collected among the
GentUe churches, for the relief of the necessity of the saints at
Jerusalem, and throughout aU Judea ;' to which the prophecy of
Agabus concerning the dearth which was to happen in the world
(Acts xi. 28, 29, 30), gave occasion. There seems to be a double
reason for the contribution by the Gentiles of this subsidy for the
believing Jews. The first is : — that that chastisement, or want of
necessaries, in Judea, was greatly aggravated by the hatred of their
feUow-countrymen who did not believe, and who, notwithstanding,
viz. shortly before the final destruction of Jerusalem, drove the
believers to such necessity, that they were forced to retire, and
banished from their homes ; which happened to the Jewish church
within forty years after Christ. This necessity— which was first of
aU to light upon the churches of the Jews, and which was an
nounced by the Jews to the churches of the Gentiles, as soon as it
had been made known to the former from God — seems to have
given occasion to this subsidy. The second reason is : — the ac
knowledgment of the benefit on account of which the apostle after-

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 357
wards says — ' that the Gentiles were indebted to the Jews,' or were
" their debtors." The benefit thus ackriowledged, moreover, was
twofold : The one was — that of " the word going forth from Zion,"
according to the ancient prophet, or of ' the gospel communicated
to the Gentiles by the Jews :' the other was — the forewarning from
God of this same approaching necessity, first of aU revealed to the
Jews, and by them communicated to the GentUes who believed-;
so that they, being warned, as the Egyptians were by Joseph,
might piously provide for themselves against the judgment of dearth
which was about to afflict the rest of the world.
26. " For it hath pleased Macedonia and Achaia to contribute
something for the poor saints who are at Jerusalem." This is the
reason of the ministry for the sake of which he journeys to Jeru
salem, taken from its efficient cause, which is — ' the contribution
and coUection of a subsidy for the relief of the necessity of the
saints at Jerusalem :' —
' A coUection has been made,' so the apostle reasons, ' for the
relief of the necessity of the saints dwelling at Jerusalem :
' Therefore I now take my journey _ to Jerusalem to minister to
the saints.'
This coUection the apostle Ulustrates, both by its subject-place,
and by a sort of analysis of its efficient causes. The subject-place
is stated to be twofold : — ' that coUection was made in Mace
donia, and in Achaia.' The causes also are two ; the proximate
being — ' the good pleasure of those who had made the collection.'
27. "It hath pleased them verily, and their debtors they are."
He introduces, by way of epanorthosis of the prior cause, or the
good pleasure of the Macedonians and Achaians, the remote cause,
namely — ' the debt whereby they were bound to the churches in
Judea.' " For if the GentUes have shared in their spiritual (bless
ings), they ought also to minister to them in carnal (blessings)."
He estabUshes the debt whereby the Macedonians and Achaians,
and indeed aU believers among the Gentiles, were bound to the

358 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE

churches of the Jews. The argument is taken from a comparison
of majority : —
' The Jewa have bestowed greater blessings upon the Gentiles :
' Therefore the GentUes, as their debtors, should bestow those
which are less, upon the Jews.'
The greater blessings, the apostle calls—" spiritual"- (ra nvsvpa-
nxa) ; the less — " carnal" (ra eagxtxa). By the term " spiritual
(blessings)," he intends — both ' the gospel,' and ' gifts of the Spi
rit, of all sorts, conferred upon those who by faith have embraced
the gospel ;' among which gifts there is one — the gift and grace
of prophecy, not only ordinary, but extraordinary, according to the
place, time, and necessity of beUevers — whereby the Church is
forewarned, both concerning the future benefits of God, and the
judgments which he is about to bring upon the world because of
sin ; such as was that prophecy of Agabus. In this comparison
of majority, therefore, the apostle deduces both the reasons of the
debt of the Gentiles, which we have mentioned under the head of
the 25th verse.
28. " When I shaU have performed this." The demonstrative —
" this," in these words, denotes — ' the journeying which Paul had
undertaken into Judea, and towards Jerusalem ;' so that the mean
ing is : — ' when I shall have accomplished that present journey of
which I have just spoken.' "And shaU have sealed to them this
fruit." By " fruit," he means — ' the subsidy which had been pre
pared, and for the sake of ministering which to the saints, he takes
his journey to Jerusalem ;' and he calls that subsidy — " fruit," be
cause, just as good fruit is gathered from a good tree, so the Jewish
churches, and pious poor who were at Jerusalem, reaped this fruit
from his faithful labours in the gospel among the Gentiles. In
this verae, accordingly, the apostle deduces his promise, which he
has before amplified by a twofold Ulustration : — " I shall take my
journey, through you, into Spain." He also amplifies this conclu
sion a third time, in this verse, by a new adjunct of the time, and
that doubly defined : first, by the end of his present journeying—

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 359
'after I have performed this journey, I shall take my journey,
through you, into Spain ;' then by the effect of his journeying to
his countrymen with alms, which is — ' the sealing of the advantage
redounding, both to the Jews and to the Gentiles, from his own
labours in preaching the gospel.'
29. " For I know that when I come to you, I shaU come with
the full blessing of the gospel of Christ." This is a fourth ampU-
fication of his promise, from the adjunct of his coming, which
adjunct is — ' the fuU blessing of the gospel of Christ, about to
come to you with my coming :' and this again, he iUustrates by
the adjunct of ' his knowledge ' of it ; — for I know that the bless
ing of the gospel will come with my coming.' By " blessing," he
here intends — 'the grace to be communicated to the Romans
from the preaching of the gospel among them by himself, when
he should come.' He is persuaded that this will be — " fuU ;"
which ' fulness ' is to be understood of the measure of the
" strong, " or " perfect," as he himself speaks, in 1 Cor. ii. 6, —
" we speak wisdom among the perfect," — where he caUs those
" perfect, " who ' had already made such progress in the grace of
the gospel, that they were both looking forward to, and striving
after perfection,' as he himself explains it, PhU. iU. 13, 14, 15.
The apostle, therefore, does not mean to intimate, that any one can
enjoy the fuU blessing of the gospel here, upon this earth, with
that complete fulness which is prepared for the redeemed of Jeho
vah in Christ — for that fulness shaU be the lot of the saints in the
Ufe to come ; but by " fulness " he means, as I have already said
— ' that measure of grace of the perfect, whereby they have a per
suasion here of the complete fulness to be enjoyed hereafter.'
30. Now comes the second argument for gaining their good
wiU; which is taken from his requesting the kindness of their
prayers — "I beseech you, brethren, that ye strive in prayers
for me." This argument is efficacious for procuring good will,
from the fact, that the request for prayers argues, in him who

360 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
makes the request, an opinion honourable in the Lord, concerning
those whose prayers he requests : for we wUl never entreat the
prayers of those of whom we have a mean opinion. By requesting
the Romans, therefore, to strive for him in prayers to God, the
apostle shews that he regards them as "fuU of goodness," of which
he has before professed his persuasion (v. 14.) " Through the
Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of the Spirit." These prayers
which he requests, he amplifies variously, by their causes, adjunct,
subject, and ends. The causes are two. The first is — our " Lord
Jesus Christ ;" for a common participation in him as the one and
same Lord of all of us who believe, should give rise in aU to mutual
prayers, and cause aU and each of us to pray for one another through
him. The second cause is — " the love of the Spirit ;" which is that
whereby the Holy Spirit dwells in the sanctified, and is twofold :
the one is — "the love of God, shed forth in our hearts by the
Spirit" himself; the other arises out of this, and is — ' that with
which we piously regard each other in Jesus Christ, on account
of our common participation in fhe love of God, with which he
himself regards us aU in common in Christ Jesus.' I conceive that
both kinds of love are to be understood here ; and that the apostle
founds the prayers which he requesta of the Romana, on the love
wherewith we are bound to regard each other in Jesus Christ,
arising out" of the Jove wherewith God himself regards us aU
in Christ Jesus — both of which are wrought in us by the Holy -
Spirit of God. The adjunct is indicated by the term — ' striving,'
when the apostle says — " that ye strive for me in prayers to God."
' Striving,' moreover, requires two things : — ' continued struggling
until the victory be known ;' and ' the zeal of perseverance :' he
therefore requests two things :^-' that they should be earnest in
praying and entreating ;' and ' that they should persevere in that
zeal, untU at length they heard of his deliverance.' Of these
prayers, as 'Paul' is the subject — for he asks them to pray for
himself— so » ' God' is the object : — " that ye strive — for me ; to
God." And he himself also is a social cause ; which is intimated
in these words, when he says — " I beseech you, that ye strive with

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 361
me :" for if they strove in prayers with him, and he with them, he
strove aa a social cause of the same affection with them.
31.: " That I may be delivered from those that are disobedient
in Judea." Three ends of the prayers requested are pointed out
in the two foUowing verses. The first of these is — -' deUverance
from the disobedient ;' who are described by the subject-place of
their habitation : — they are Jews, dweUing " in Judea." Moreover,
by " disobedient," I understand here, not only — ' those who per
sisted in refusing to believe on Jesus Christ,' but also — ' those
who, professing Christ, were false brethren, and through zeal for
the law, corrupters of the gospel of Jesus Christ.' The apostle,
therefore, requests the Romans to pray for him, first of aU, for this
end : — ' that, on this perilous journey to Jerusalem, he may not be
delivered over to the desires of the disobedient Jews, but may, by
divine protection, be deUvered from them. " That this my minis
try for Jerusalem may be acceptable to the saints." This is the
second end : he b'egs them to pray for him — ' that he himself with
his ministry may be acceptable to the saints in Jerusalem.'
32. " That I may come unto you with joy." This is the third
and last end. He begs them to pray for him — ' that having ac
complished his journey to Jerusalem, he may, immediately there
after, come to them, and through them into Spain.' This ' coming
of his to them,' he amplifies by the adjunct of "joy" — " that I may
come with joy;" by its efficient cause, which is — "the will of
God;" and its end — "that I may, along with you, be refreshed,"
that is — ' that I may comfort you with the gospel, and may re
ceive comfort from you in return, viz., when I see the grace of the
gospel effectual in you.' From this last end of these prayers we
may see, that this epistle to the Romans was written when he was
journeying to Jerusalem for the last time : for he promises that he
will immediately take his journey through them into Spain ; and,
moreover, in ver. 23, he has shewn that he had no longer a place
in these regions, as far as the^Adriatic sea — on the eastern shore of

362 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
which, over against Italy, lay Ulyricum, to which, he has declared
in ver. 19,. that he had penetrated from Jerusalem.
33. "And the God of peace (be) with you aU." This is the
third argument for gaining their good wiU ; which is taken from
the kindness performed by himself towards them, or his prayers
for them in return : for as, in undertaking that journey, he requests
them to commend him to God in their prayers ; so he requests for
them the presence of the God of peace for ever. He caUs Jehovah
— " the God of peace," because he is the author and efficient cause
of our reconcUiation with himself in Jesus Christ, in the consum
mation of which consists the blessedness and felicity of men ; he
therefore prays : — ' that God may be ever present with them, to
complete the work of peace by the mortification of sin, untU that
peace, and their restoration to favour with God, be perfected in
Jesus Christ, when he shaU present them unto God " unblame-
able and unreprovable." " Amen." This is the second part, and
conclusion of his prayers ; wherein he requests of God — ' that the
prayers which he has just put up for the Romans, may be ratified
and accomplished by Jehovah.'

CHAPTER XVI.
Thus far, from the 13th ver. of the foregoing chap., we have had
the particulars respecting himself. Next come the particulars
which respect others ; which are twofold : the first part contains a
commendation, in vv. 1 and 2 ; the second a salutation, from v. 3
to the end of the chap. A salutation, moreover, differs from a com
mendation in this : — that a salutation is a commendation of those
whom we salute, whereby we commend them to God for partici
pation in the common salvation; a commendation, on the other
hand, being that whereby we commend the commended to the care,
zeal, or assistance of those to whom we commend them.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 363
1. " Moreover I commend unto you Phcebe," &c. The apostle
first amplifies, and then assigns a reason for his commendation.
The amplification is taken, first of all, from its subject, and next)
from its end. The subject of Paul's commendation here is Phcebe:
— " I commend," says the apostle, " to you (who are in Rome),"
or ' to the Roman church' — that is, ' I commit to your care, zeal,
and assistance' — " Phcebe our sister." We have here an lllustra-
tion of Phcebe from two adjuncts, namely: — first, her common, and
secondly, her particular vocation. Her common vocation is indi
cated by the apostle's caUing her — " our sister;" that is — ' the
daughter, through faith, of the same God with us who believe on
Christ.' But ' to be the daughter of God in Christ, and through
partnership in the common faith, the sister of believers,' is the
common vocation of a Christian female. Phcebe, therefore, is first
of aU described from the circumstance — ' that she is a Christian
female, the daughter of God, and the sister of aU who believe,
through faith in Christ.' That is her common vocation. " Who is
a minister to the church at Cenchrea." This is her particular
vocation ; she was, it appears, among the ' widows' of the Cen-
chrean church : unless you prefer to say, what seems more correctly
said, that she was — ' one who ministered to the church of Cen
chrea, by hospitably entertaining pious strangers ;' from which class
of females, the apostle teaches, in 1 Tim. v. 10, that a widow should
be chosen.
2. " That ye may receive her." This is the second amplifi
cation of the commendation of Paul, taken from the end, and that
twofold, for which he has commended Phoebe to the Roman
church : the first end is — ' that they should receive her when she
came to Rome ;' the second — ' that they should assist her.' " In
the Lord." This is a clearing of the first end ; in which there are
two arguments. The firet ia intimated in those words : for to
receive her " in the Lord," is to receive her — ' as engrafted on the
Lord through faith, and for the sake of the Lord on whom she is
engrafted.' The first argument of the clearing may therefore be

364 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
said to be taken, either from the spiritual adjunct of Phoebe herself
— ' she was a female engrafted on Christ the Lord ;' or from the
efficient cause, viz. — ' the Lord of the Romans and of Phoebe,'
namely, ' Jesus Christ,' participation in whom should induce them
to receive her. " As befitteth saints." The second argument of the
clearing of the first end, is taken from the adjunct of ' the duty of
saints :' — ' it becomes saints, or those who are in the Lord, to re
ceive those who are sanctified in the same Lord.' " And that ye
may assist her in whatever matter," &c, This is the second end,
amplified by its subject : — ' that they should assist her in every
business requiring their assistance.' From this I would have you
observe, that it is lawful and customary for saints to commend
saints, even in common and external affairs : thus Paul commends
Phoebe to the Roman church, to be assisted by the church in any
business which she might have at Rome.' " For she hath shewn
hospitality to many." He next assigns a reason for his commen
dation, thus amplified, from the effect of Phcebe : — ' she was hos
pitable, and had hospitably entertained many of the saints,' " And
to myself also." He iUustrates the effect by a comparison of ma
jority : — ' she has shewn hospitality, not only to other saints, but
to myself also,' namely, ' to Paul.'
3. Next come the salutations; which are of two kinds. The
first are those of Paul himself, in which he, by himself, salutes the
church : first, the more distinguished in the church at Rome, as
far as v. 16 ; then all in common, in the 16th v. ; both of which he
winds up by an admonition and prayers, from the I7th to the 21st
verse. The salutations of Paul wherein he salutes the more dis
tinguished and eminent in the church at Rome, are partly of single
persons, who are named individually ; and partly of several, who
are included in a sort of common abridgment and description.
Both are enumerated, one after another, in succession ; not sepa
rately however, but in passing, and jointly, as suits the occasion.
'' Salute PriscUla and Aquila." The first who are saluted by
name are — Priscilla and Aquila. Nor should we omit to notice,

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 365
that, in the salutation, the wife is named before her husband; for
PriscUla was the wife of Aquila (Acts xvUi. 2) : from which it
appears, that as these two surpassed the rest of those who pro
fessed the gospel at that time in Rome ; so PrisciUa, an eminent
female, surpassed her husband in the business of the gospel.
Hence, in Acts xviii. 21, she is joined with her husband in more
perfectly instructing Apollos, a distinguished preacher of the gos
pel. " My helpers in Christ Jesus." He describes those who are
saluted, first, by their effects ; and then, by their adjunct. The
first effect is — ' they helped Paul,' or ' they were the helpers of the
Apostle Paul;' which effect is amplified by its subject — 'in Christ
Jesus,' or ' in the business of Christ.' What this ' help' was, is not
here stated ; nor does it seem to have consisted in ' preaching the
gospel along with Paul,' but rather in — ' so courageous a profes
sion of the gospel of Christ which Paul preached, that they often
exposed themselves to danger to save Paul,' as at Corinth, and on
the journey to Ephesus (Acta xviu. 12.)
4- " Who, for my life, have laid down their own neck." The
second effect of PriscUla and Aquila is — " they have laid down
their own neck," i. e. — ' they have exposed themselves to danger,
even to death.' This effect is in Uke manner explained by its ma
terial cause : — they exposed themselves to the danger of losing
their own life, ' to save the Ufe of Paul,' viz., at Corinth, and on
the journey to Ephesus (Acts xviii. 12), as haa been already re
marked. " To whom not only I give thanks, but also aU the
churches of the Gentiles." Thus far PrisciUa and AquUa have
been saluted, first of aU, from their effects : they are now saluted
from their adjunct, namely, — ' they are persons to whom thanks
are deservedly given.' And as this adjunct flows from the fore-*
going effects, so it is presented under the form of a comparison of
majority : — ' not only I, but moreover aU the churches of the Gen-
tilea deservedly give thanks to Priscilla and Aquila, for their et
fects,' viz., those already mentioned. For if these effects are com
pared together, the former shews what they did, namely — ' they

366 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
helped Paul in the business of the gospel;' the second shews how
far they proceeded, namely — ' even to the greatest danger of their
own lives :' on both which accounts, Paul, whom they had helped,
as weU as all the churches of the Gentiles, whom they had bene
fited by helping Paul in the manner mentioned — give thanks.
5. " Also the church which is in their house," The first who are
saluted in an abridged form by the apostle, are — ' the domestics of
Priscilla and Aquila :' from which it appears, that although they
were often changing their dwelUng-place for the sake of the gospel
— for before Paul came to Corinth, they were at Rome (Acta xviii.
2) ; from Corinth, they removed with Paul to Ephesus (Acts xviU.
18) ; now, on the occasion of his last journey to Jerusalem, they
are at Rome a second time ; and whUe the apostle was a prisoner at
Rome, they were living at Ephesus, (2 Tim. iv. 19) — although, I say,
they were thus always "strangers on the earth," and as they lived by
making tents (Acts xviii. 3), so dwelt in tents, or in an ever-shift
ing habitation; yet, from this passage, it appears that they had a
numerous household, and many domestics : so that these two, un
der the gospel, somewhat resemble their progenitors, Abraham and
Sarah, before the law ; of whom it is also recorded (Gen. xiv.),
that though always living in tents, they yet had a numerous house
hold. This household of AquUa and PriscUla is described by
its adjunct ; they are — ' a church of God :' that is, as there were
many servants, so they were servants who feared God, and had
embraced the gospel along with their master and mistress ; as may
be seen also in the case of the household of Abraham (Gen. xviU.
19), as weU as in the fidelity of his eldest servant (Gen. xxiv.).
" Salute my beloved Epenetus." The aecond who ia saluted by
name, is described: — by his name; by 'his advanced age in Christ;'
and by the adjunct of the 'love' wherewith the apostle loves him.
He is Epenetus by name, and in point of fact, a man ' worthy of
praise,'* as appears from the rest of the description: for, besides
* As tho name signifies. — Transl.

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 367
being " beloved by the apostle," he is, moreover, " the first-fruits to
Christ in Achaia," that is — ' the first in Achaia who embraced the
gospel of Christ under the preaching of Paul.' The first-fruits,
under the law, were holy to God ; and, accordingly, the apostle
salutes this 'praiseworthy' man, not only as beloved by himself,
but as whoUy consecrated to Christ.
6. In the third place, Mary is saluted ; who is described, not by
any one effect, but by her continued course of life among the
saints : namely — ' that she has laboured much, according to her
sex and station, in propagating the gospel :' but what station she
occupied in the Church — whether she was a widow, or a wealthy
and hospitable female — the apostle does not expressly state in her
case, as he has before done in the case of Phcebe.
7. In the fourth place, Andronicus and Julia are saluted ; and
are described by their four adjuncts : first — ' they were Paul's re
latives, or allied to him by blood ;' secondly — ' they had been fel
low-prisoners with him in captivity ;' thirdly — ' they were of great
note among the apostles, and famous in the Christian Church;'
fourthly — ' they had been professors of the gospel before Paul.'
What captivity that was, and when it happened to Paul and these
relatives of his at the same time, is not shewn. Certain it is, that
the apostle here speaks, either of his imprisonment at Jerusalem
under Lysias, or at Caesarea under Felix and Festus, but not at
Rome ; for this epistle to the Romans was written before the
apostle's captivity in that city.
8. Amphias or, as some read, Amphiatus, is saluted in the fifth
place ; and is described by bis adjunct, and its efficient cause : he is
¦ — ' beloved by the apostle ;' and the cause of that love is — ' his
participation in the Lord in common with the apostle.'
9. Urbanus and Stqchys are saluted in the sixth place; and both
are described : Urbanus by — ' the help which he had rendered in

368 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
the business of the gospel ;' and Stachys by—' the love wherewith
the apostle, by whom he is saluted, regards him.'
10. Seventhly, Apelles is saluted, and is described by his adjunct,
namely, that he is — " approved in Christ ;" that is — ' he was known
by experience, and by having been often put to the test, to be a
genuine Christian :' for I take the word doxipov to signify " ap
proved" in this sense, according to the apostle's own exposition of
his meaning, in 1 Cor. xi. 19. " Salute those who are ofthe (do
mestics) of Aristobulus." This is the second abridgment. I think
we must regard this Aristobulus as some leading man of the Jewish
nation, out of whose numerous household Paul here testifies^ that
some at Rome had embraced the gospel.
11. In the eighth place, Herodion is saluted; being described by
the adjunct of his ' consanguinity' with the apostle : he was — the
apostle's " relative." " Salute those who are of the domestics of
Narcissus." This is the third salutation in an abridged form. ' The
domestics oi Narcissus are saluted; not all together, however, as
in the case of those of Aristobulus, but with the introduction of
a distinction, — ' those who are in Christ :' by which the apostle
gently hints, that whoever this Narcissus was, his household was
divided ; some in it being Christians, whUe others refused to em
brace Christ.
12. In the ninth and tenth places, three females are saluted, viz.
— Tryphcena, Tryphosa and Persis ; who are each described by their
effects, or — ' their labours in the gospel :' but Persis, above the
other two, is described by — ' her much labour,' and — ' the much
love' wherewith she was regarded on account of her labour.
13. 'Rufus and his mother' are saluted in the eleventh place. Both
are described. Rufus is described by the adjunct of — ' his being
chosen by God ;' or because it was clearly seen from the sincerity
of his profession, that he was among the number of God's elect;

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 369
Hia mother, again, is described as being also — ' the mother of Paul,'
either from her maternal affection towards the apostle, on ac
count of the work of the Lord in which he was engaged ; or even by
blood, as Andronicus, Junia and Herodion are called his " relatives :"
from aU which examples we may perceive, that as the Apostle Paul
was the minister of God unto salvation, and the instrument of *' a
good work" to others, so he was" also to many of his father's house.
14, 15. In the twelfth place, Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermas, Pat-
robas and Hermes ; Philologus, Julia, Nereus with his sister, and
Olympas, are saluted : and each induction of particular individuals
concludes with an epUogue, or abridged enumeration of " brethren,"
that is, of ' feUow-beUevers on Jesus Christ.' There were, therefore,
it appears, these two sets of Christians living at Rome ; but how
separated — whether by their occupation, or in some other way — we
are not here informed : one thing at least is certain, that they were
aU united in Christ, and in the profession of the gospel.
16. Hitherto the apostle has saluted the more distinguished
saints individuaUy, or a few included in an abridgment. He now
salutea aU in common with a common salutation, and that mutual,
or so that they may salute one another from him. This common
salutation is first explained by the adjunct of the manner ; and is
next enforced by a simUar example. As regards the manner, the
apostle bids them — " salute one another with a holy kiss ;" an en
treaty in which, by a metonymy of the adjunct for the subject,
he commends to the Romans a holy and sincere love, as the foun
dation and source of aU the salutations wherewith he has admonish
ed them to salute one another : for a " kiss" is the token of ' love ;'
and a " holy kiss" of ' holy love in the Lord.' When, therefore,
he prescribes — -'the kiss of such as love,' instead of enjoining 'com
mon love,' he requires, not so much the sign itself, as the thing sig
nified, and that holy and in the Lord ; so that the meaning is : —
* salute ye one another ; and see that that salutation of yours pro
ceed from love in the Lord, or that holy love with which we wlm
2 a

370 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
are in Christ ought to regard each Other, on account of the love
wherewith God has regarded tfs all in common, in Christ Jesus.'
The similar example by which he persuades them to salute each
other mutually in a holy manner, is taken from the other churches
of Christ : —
' The other churches of Christ salute you with a holy kiss, of
salute you with a salutation proceeding from a holy love in the
Lord :
' Therefore, do ye salute one another in Uke manner, or with a
holy kiss.'
From this the apostle gives to learn the two foUowing things :
— first, that aa it had been told him in the case of the Corinthian
church, (1 Cor. i. 11) ; so, at the time that thia epistle was
written, it had become known to the apostle that there were divi
sions in the Roman church, both already begun, and in regard to
which it was to be feared more and more every day, lest they
should increase to the disturbance of the peace of the Church :
secondly, that the example of other churches walking with God,
should stir up every particular church to avoid divisions, and to
cherish love ; for so, from the holy love with which aU the churcheB
of Christ then saluted the church at Rome, the apostle admonishes
the Romans to salute one another in the Lord.
17. Thus far we have had the salutations ofthe first kind ; which the
apostle concludes — first, by an admonition, from this ver. to the 20th;
then with a prayer, in the 20th verse. The substance of the admoni
tion is — ' mark those that are the authors of divisions, and avoid
them.' This admonition the apostle amplifies in this 17th ver. ; and
enforces the same in the two foUowing vv. " I beseech you)
brethren." The first amplification of the admonition is from —
¦* the earnest affection and desire of the apostle, wherewith he is
desirous that the Romans should be on their guard against this so
great an evil ;' which desire is expressed in the form of a rhetorical
wish, whereby he beseeches them to mark and shun the authors of
divisions. " And of causes of offence." The second amplification

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 371
of the admonition is from the effect of division, or schism, in the
Church. This effect is — ' cause of offence ;' and that twofold :
both that whereby many weak are made to offend, or stumble ; and
that by which the truth, and the professors of the truth, are evil-
spoken of. Both these evUs proceed from division : for both the
weak, being carried away by the authors of divisions, often grier
vously stumble ; and those who, without having examined into the.
matter, shun division, often blame even good men, and the truth?
which otherwise is irreprehensible. For it is neither the truth,
nor those who stand up for the truth, who are the cause of divi
sion ; but these " authors of divisions" of whom the apostle speaks,
are ' those who rise up against the truth, and, on the truth's ac
count, harass the professors of it.' " Contrary to the doctrine
which ye have learned.'7 This is the third amplification of the ad
monition, from the disparate of division : — ' the doctrine which ye
have learned is remote from division ; and'division, remote and dif
ferent from it.' By " doctrine" the apostle here means — ' the gos
pel of Christ ;' which is not a doctrine of divisions, but of love :
for it teaches — both that the world has been reconciled to God in
Christ ; and that Gentiles are joined with Jews, and Jews with
GentUes, in the one sheep-fold of Christ : so that now, under the
gospel, 'there is neither Jew nor GentUe, neither male nor female,
neither bond nor free, neither circumcised nor uncircumcised,' but
all who believe are the one sheep-fold of God in Jesus Christ.
This doctrine, he says — ' they had learned,' and that from himself;
for so I understand the apostle here to speak : for although the
apostle had not yet come to Rome, nor had yet preached the gos
pel in that city; -yet almost aU those who professed the gospel in
Rome, at the time when this epistle was written, had heard him,
and had been taught the gospel of Christ by him elsewhere, as
appears from the foregoing salutations. For Priscilla and Aquila,
and the whole Church which was in their house, heard Paul, both
at Corinth, and at Ephesus ; and the same conclusion holds true in
like manner of the rest, namely, that the others who are saluted by
him, had each heard him elsewhere, and through hearing, had ~r&-
2 a 2

372 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
ceived faith — as appears from almost all their descriptions: for
these descriptions shew that those whom Paul salutes in the
Church at Rome, had assisted Paul, and had been gathered by him
irito the Church, in other places ; as it is said of Mary — ' that she
had laboured much in his behalf,' and so on. The "division"
(h%oarasia), the authors of which he admonishes them to mark
and avoid, is every division which is contrary to his doctrine : the
admonition, however, is suggested by his experience of a particular
division, whereby the true Church of Christ was troubled during
aU the days of the apostle's Ufe. This was the division which
arose about ' retaining, along with faith in Christ, the ceremonies
of Moses, as equally necessary with faith to fhe salvation of be
lievers ;' as appears from the description of the division at Antioch
(Acts xv.). This is the division which, first and chiefly, he admo
nishes the Romans to whom he writes, to avoid ; but being taught
by the experience of this division the devices of Satan for the time
to come, and that he wiU harass the Church of Christ with schisms
and divisions, during the whole period of her miUtant state — in
admonishing the Romans, he admonishes the whole Church uni
versaUy, to be on their guard against the authors of division con
trary to his doctrine of the gospel : from which we may learn —
that those who stand up for the sound doctrine of the gospel can
neither be the authors, nor the followers of division ; but that both
these are such as depart from the gospel.
18. " For those that are such," &c. Thus far we have had the
amplification : next comes the reason and enforcement of the ad
monition, or the cause for which the Romans should obey the
apostle admonishing them. A double reason is assigned. The
first is contained in this verse, being taken from the effect of those
who are the authors of divisions ; and that twofold. The first
effect is : —
" Those that are such " —that is, ' who are the authors of dissen
sions and schisms ' — " serve their own beUy," or, as the apostle
elsewhere speaks, (Phil. iii. 19) — " their belly ia their god :"

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 373
' Therefore they are to be marked and shunned by the Church,
as idolaters, who worship a strange god, namely, their own beUy.'
This effect the apostle amplifies by a contrast : — they " serve
not the Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly ;" by which con
trast it is the intention of the apostle to charge them with ' putting
their own beUy in the place of Christ :' for otherwise, it is lawful
in Christ for Christians piously to care foiNtheir belly, as for their
other [members] ; whence the apostle elsewhere enjoins — ' that
he who does not work ' — that is, ' who is not piously solicitous
about the satisfying of his belly ' — ' should not eat,' that is, ' sa
tisfy,' or ' be permitted to satisfy the wants of his belly' (2 Thess.
Ui. 10). " And by fair speaking and flattery," &c. The second
effect from which he proves, as he admonishes, that the authors of
divisions are to be marked and shunned, is : —
' They seduce the hearts of men :
' Therefore, they are to be marked and shunned.'
This effect the apostle ampUfies — both by the adjunct ofthe man
ner of seducing, and by the adjunct of those men whose hearts they
seduce. The adjunct of the manner of seducing is — " fair speak
ing and flattery ;" which two things differ in this way : that " fair
speaking" is — ' the language addressed to others by the speaker,
enticing them to evU ;' whUe " flattery " is — ' our approbation of
the language of others, whereby, in like manner, we seek to ehtice
them to evU.' These seducers, therefore, seduced the hearts of
men, both by speaking what was agreeable to those whom they
-seduced, and by approving what they spoke themselves ; both con
trary to his doctrine. The adjunct of those who were seduced is
indicated by the apostle when he says, that they were — " (men)
without maUce."* In 2 Pet. ii. 3, these persons are called — ' pro
fessors ofthe gospel:' for, addressing such, the apostle says — that
those seducers, " through covetousness, would, with feigned words,
make merchandise of" these same professors ; and in the 20th verse
of the same chap, they are caUed — such as " have escaped the pol
lutions of the world, through the knowledge of the Lord and Sa-
* Minime mahrum.

374 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
viour Jesus Christ, and, being overcome, are again entangled In
the same," so that " their latter state is worse than the former."
These " (men) without maUce," therefore, are — ' hypocrites, who
profess the gospel in such a way, that they both deceive others, and
are deceived concerning themselves and their own condition;5
whom our Lord compares to ' the sprouting seed, which forthwith
withering, as soon as the sun has arisen, never attains to. the harvest
of the sons of God.'
19. " For your obedience has spread abroad to aU." The second
reason of the admonition is taken from the adjunct of the fame of
the obedience which they had hitherto rendered to the gospel.
The force of the argument from this is — that the more celebrated
their obedience had been, the more notorious, and attended with
the greater cause of offence, would be their declension and apos
tacy to the side of the schismatic. The apostle therefore here
thus reasons : —
' Those, the obedience rendered by whom to the gospel of peace
is celebrated, should, most of aU, beware of divisions contrary to
the peace of the gospel :
' But the obedience hitherto rendered to the gospel of peace by
you who are at Rome, has become celebrated and known to aU :
' Therefore you, above others, should beware of divisions, and
shun the authors of divisions.'
The proposition is obvious. The assumption is expressed in the
commencement of this 19th verse ; which, in the words immediately
foUowing, the apostle ampUfies by the adjunct of ' his joy,' as the
effect and fruit of their celebrated obedience : — " I rejoice there
fore concerning you." " But I would have you," &c. This is an
epanorthosis and correction, as it were, of his joy, whereby he ob
viates an objection which might arise from that profession of his
joy: — 'if we are such as to afford you joy, to what purpose this
admonition ? why apply the spur to the running horse ?' He re
plies by a contrast : — ' Although I rejoice concerning you, yet it
is in such a way, that I would have you continue both wise and

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 375
innocent.' He therefore corrects his profession of joy by the desire
which remained and continued with him, that the subject-matter
of his joy from them should continue ; and this he comprises in
two particulars : — " wisdom," and " innocence." Each of these
the apostle Ulustrates, and in a manner defines, by their subjects :
he requires " wisdom" in " what is good ;" " innocence (from guilt)"
in " what is evil." If, therefore, you wish to define them : " wis
dom" is — ' the science of walking with God in that which is good ;'.
whUe " innocence" is — ' freedom from the deeds and guilt of those
who walk in that which is evil :' both of which definitions the
apostle elsewhere expresses in a few words, when he recommends
to the Church ' to walk in the spirit,' and ' not to care for the lusts
of the flesh, so as to fulfil them' (chap. vui. 1 ; xiii. 14).
20. Now comes the second part of the conclusion of the first
kind of salutations, or the prayer put up for them by the apostle ;
which consists of two parts : the one being a request against an
enemy ; the. other a request for the presence of God : in which two
requests he briefly comprises whatever is advantageous for them,
and whatever is necessary to carry them forward and sustain them
during the continuance of their warfare, and on to its close. " And
may the God of peace bruise Satan under your feet shortly." The
enemy he denominates — " Satan ;" and in the single mention of him,
he includes aU the enemies of the Church : for aU who annoy the
Church are — either Satan himaelf, or his emisaariea ; as appears from
the first denunciation of spiritual war, in which it is said that ' the
serpent,' and ' the seed of the serpent,' are those, and aU those, who
should be enemies to, or indulge enmity against that particular
' woman,' namely, the Church of God, and ' her seed,' both the first
born, and the rest in him. The first request therefore is :— ' may
God tread and put under your feet, the serpent and hia seed, viz.,
Satan, and aU who, being his emisaaries, are your enemies.' This
request is founded on the promise made to the first-born of the
woman — " sit thou on my right hand, untU I make thine enemies
thy footstool;" which promise the apostle here extends, in the

376 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE
first-born, to the rest of her seed, and prays : — ' that as God has
put Satan under Christ, so he may put him under those who are
in Christ ; so that Satan with his emissaries, may be made the
footstool of the saints of God.' This is the first request; for the
understanding of which, the foUowing things must be observed in
fhe words of the apostle. First, that by " Satan" he especiaUy in
tends ' the authors of divisions,' as the chief ministers of Satan,
and sent by him into the Church ; and this he does after the ex
ample of his Lord : for since he addressed .Peter, giving perverse
counsel, by the name of ' Satan' (Matt. xvi. 23) ; much more might
the apostle style false brethren, perversely perverting the Church,
by that name. And this he does most wisely; and on two accounts :
for in the first place, by the mention of Satan, he stirs up the saints
to whom he writes, to beware of these authors of divisions and false
brethren who urged that Moses and his ceremonies must be com
bined with faith in order to salvation, not less than they would be
ware of the devil himself; and in the second place, he wisely
avoids being accused by these same false brethren, who, although
in this request he was praying directly against them, would be un
able to lay it to his charge. In the second place, we must observe
that, in this prayer, he denominates the God of the Church — " the
God of (her) peace ;" and that too most wisely : for he thus shews
the Roman Church that they could not give place to the authors
of divisions, as the Corinthian Church had done, without losing
the peace which they had enjoyed in God, as had happened in the
case of the Corinthian church; which, on the reception of the
false brethren, had been fUled with divisions, and especiaUy in that
department of the ministry which was the chief token of their
peace in the Lord, namely, in the administration of the Lord's
Supper. In the third place, we must observe the adjunct of the
time ; the apostle prays — ' that God may tread Satan under their
feet,' and that — " shortly :" by which adjunct ofthe time, he both
shews his own zeal for the deliverance of the Church of Christ from
so dangerous a pest as these false brethren and authors of division;
and besides, consoles them with the expectation of deliverance

EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 377
about to come to them immediately, as that which he himself re
quested in faith, and assuredly expected from his God in Christ.
" The grace of our Lord," &c. This is the second part of. his
prayer ; he implores " grace" for them, as the armour of God for
resisting evil, and opposing the authors of division. By the term
"grace," therefore, I understand here — ' every thing wherewith
God furnishes and arms his people, for resisting evil, and the
authors of evil:' and he calls it " grace," because, just as the bene
fits of peace are given gratuitously in the Lord of grace ; so this
celestial armour itself, or furnishing of strength against impending
evils, is gratuitous, and in Jesus Christ. " Amen." He amplifies
both parts of his prayer by a new and joint request ; wherein he
prays — ' that both the petitions which he has already uttered, may
be heard and ratified by God in Christ.'
21. Next come the salutations of the second kind ; in which
others besides Paul salute the Roman Church, in three verses :
and these salutations the apostle, in like manner, winds up, in
the 24th and three foUowing verses, with prayer, and giving of
thanks. Verse 24th is the prayer ; in which he supplicates the grace of
Christ for all the Romans to whom he writes.
The three foUowing verses contain the doxology.
Verse 25th is a description of God from his great " power ;"
which is — ' the power of establishing in faith :' for God alone, who
gives faith, and works it in our hearts, can establish the same.
This 'power' is ampUfied by its subject — "you;" and its instru
ment — " the gospel." ' The gospel ' is Ulustrated by the different
dispensations : at first, the mystery of the gospel was ' hidden and
concealed ;' which is shewn by the adjunct of the time — ' from the
beginning of the world to the time of the New Testament :' then,
under the New Testament, it was ' manifested and revealed.'
This 'revelation,' again, is explained by its object — "to aU na-

378 LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROMANS..
tions ;" its instrument — " through the scriptures of the prophets ;"
and its end — " for the obedience of faith."
Verse 27 is the doxology itself: — " Glory be to God." More
over, God is described by his proper adjunct — " the only wise."
And that this giving of thanks may be acceptable to God, it is
offered in the name of the Mediator : for no prayers, and no
thanksgivings, can be acceptable to God, except through Christ
the Mediator. Lastly, this doxology is sealed with the word — •
" Amen," which indicates ' faith ;' or ' desire :' — ' so it shaU be ;'
or ' so I wish it may be.'

COMMENTABIUS

IN

DIVINAM PAULI EPISTOLAM
AD ROMANOS;

AUCTOKE

ANDREA MELVINO, SCOTO :

NUNC PRIMUM E CODICE MANU SCRIPTO EDITUS

CURIS
GUILHELMI LINDSAY ALEXANDER, S.T.D.

EDINBURGH
SUMPTIBUS SOCIETATIS WODROVENSIS.
MDCOCXLIX.

ED1T0BIS PRAEFATUM.

Tenes in manu, L. B. opusculum quod, sive nomen famamque
auctoris, sive libri ipsius materiam ac rationem spectes, non sine
summa observantia recipere possis. Nemo est, minima quidem ex
parte Uteris imbutus, qui nesciat quantum honoris sibi acquisiverit,
quantum boni in patriam contulerit Melvinus Ule. Knoxium rov
icdvv excipiens, opus reformandae ecclesiae a viro iUo spectatis-
simo inceptum fideliter promovit, vel, ut potius dicam, annuente
Deo confecit. Optime etiam de re litteraria apud nostrates meruit,
tum studiis juvenum dirigendis, tum suis diligenter fideUterque
persequendis. Ingenii fuit eximU, indoUs haud minus subtiUs
quam sagacis, et, quum scientiam omnigenam vehementer affecr
tabat, tantos doctrinae thesauros accumulavit, ut, quod ad mentem
attinet, inter ditissimos sui temporis annumerari debeat, Nihil
tamen ipse tanti aestimavit quanti sacras literas divinamque scien
tiam ; quamobrem in has praecipue incumbebat, et humanam doc-
trinam Theologiae ancillam fieri sedulo studebat.
Dum officio Rectoris ac Professoris in Academia Andreapoli-
tana fungebatur, discipuUs in Epistolas Beati PauU praelegere

382 EDITORIS PRAEFATUM.
solebat ; inter quas quis neacit quantum emineat, tam gravitate
materiae quam ratiocinationis acumine atque vi, Epistola ad Ro-
manos ? Huic igitur operam dedit praecipuam Melvinus ; nee
sine fructu ; multis enim ApostoU locis lucem affusit, et non solum
auditores doctrina ac pietate sua quotidie delectavit, sed etiam
multorum adolescentium ingenuorum mentes Uteris sacris infor-
mavit, ipsosque ad praedicandum evangeUum optime munitos
emisit. TaUs viri quis non admiratur ingenium ac labores ? quis
non tanti ingenu, tantorumque laborum fructus aUquot recipere
cuperet ?
Praelectionum Melvini nescio an exstent uUa vestigia propria
manu scripta ; omniasuspicor abolevisse aetatem invidam. Disci
pulis autem commentaries suos commodare solebat, ut, ipsissima
magistri verba describentes, penitiorem rerum, de quibus coram
eis disseruisset, cognitionem secum deportarent. Inter alios, pere-
grinus quidam, nomine Daniel Demetrius, qui Melvini audiendi
causa in Scotiam venerat, commentarios ejus in Epistolam PauU
ad Romanos transcripsit, auctoris, ut ipse testatur, exemplar secu-
tus. Hoc opus Demetrii, ad nostrum usque tempus servatum,
hodie penes est virum humanissimum, Davidem Laing, Armigerum,
-qui, pro solita sua liberalitate, concilio Societatis Wodrovensis
facillime concessit ut librum sub prelo ponerent, et pubUci juris
facerent. Codex paginas centum viginti et unam in quarto, ut
dicunt, sed minoris formae continet ; scripturam lectu facillimam
atque singularis elegantiae exhibet; et si menda perpauca par-
vique momenti, hie iUic sparsa, excipias, nusquam manu corri-
¦genti opus praebet.
Haud dubito quin omnibus societatis nostrae sociis opusculum

EDITORIS PRAEFATUM. 383
hocce nunc typis editum acceptum fiiturum sit. In officio fungendo
meo maximam adhibui curam ut quam accuratissime prodeat,
Faxit Deus ut sit haec nostra cura frugifera, utque hoc servi sui
eminentissimi opus, tandem post tot annos in lucem proditum,
honori suo inserviat. Illi soli vivo veroque Deo sit laus, gloria et
imperium in saecula saeculorum. Amen.
Dabam viUa mea prope Musselburgum
ipsis Nonis Julii MDCCCXLIX.

COMMENTARIES, &c.

ARGUMENTUM EPISTOLAE.
Haec epistola, summam Christianismi complexa, constat medio et
extremis ; extrema duo, prius et posterius : Prius extremum dica-
tur dicendi causa irgoyguQ?), praescriptio ; Posterius siciygatyri, quasi
postscriptio ; Medium vero yga<pJ?, scriptio ipsa ; quemadmodum
•rgoKoyog , Xoyog, sxikoyog, sive prooemium aut exordium", oratio, pe-
roratio in orationibus apud oratores. Sive istis, sive aliis utamur
nominibus, res ipsa teneatur, et extrema cum mediis, et media cum
extremis vincta inter se et coUigata esse inteUigantur. HgoyguQq
sive praescriptio duabus constat partibus, nimirum priore, qua sig-
nificatur PauU munus et officium apostolicum erga Romanos ; pos-
teriore, qua significantur Pauli studium, ac benevolentia erga Ro
manos apostolica : ad illam spectant nomina pluribus argumentis
Ulustrata, ad hanc svXoyia, fausta imprecatio bonorum omnium
spiritualium a Deo Patre in Christo fiUo, [et] sv^agigiu, gratiarum
actio, qua ob fidei Romanorum celebritatem Deus in Christo, fidei
autor, celebratur : quae celebratio probatur studio augendi, et con-
firmandi fidem Romanorum. Et hoc studium a studio communi-
candi Spiritualis boni, et hoc rursum studium a proposito et studio
invisendi Romanos. Et hoc demum studio facultatis seu veniae
divinitus concedendae, et viae prosperioris ex Dei voluntate, quae
duo precum assiduitate Ulustrantur, atque haec tandem religiosa
asseveratione, et jurisjurandi sanctitate : Vnde a primo ad ultimum
coUigi potest, valde laetari apostolus de felici Romanorum statu ;
qui eum tam vehementer cupiat opera sua auctum, et confirmatum,
idque ex officio.
2b

386 ARGUMENTUM EPISTOLAE.
Sequitur ygaQrj sive scriptio ipsa bimembris, nimirum oioaaxa-
"klu, doctrina, et Kagdx%ri(Tig, adhortatio : AihaaxaXiu sive psgog
hhactxakixbv, pars doctrinam explicans, est de salute in Christo
per Evangelium conferenda, quam probat a salutis causa, quae est
vera justitia ; haec autem Evangelica non legalis, Dei, sive divina,
non humana, fidei non operum ; quia legalis, humana, operum justitia
omnis, sive Gentium, sive Judaeorum, ad legem tum naturae, tum
Mosis coUata atque exacta, est mera injustitia, omnes homines tam
Gentes, quam Judaeos condemnation! divinae subiiciens ; a cap.
i. 17, ad iii. 21. Justitia EvangeUca, Dei, et fidei, communis
Judaeis et Gentibus •xgotwiflixwg insertur vv. 21, 22, 23. IUustratur
justitia, qua. Dei est, testimonio dupUci, altero ex lege, altero ex
prophetis vv, 24, 25, 26, qua, fidei, vv, 27, 28, qua communis 29, 30,
Legem non evertere docetur ult. v. Ulustratur haec Evangelica,
Dei, fidei et communis justitia exemplo Abrahami, communis om
nium justificandorum patris, et testimonio duplici, altero ex lege,
altero ex prophetis cap. iv. Vnde infertur salus quatuor capitibus v.
Vi. vii. viii. Et quia duplex justitia, altera causa salutis, altera testi
monium, a justitia fidei, quae causa est, infertur cap. v. salutis spes
certa ex pace cum Deo et reconcUiatione quae est effectum et
comes justificationis fidei : Ad salutem, eiusque certitudinem tam
Ulustrandam quam confirmandam spectat triplex gloriatio, una sub
spe gloriae Dei, quae aliud nihil est, quam salutis certitudo ; altera
in afflictionibus, qua augetur patientia ; et, aucta patientia, augetur
experientia, qua aucta augetur spes et confirmatur, quae non est fal-
lax, aut * cum Spiritu Sancto tanquam arrhabone obsignetur
amor Dei in Christo erga nos, quibus justificandis et reconciliandis
eum in mortem exposuit, ut nos justificati et reconciliati a metu
mortis Uberaremur, et vita aeterna aecum perfrueremur atque haec
quoque est salutis certitudo : Tertia gloriatio in Deo per Dominum
nostrum Iesum Christum, per quem reconcUiationem adepti sumus.
Materia gloriandi est justitia per Christum nobis parta, et Dei
gratia per Spiritum Sanctum nobis communicata, quae infinitis
* [Hie valde difficilis est scriptio, ita ut quid dicendum vellet auctor haud certe
scio ; sed fortasse " irrita."]

ARGUMENTUM EPISTOLAE. 387
partibus uberior, et efficacior ad nos justos constituendos, et offer-
endam nobis vitani aeternam, quam injustitia Adami ad nos injustoa
constituendos, et mortem promerendam ; ac proinde haec omnis col-
latio Christi cum Adamo ad salutis certitudinem pertinet, sumpta
nimirum a causa uberiore et efficaciore per duplicem comparationem
tam simUium quam imparium. Cum hac juatitia, aalutis causa, co-
haeret altera justitia salutis pignus, quia justificationis testimonium;
quippe sanctificatio promanans a morte et reaurrectione Christi, qua
cum Christo coalescentes in morte et vita iUi conformes reddimur
morte peccati, et vita justitiae ; ad quam exercendam et promoven-
dam dupUci simiUtudine extimulamur, una servitutis et libertatis,
unde certitudo salutis gratuitae cap. vi. concluditur : altera coniugii
veteris et novi, cum purgatione legis, et defensione legitima, quod
non legis vitio, sed peccati maleficio peccatum per legem augea-
tur. Vnde post gravem luctum concluditur certa victoria ad sa
lutis certitudinem confirmandam. cap. vii., quae toto octavo capite et
confirmatur, et iUustratur, et ampUficatur a sanctificationis et cer-
titudine et plenitudine, Ula quidem iam praesente, hac vero tandem
futura, quia jam per evangelii auditionem Spiritu Christi vivifico
donati sumus, qui caepit in nobis bonum opus Dei, non solum fidei,
de qua hie non agitur, sed sanctificationis, liberando nos ex parte a
lege peccati et mortis, ut ne nunc quidem dominent in nos, ta-
metsi ex parte detineant quasi captivos ; et quod opus caepit, non
est intermissurus donee idipsum perficiat utjus legis in nobis com-
pleatur : Ergo in quibus jus legis divinae tandem complebitur, Uli
Uberati sunt, vel coepti sunt Uberari a lege peccati et mortis, et
qui Uberati a lege peccati et mortis, illos nuUa manet condemna-
tio propter peccatum inhabitans, et mortem inde consequentem.
Liberatos a lege peccati et mortis i. e. cceptos Uberari ex eo con
stat, quod secundum Spiritum ambulant ; et quia ambulant se
cundum Spiritum, ideo scimus eos in Christo esse, sive in Spi-i
ritu esse, sive secnndum Spiritum esse : haec enim omnia eodem
gpectant i. e. communione mortis et resurrectionis Christi per Sp. S.
participata mortui peccato vivunt justitiae, atque ita Spiritualea;
facti sapiunt quae Spiritus sunt, et ambulant secundum Spiritum,
2 b 2

388 ARGUMENTUM EPISTOLAE.
quod certum est testimonium tum pacis cum Deo et reconcUiati--
onis, tum salutis et vitae aeternae : nam ut qui in carne sunt, Deo
placere non possunt, in Spiritu esse docent opera Spiritus et
secundum Spiritum incessus; et quia in Spiritu sunt, Spiritum
Christi et Christum habent incolam ; qui Spiritus Christi a Deo,
ut Christum excitavit a mortuis, ita vivificabit a peccato et morte
plane liberaturus corpora haec, quae nunc peccant, mortalia, et
glorificabit cum animis glorificatis coniungenda : Quin et idem SpH
ritus nos sanctificans, est adoptionis Spiritus obsignans in cordibus
nostris affectum Dei erga nos paternum, nostramque adoptionem.
Vnde infertur salutis et gloriae aeternae certitudo, ex eo quod fiUi,
ac proinde haeredes Dei, et Christi cohaeredes : Quo spectat Ula
rerum creatarum, quasi nobiscum, tam soUicita expectatio, quam
unanimis <rv[/jTddsta v. 3, ad spem salutis confirmandam, quo spectat
et Spiritus S4i. in adversis praesidium, et in precibus ardor et effi-
cacia : Denique hue omnia etiam adversa, atque adeo peccata, ex
Dei ordinatione tendunt, ut, nostrae sanctificationis his mediis pro-
movendae certiores facti, certo sciamus ex aeterno Dei proposito et
praedestinatione, nos tandem aliquando glorificatum iri, quod apos
tolus per praeteritum tempus expressit, iSo|a<rs, ad hanc certitu
dinem salutis confirmandam, quo spectant etiam, Deum nobiscum
esse, itaque quid contra nos ? Christum filium dedisse nobis, quid
negaturus ? nos justificasse, quis accusaturus ? Christum nobis pa-
tronum esse, ergo salus nostra certissima est. Atque haec omnia
faciunt, ut Deum redamemus exemplo veteris ecclesiae, Ps. xliv.,
adeo ut in aerumnis et media morte plus quam victores simus,
amore ipsius in nostris animis accenso per Spiritum Sm. sensu Ulius
amoris, quo Deus in Christo est nos ultro prosequutus, quam vim
amoris mutui et vinculum indissolubile nulla vis in terra aut caelo,
vel hac rerum universitate queat dirimere : hinc rursus ex nostri
sanctificatione colUgitur salutis certitudo ; atque ita ut ex justifica-
tione cap. v. Ita ex sanctificatione cap. vi. 23, cap. vii. 24, 25,
cap. viii. 1, 10, 11, 13, 17, 28, 34, et ultimo, colligitur, inquam,
salutis certitudo.
Hactenus ergo justitia et salus gratuita in Christo per evangelium

ARGUMENTUM EPISTOLAE, 389
communicata, non legalis, sed evangeUca, quam quia* Judaei asper-
nanturyideo rejecti ex aeterno Dei decreto secundum prophetarum
oracula, gentes vero quod evangelium ex gratia amplexae hujus
justitiae et salutis evadunt compotes, ex decreto item aeterno Dei^
et prophetarum oraculis, capp. ix. et x. ; Ubi legali justitiae evan
gelica opposita describitur, et iUustratur Mosis et prophetarum
testimoniis, quam justitiam ut Judaei tandem amplexentur, ad tem-
pus rejiciuntur, ut aemulatione gentium provocentur et ipsi, ut
catholica ecclesia ex Judaeis et gentibus coUecta, universis gratia
Dei in Christo servetur, cap. xi.
Hactenus doctrina de justitia et salute tam judaeis quam genti
bus communi ; sequitur Tugaxktjo'ig sive ftaguivsaig ad vitam sanc-
tam et dignam homine Christiano, ttibus capp. xii. xiii. xiv. ad
xv. 14. Ac primo ad corporis et animi sanctitatem hortatur
in genere, ad divinae voluntatis normam, et temperatam fidei
demenso prudentiam, quam singulis ' ecclesiasticarum functionum
muneribus accommodat, ac deinde generalibus omnium Christiano-
rum officiis erga fratres, erga deum, et adversum inimicos 12mo cap.
Quae ethica Christiana dici possunt. Tum de officio subditorum
erga magistratus, et contra officio magistratuum adversus subditos,
cum generali adhortatione ad omne oflScium alteri praestandum sub
generaU charitatis commendatione ; at tandem ab omni libidinum et
irarum intemperie dehortans ad sobrietatem in cibo, et potu, ad
castitatem, ab inconcessa et immodica venere, ad mansuetudinem
in lenitate et placabUitate hortatur, ac generatim Christum in-
duendum monet 13mo cap. Quae ad politica Christiana referri
possunt. Postremo ne firmi fide infirmos in rebus medUs con-
temnant aut infirmi firmos condemnent, cap. xiv., sed unusquisque
non tam sibi, quam aliis placere studeat ad aedificationem, exem
plo Christi, qui gentes et Judaeos, secundum promissiones patribus
factas et prophetarum praedictiones, veram justitiam exhibito
evangelium obtulit in electorum omnium salutem, 15mo cap. ad
14um v.
Atque haec de sanctitate seu vita Christiana, quoad officia erga
deum, et homines sive aequales, eosque vel amicos, vel inimicos, sive

390 ARGUMENTUM EPISTOLAE.
inaequales, vel autoritate, vel fide ; denique de omnium erga omnes
charitatis officio.
Sequitur epistolae pars tertia atque ultima, quam s<?nyga<p^vt aut
Siti'hoyov diximus. Ea partim excusatione, partim salutatione con
stat, a 14mo v. 15mi cap., ad finem 16mi cap. Excusatio duplex,
altera Ubertatis in scribendo, altera dilati adventus ; utriusque
causam transfert in necessitatem muneris apostolici cujus efficaciam
magnificentissime praedicat, poUicitus brevi se Romanos invisurum,
requisitis ad hoc eorum precibus. Salutatio duplex, una quasi
humanior, altera religiosior : Humaniorem voco salutationem, qua
certas personaa commendat, commemoratis earum virtutibus^ ad eas
sancte vel excipiendas, vel imitandas, quibus opponit dissidiorum
autores sive srsgohhaaxd'kovg omni studio fugiendos. Ad hoc genua
salutationia spectant nomina sive in genere omnium ecclesiarum,
sive in parte singulorum hominum, qui tanquam testes huic epis
tolae quasi subscribunt, ad veritatem communiter obsignandum.
Salutatio religiosior, aut si placet valedictio, posita est in sancta
precatione una atque altera, qua Dei gratiae in Christo Romanos
commendat, ac tertia quasi operosiore, mysterio EvangelU alte re-
petito, qua epistolam claudit.

CAP. I. E\sy%oi.
Exordium epiatolae, sive praeloquium ad primi capitis 16. v. (ut
dixi)extenditur; nlmirum de suo apostolatu, et studio erga Romanos
suo ex muneris apostolici fungendi necessitate. Haec duo non satis
distincte ab interpretibus explicantur, pleriqui enim periodum pri-
mam, quae finienda est v. 7, parte media, ante verba " gratia sit,
etc." confundunt cum sequenti periodo, quae altera parte 7mi v.
continetur, atque ita totum hoc comprehensum primis 7mis w. salu
tationem vocant non levi errore : Cum sint revera duae distinctae
(ut dixi) et plenae periodi, quae ad diversas spectant sententias ;
prior ad descriptionem Apostolatus Paulini erga Romanos, posterior
ad salutationem sanctam et apostoliqam, qua Paulus Romanis, bona
omnia spirituaUa adprecatur. Utrobique est verbi elUpsis ; in
priore ygdpsi vel smtrrsKhsi, ut sit indicandi modi : Paulus, &c.
Romanis, sive Romae fideUbus scribit. Docetur, enim quis cui
scribat, aut mittat hanc epistolam, non quis cui salutem dicat, aut
fausta imprecetur. Quae vero nominibus adjiciuntur, faciunt apos-
toUcam erga Romanos autoritatem ex vocatione commendandam,
et impetrandam audientiam ; adeo ut quae de Evangelio, de
Chriato, deque Apostolatu dicantur, tres digressiones aut excur*
sus dici non debeant ; cum hue spectent vel maxime, nimirum ad
ApostoUci muneris descriptionem et commendationem ; versatur
enim in Evangelio praedipando, tanquam in materia quam tractat,
et EvangeUi subjectum, quasi adaequatum, Christus, ut ab Apos-
tolo hie describitur. Tertium iUud de Apostolatu, praecipuum
est quod hie agitur. Quare cum haec tria hie describuntur, nou
excurrit aut digreditur ab eo, quod sibi proposuit agendum, hoc
loco, Apostolus ; cujus Apostolatum tam Christi, quam Evangelii
deacriptio, mirum quantum amplificat, imo illustrat dignitatem
et naturam maxime, cum ad dpcUitatem tum ad attentionem com-

392 CAPITIS PRIMI
parandam. Est autem plena admodum haec periodus, seu com-
prehensio verborum, quam Graeci vrsgtfio'krjv, Xoyov xsgiohxov, xai
(Jbstrorqra, appellare consueverunt. In posteriori autem periodo deest
verbum optandi modi aut KkqDvvdsiri (quod expressum legitur apud
Petrum in utriusque Epistolae suae exordio), vel verbum substan-
tivum, cuius valde frequens est eUipsis, vel aliquod aliud verbum,
modo sententiae conveniat. Profecto vel grammatica ipsa non
patitur tam absurdam Syntaxin : — Paulus Romanis, &c, gratia sit
vobis ; multo minus patitur vel logica, vel theologia sententiarum
tam diversarum, quam divinarum confusionem ; cum prior advoca
tionis et muneris commendationem ; posterior ad studium ApostoU
in fungendo munere pertineat. Precari enim fausta omnia Romanis
benevolentiae significationem habet, non minus quam gratias agere
Deo super illorum fide, &c. Cuius benevolentiae et studii erga
Romanos ApostoUc! commendatio, altera praefationis parte ut dixi
continetur. V. 1. AouXoj. Servum se Christi vocat, non tam eo sensu,
quo Christiani omnes sancti vocantur, per vocationem (ut quidam
loquuntur)generalem,sed muneris pubUci notionem habet nomen hie
servi, ut inscriptione Ps. xviii. et xxxvi., David Dei servus dicitur, et
magistratus hdxovog et "ksirovpyog 6sov, Rom. xiii. 4 et 6 ; servus
i. e. publicum munus gerens ; Magistratus quidem in repubUca civile,
Paulus vero spirituale in Ecclesia. Nam qui rempublicam cum ec
clesia confundunt, de utroque statu tam civili quam ecclesiastico
pessime merentur, suamque produnt non minus impietatem, quam
maximarum rerum ignorationem. Quin et atyopiGfJbog a vocatione
videtur distinguendus, ut hie distinguit apostolus ; et ad Galatas
{i. 15,) dlcit divinitus separatum se ab utero matris (o atpooiaag
ps:) At nemo sanus dixerit Paulum vocatum ab utero matris ; et
Act. xiii. 2. distinguit Spiritus Sanctus inter separationem et voca
tionem PauU, apopiffals tis pot rov ^avhov hg ro sgyov 6 itgoax's-
tchij[iui avrovg. Itaque vocatio distingui debet in privatam et
pubUcam. Publica rursus in civilem, et ecclesiasticam, sed de hoo
satis. ...

ELENCHI. 393
V. 9. Mdgrug yag, &c. Non tam occupat, ut mihi videtur ob-
jectionem dilati adventus, quam probat quod proxime posuit de
sua gratiarum actione, qua gratulatur Romanis celebritatem fidei.
Nam si studiosus est augendae iUorum fidei, tam praesentia quam
opera sua, sane non potest non laetari de illorum fide, et si preca-
tur assidue, ut sibi concedatur ilia opportunitas iUos ea de causa in
visendi, quidni etiam gratias agat Deo, etc., de iUorum felici con-
ditione ? Causam vero dUati adventus rejecit in cap. xv., quod hie
non tam commode tractaretur, ubi totus est in significatione studii
sui, quod declarat cum fausta precatione, v. 7, turn sancta gratula-
tione, v. 8. Sed etiam huius gratulationis confirmatione, idque,
tam studio, v. 11, quam proposito, v. 13, invisendi Romanos, et
coram evangelizandi ; ut omittam mentionem iUam Romanorum,
quam facit in agendis Deo gratiis perpetuam (sic enim distinguo
illud dhaksiicrug et ndvrors, ut hoc ad participium hso^svog \<xi ruv
icgoasvypv, illud vero ad mentionem sv ru svy^apiarsiv referam, ita
ut participium bsofiusvog causam includat mentionis illius : Ut qui
rogem.) - Quod quia occupatus alibi in munere fungendo, et a Spi
ritu Sancto distentus praestare non potest, absens facit per Uteras,
quod praesens facere maximopere vellet.
V. 10. Defectum aut sKXst-^iv nuUam video ; neque enim con
structs erit insolens, aut absurda sententia, si participium dsofjbsvog
cum verbo skdeiv componatur, i.e., Rogans, ut qui rogem, vel dum
rogo ut veniam ad vos.
V. 12. Tovro- Is sgi. Mitigat asperitatem verbi ffrqgiyfitjvai,
modesta interpretatione, ut confirmationis loco cohortationem, aut
consolationem, eamque communem et mutuam substituat. Ideoque
minus recte quidam in hunc locum, " Interpretatur (inquit) finem
ilium, posteriorem non tantum esse, ut ipsi confirmentur, sed etiam,'
etc." Immo vero quasi revocaret id quod dixerat de confirmatione,
quasi nimium arroganter dictum cum illorum contumelia, per inter-
pretationem subjicit verbum mitius, quod minus offendat, et in
meliorem partem accipiatur facUius.

394 CAPITIS PRIMl
V. 15, "Ovru. Non tam conclusionis quam simUitudinis in
apodosi nota, cuius relativum xaSSig in probaai praetermiait, for-
tasse propter ambiguitatem, ne scUicet videretur extenuare nexum
aeris aUeni, quo se obligatum intelligi voluit maxime; vel quia
posuerat in superiore sententia zadug, sine eo quod ex adverso
respondet redditivo ovrog, idque brevitatis causa, cuiusmodi multae
eUipses passim occurrunt in Hebraismo, tum alibi, tum in Pro*
verbiis Solomonis, praesertim ubi similia aut dissimilia aut dis-
sentanea inter se conferuntur.
Nunc vero ut tota hujus Epistola praescriptio sit Ulustrior, in
summa tenendum duabus earn partibus contineri, alteram in nomi
nibus PauU et Romanorum, et in eorundem iUustratione positam,
ad muneris Apostolici dignitatem commendandam, et Romanorum
impetrandam auscultationem, sex primis versibus, et septimi parte
priore : Alteram vero reUqua septimi parte et ceteris sequentibus ad
v. 16, studium et benevolentiam Pauli erga Romanos in fungendo
munere Apostolico Romanis commendare. Ad priorem spectat
primo servi nomen ad Christum Dominum relationem habens, cui
verbo subest hie notio spirituaUs et publicae servitutis, quae Paulum
differre facit non solum a Magistratu civili, qui Dei servus proprie
magis quam Christi dicitur, verum etiam ab aUis Christianis, qui
cum privati sint, immunes sunt ab omni publico in Ecclesia munere :
NihUo secius communis hie honor Paulo cum omnibus aUis publicum
in Ecclesia munus gerentibus. Cum titulo honorifico subjicitur
secundo loco specialis ad Apostolatum vocatio, summus sub Rege
Christo in Ecclesia honosj ad quern honorem (Act ix.) a Christo
vocatum ex Christi verbis constat. Tertio loco, separatus dicitur,
auctore Spiritu Sancto, per Antiochenum Presbyterium Paulua
(ut ego interpretor hunc locum) ad Evangelium inter Gentes prae-
dicandum, (Act. xiii.) ad quod opus divinitus antea vocatum testa-
tur oraculum Spiritus Sancti ibidem. Nee excludo aipopifffjijov «ffo
rrjg xoiktag, (Gal. i.), ex aeterno Dei decreto, vide Jer. i. Quarto
loco est Evangelium, in quo promulgando, hujus servi Christi,
vocatione Apostoli, et a Spiritu Sancto praecipue cum Barnaba
ab aliis Apostolis separati, et ad gentes missi, eat omnis occupa-

ELENCHI. 395
tio : Cujus Evangelii autor Deus, antiquitas jam inde a lapsu homi
nis, natura in gratuita pollicitatione, sanctitas, et certitudo pro
phetis testibus omni exceptione majoribus et sanctarum Uterarum
tabuUs authenticis, commendatur: describiturque materia Evan
gelio subiecta, quippe fiUus Dei, cuius persona una ab aeterno
genita ; naturae duae : humana, Davidicae stirpis virgine orta,
anno M. 3927; divina, per se aeterna, verum lv vrkspufiun xaipuv,
anno 3960, declarata mundo, et manifestata resuscitato in vitam
corpore, quod expositum erat in mortem crucis execrabilem, idque
virtute sua, qua Spiritus est sanctimoniae omnis autor in angelis
et bominibus, atque adeo ipsa sanctitas, naturam assumtam non
solum in articulo conceptus purissime sanctificans, sed etiam vita
post mortem rediviva plenissime glorificans; unde filius Dei, Deus
et homo, idoneus nobis Servator, unctus Propheta, Sacerdos, Rex
et Dominus nosfer, debellato peccato et morte, et triumphatis
hostibus, coelum ingressus ad dextram majestatis in solio consedit,
donis et muneribus inde Ecclesiam cumulans Ephes. iv. Nee
aUunde, aut ab aUo Paulus vocatus accepit gratis Apostolatum, pro
Christi nomine et ad gloriam Christi fidem, gentibus in justitiam
cum sanctitate, et salutem per evangeUum communieando, legatione
functurus, non tam inter Judaeos, quam inter omnes Gentes, qua-
rum ex numero est Romana omnium nobilissima, non tam sede et
domicUio, famaque imperii in omnes gentes constituti, quam Christi
vocatione, qua plerique non solum vocati a Christi Apostolis, sed
et ad Christi communionem vocati, non dicantur magis cogno-
mento, quam sint reapse, Christian!-. Paulus, inquam, talis tantus-
que Christi ad gentem etiam Romanam Apostolus scribit Epistolam
hanc, vobis quotquot Romae estis. Deo aeternum singulariter ada-
mati, sive iam vocati in Christi aocietatem sitis sive porro vocandi
ad vitam caste sancteque degendam, in spem gloriae sempiternae.
Atque hactenus pars procemii prima, uno verborum ambitu com-
prehensa, et rudiore a nobis peniciUo adumbrata : In qua Uceat
videre quis, cui, quid, qua de re, et cur scribat ; et cur sit, quod
scribit, attente legendum, et avide amplectendum : Quae dum
summa rerum tractandarum fastigia delibat, earum et divina majes-

396 CAPITIS PRIMI
tate attentionem, et iUustri brevitate docilitatem comparat ; quod
facit tersissimis verbis atque sententiis, adeo ut Ciceroniana via
omnis dicendi evanescat in fumos, et, si cum hac conferatur, De-
mosthenica. Secunda pars sequitur, de functione muneris Apostolici, in qua
est vehementis studii, et singularis erga Romanos benevolentiae
luculenta designatio ad mutuam benevolentiam conciliandam.
Partes muneris duae, Precatio, et Predicatio. Precatione assidua
se hactenus usum esse, praedicatione vero Evangelii coram uti
maxime voluisse, et qua- potest nunc uti. Precationis partes duae,
votum, sive optatio vulgo salutatio, et sv^agigiu, sive gratiarum
actio ; Tiaec Deo patri per Christum pro singulari beneficio fidei
Christianae Romanis datae redditur ; ilia a Deo Patre et Domino
lesu Christo petit omnia bona spiritualia sub gratiae et pacis
nominibus communicanda. Observa obiter hie et in omnibus aUis
Paulinis exordiis sKksrfytv verbi dupUcam, alteram in nominibus,
alteram in salutatione (ut dictum est) ad affectum animi arden-
tiorem significandum. In svfcapigia fidem Romanorum in toto
mundo celebrem esse synecdochice dicitur, cum in Ecclesiis tantum
Christianis ea praedicaret, nisi mavis, propter Imperii Romani in
orbe terrarum amplitudinem, divulgatam inter alienas adhuc a
Christo Gentes Romanorum conversionem ; sed neque hoc sensu
aberit synecdoche.
Quaeri potest, quis primus fundavit Romanam Ecclesiam, et cur
Apostolus tantopere optarit Romam venire, qui super alieno fun-
damento noluerit libenter aedificare, infra c. xv. v. 20. Quod ad
prius, verisimile aut unum aut plures eorum, quos nominat in calce
Epistolae, et quorum virtutes commendat Romanis imitandas ;*
haud scio an praecipue Andronicus, et Junias, quos et insignes inter
Apostolos esse, et ante se in Christo fuisse dicit, prima Romanae
Ecclesiae fundamenta jecerint. De Petro nihil neque hie (quem
sine contumelia, si Romae fuisset, praeterire non potuit) neque
aUbi usquam in sacris Uteris, quod faciat ad Petri cathedram in
perforatam Pontificis Romani sedem transformandam ; sed haec
* [Supp. hanc ecclesiam fundavisse ; quibus aut talibus omissis amxokoulu scripsit
auctor.]

ELENCHI. 397
alias. Ad alteram quaestionem commodius postea cap. xv. respon-
debitur. JLv-fcapigiuv probat, et gratulationem suam ob fidem Romanorum,
testimonio divino, et sacrosancta jurisjurandi reUgione, qua Deum
in testem advocat, sinceritatis suae conscium, et integritatis in
Evangelio filii sui administrando, se Romanorum mentionem inde-
sinenter facere, nimirum in agendis Deo gratiis pro collatis in eos
beneficiis, ut supra exposui, quod probat etiam precum assiduitate,
qua utitur, ut tandem expleat desiderium invisendi Romanos suum,
ad doctrinae communicationem, ut supra dictum est ; ad quam
priusquam accedam, obiter ponenda quaestio, cur cum et patris et
filii meminerit in petitione beneficiorum, et gratiarum actione pro
acceptis beneficiis, atque adeo in jurejurando, cur, inquam, nuUa
mentio facta ab eo est Spiritus Sancti ? An quia unus idemque Spi
ritus utriusque, procedens ab utroque, utrique coniunctus intelliga-
tur? cuius afflatu Paulus xa) svy^srai xai sv%apigs7, xa) "karg'svst xa)
•TTpoasv^srai, et per quem pater in Alio et exoratur, et confert omnia
beneficia ? hie est. Atque haec de precatione ; doctrina sequitur.
Ad functionem muneris Apostolici in doctrina administranda per
tinet duplex ratio, altera inter praesentes viva voce, altera scrip-
tione inter absentes : Prioris oportunitatem ut desideravit hactenus,
sic etiam nunc desiderat ; quin etiam capto consUio proposuit se
in viam dare, ut Romanos eadem de causa inviseret ; per Ulum ergo
non stetit, quominus munere suo etiam hac in parte fungeretur.
Hujus tam studii, quam propositi sui Romanos videndi finem pluri-
bus explanat, nunc doni spiritualis communicandi, nunc confirmandi,
nunc consolandi, aut cohortandi, denique fructus habendi, aut per-
cipiendi verbis : quae omnia ad doctrinae tradendae usum et fruc-
tum pertinent, quanquam diversa ratione, ut est aUas expositum.
V. 13. (Vt'fructum aliquem habeam,)
Modeste aliquem dixit, ut supra av^ffagax'kridrivai, et signate,
habeam viz. quaesitum studio, et labore meo partum ac quodammodc*
mihi apostolo debitum inter vos, non secus atque inter alias gentes,
quibus multum profuit mea praedicatio. Argumentum a parium

398 CAPITIS PRIMI
aut similium comparatione ; altera similitudinis nota ovru sKKsitsi
hie iv aTodoasi, ut statim postea in itgordaii xadug.
V. 14. Alteram argumentum ab adjuncto aere alieno, quo obstrin-
gitur omnibus omnium gentium ordimbus (sive graeci sint, sive bar-
bari: sive sapientes (ut GaUorum Druides, Aegyptiorum sacerdotes,
Persarum Magi, Chaldaeorum Genethliaci, Indorum Brachmanes et
Gymnosophistae) sive insipientes et Idiotae, etc.) quod itidem Ulus-
trat similium aut parium contentione, qua suam expromptam alacri-
tatem ad praedicandum Romanis Evangelium arguit, ro xar \\hs ad
dit, quo indicet scripto se nunc facere, quod viva voce non potest.
Atque haec est altera doctrinae tradendae ratio apostolica per scrip-
turam Novi Testamenti ; qua se profitetur ivayyshiZpd&ai, ne quia
putet assa voce solummodo praedicari evangelium. Atque haec de
functione muneris apostolici in precatione et doctrina; in quibus
proponendis affectus paterni studium ardentissimum erga Romanos
omni ex parte se effundit: hue spectat votum, quo bona omnia Ro-^
manis op tat divinitus; hue sv^agigta, qua gratias agit Deo pro Ro
manorum fide; hue item spectat huius gratulationis confirmatio
omnis a perpetua mensione Romanorum, et assidua postidatione in
omni precum genere.
Quid numinis divini ad hoc obsignandum advocata in testimonium
conscientia ? Quid desiderium vehemens et diuturnum invisendi
Romanos ? Quid propositum constans, ac saepe repetitum ad utili-
tatem et solatium Romanorum ? ut, nihil dicam de ea, qua Romanos
prosequitur dignatione, dum se quamvis apostolum usque adeo de-
mittit, ut sibi Romanos in spirituaUum donorum communicandorum
facultate tantum non exaequet, et quod a se profecturum in rem
eorum sit, in beneficii apud se coUocati locum ducat, nedum ut de
Ulis bene merendo sibi consulat, aut eos sibi hoc nomine devinctos
putet, ut quibus se obaeratum ultro profiteatur. Observentur hie
verba ra tJ6ji simul et mores amabiles" supra modum, et pihav-
6gu7rfav dulcissimam apostolica gravitate temperatam exprimentia
divinitus. Et ut hunc locum concludam, affectus ad benevolentiam
conciliandam mitiores spirituali fervore, et divino artificio pruden*

ELENCHI. 399
tissime, simul et sanctissime tractantur, adeo ut ferreus sit, ac pror-
sus inhumanus, qui tantum, tam sanctum amorem ultro se offeren-
tem non redamet. Atque haec de utraque exordii parte, totoque
exordio, quod accuratum adeo et elaboratum est, ut nihil quicquam
sit eius generis apud ullum scriptorem cum eo comparandum. Se-
quitur pars secunda et epistolae praecipua, quae disputatione de
doctrina et adhortatione ad vitam et mores Christiano homine dig-
nos continetur.
V. 16. Gloriosum sibi ducit apostolus Evangelii praecomum, ut
cujus virtus sit plane divina, et quibusvis hominibus absque ullo
gentium discrimine salutaris ; quamobrem apud Esaiam brachium
Dei vocatur. Hie disceptanda quaestio de statu huius epistolae,
sitne salus per EvangeUum an justitia ex fide conferenda ? Omnino
est gratuita in Christo salus, ad quam probandam tam justificationis,
quam sanctificationis doctrina omnis affertur : Est enim Evangelium
Koyog aurrigiag, et Christus inEvangeUo aurrjg, nee est aliud sub caelo
nomen salutare, et apostolus expromptam suam ad Evangelizandum
alacritatem, v. 15, professus est : Quin et res ipsa docet, tam hac
propositione 16 ver. habetur, cujus probandae causa fidei justitia
11, abducitur, quam tota subsequens disputatio, et in primis con-
clusio de certitudine salutis 5, 6, 7, et 8. capp. tum ex justificatione,
tum etiam ex sanctificatione saepius illata. Hue spectant etiam
iragansasig ad vitae sanctimoniam variae et multiplices, atque adeo
de aeterna praedestinatione doctrina iam inde ab arcanis Dei con-
siUis alte repetita, et uno verbo dicam corde creditur ad iustitiam,
ore fit confessio ad salutem ; ut mirum videri possit, quid pleris-
que interpretibus in mentem venerit, ut justitiae primas tribue-
rint ; cum de ea hie non nisi salutis causa agatur, et hanc ex Ula
concludat, sitque rerum expetendarum ultimum atque extremum
salus aeterna, cuius causa virtus omnis, ceteraque omnia, atque
adeo justitia expetitur. Deum semper excipio, cuius gloria est
tanto magis expetenda, quanto ipse est nobis, rebusque omnibus
creatis ulterior finis ac praestabiUor. Hie meminisse operae pre-
tium est differentiae illius quam tractat Apostolus 2 Cor. iii. inter

400 CAPITIS PRIMI
legem et Evangelium : ilia mortis, hoc salutis ministerium dicitur;
InteUige igitur Paulum detrahere legi, quod hie tribuit Evan
gelio ; tribuit autem potentiam salutis conferendae ex justitia fidei,
quam et ipsum confert; Legis vero ddwapiav, cum ad iustifica-
tionem, tum ad sanctificationem luculente demonstrat, ac proinde
neque ad salutem valere necessario colligit. Salus igitur non ex
lege, sed ex Evangelio quibusvis hominibus quaerenda. Atque
haec de statu epistolae.
Probatur autem salus per Evangelium conferri quatuor primis
capp. et concluditur, c. v. Ex sanctificatione vero, capp. vi. vii.,
eadem confirmatur.
V. 17. E'« rfgsug slg irigiv. Exponi solent haec verba de fide
indies augescente,.cui interpretationi suffragari putatur unus, atque
alter locus quoad phrasin, ut vulgo aestimatur ; ex posteriore ad
Cor. cap. Ui., v. ult. awo do&g slg do%av, adducitur; verum, cum bona
optimorum virorum venia, Uceat nobis, e^ verbis et argumento magis
congruentem interpretationem afferre. Loquitur' ibi Apostolus de
ministerio Evangelico, cuius administri sunt ApostoU, non velata
facie, ut Moses, sed retecta ; non splendorem evanidum inde emi-
cantem, sed immensam Dei gloriam in Christi facie refulgentem ;
non tabuUs saxeis, quibus insculpta occidens litera, sed tabulis cor
dis mollibus, ut est caro, quibus lex Jehovae inscribitur ; non legis
ministerio, sed Evangelii praedicatione tanquam in speculo conspi*
ciendam repraesentantes : Cuius gloriae imagine transformantur
auditores, ut et ipsi quoque Christo glorioso conformentur, ducta
nimirum imagine a gloria, quae est in Christi facie, ad gloriam
auditoribus imprimendam, idque, non ministrorum vi, sed Domini,
qui Spiritus est, virtute spirituali. -Itaque duplex hie gloria, qua-
rum altera alterius causa est ; nimirum ea quae est Christi, relucena
in praedicatione Evangelii, causa est gloriae in auditoribus, sicuti
gemmae scriptura sui imaginem cerae imprimit, et causa est im-
pressae in cera figurae conformis.
Ergo hoc nihU ad eiusdem in eodem incrementum. Multo minus
ad rem facit xaff vxsgfio'kTjv slg vTSgfio\?iv, % Cor. iv. 17. Quum

ELENCHI. 401
et verba ipsa excessum significent, et propositio sit alia, atque aUus
modi. Superest ut nostram interpretationem, vel Pauli potius
mentem, illustremus ; nam ut nusquam alibi in earn sententiam sic
loquitur Apostolus, ita fidei incrementum esset hoc loco anrgogbi'o-
vvffov. Fatenturinterpretes de justitia ex fide hoc v. 17, agiper Evan
gelium conferenda; necesse est ergo, ut justitia Dei sit ex fide jus
titia, ex Pauli sensu et verbis hoc loco, quod non negant interpretes,
ut sit constructio &xatoo~vv*i hov % sx vicrsug, xar eKksi-^iv articuli
Rom. ix. 30, et x. 6, ut divina humanae, fidei justitia operum
justitiae opponi inteUigatur, et Evangelium legi, sive justitia Evan
gelica legali. Superest ergo quid sit sig Titrnv explicare. Superiori
versu dixit slg aurr\p\av, quod quid sit nemo dubitat. Cur magis hie
haerendum ? annon slg iciariv, significant in vel ad fidem ? ut paulo
supra sig aurqgiav, in vel ad salutem. Sensus ergo est et verborum
constructio, Justitia Dei, quae est ex fide, revelatur in Evangelio,
vel per EvangeUum, in fidem, vel ad fidem, ut sit hie finis proximus
et effectum propinquissimum efficacis patefactionis Evangelii, viz.,
fidei ingeneratio in audientium mentibus. Fides ingenerata prehen-
dit tanquam manu justitiam Dei, quae est ex fide, atque hoc est alte-
rum effectum praedicati Evangelii : confert ergo revelatum Evan
geUum primo fidem, deinde per fidem justitiam fidei : neque enim
nos aliter capere aut obtinere justitiam ex fide, vel fidei justitiam
possumus, quam ingenerata nobis per Evangelium fide ; q. d. Apos
tolus, Evangelium conferendo fidem confert justitiam quae est ex fide:
Ergo, Evangelium confert salutem, sive est potentia Dei ad salutem ;
vel Evangelium est effieax ad fidei justitiam, Ergo et ad salutem.
Atque haec EvangeUi efficacia ad conferendam justitiam, legis im-
potentiae, quae est inefficax ad operum justitiam, opponi inteUi-
gimus. Vide quae supra in hunc locum scripta sunt. Evangelium
ergo tria conferre dicitur, fidem, et fidei justitiam, et ex fidei jus
titia salutem : quod prophetica sexcentos ante annos praedictione,
eaque Sanctis prodita Uteris, confirmatur. " Sicut scriptum est, Jus
tus ex fide victurus est." Quibus verbis haec tria in Christi ad-
ventu gratis per Evangelium exhibenda praedictum fuit : Nam
posteaquam de impietate, et injustitia tam Judaeorum, quam Bar-
2 c

402 CAPITIS PRIM1
bararum Gentium cum Deo expostulasset Propheta Imo cap. jussus
fuit visionem tabuUs, quas manu habebat, inscribere Uteris quasi
uncialibus, ut a quovis vel in transcursu legi minimo possint ne-
gotio. Visionem vero hanc in longinquum, idemque statum et
certum tempus rejectam esse monet, quam visionem (inquit) effa-i
bitur (supple) Deus, vel Christus venturus termino suo, nimirum
tempore praestituto, hoc fuit Ijrm xar a xaigov ; et lv "ifkrigu^art
xuiguv vocat Apostolus, exactis nimirum non septuaginta modo,
sed etiam septies septuaginta annis, sub decursum vitae suae peri-
culum, hoc est Yjb, ad finem, ut triennium vitae Christi ultimum
cum semestri ante mortem spatio innuere videatur, quo tempore
Christus Evangelium annuntiaturus fuit, qui, ut ait Propheta, non
mentietur aut fallet : Si cunctabitur, expecta eum, nam veniendo
veniet i.e. certissime veniet; quae verba, quamvis alii ad visionem re-
ferant, Apostolus ad Hebr. cap. x. de Christo interpretatur, O eg-fco-
psvog rfesi xa) ov ygoviey, Ego utrumque complector, et Evangelium
cum Christo, etChristum cumEvangelio. CujusEvangelii summam
programmate publico comprehensam, et tabulis eleganter inscriptam
(quae tabulae Evangelicae obscurioribus Mosaicae legis tabulis
opponi videntur) his verbis paucissimis complectitur : — Justus ex
fide sua, vel eius (i.e. Christi Domini venturi) victurus est : Ubi in-
justitiae, et impietati omnium hominum, (de qua Imo cap.) et super-
biae, sine vrogo'ky, ut cum Apostolo ad Hebr Joquar, subductioni ex
infidelitate eodem versu opponit justitiam, eamque ex fide, quam
vita aeterna consequet et secundum quam justitiam Justus ex fide
.victurus est ; quae justitia neque humana, neque operum justitia
potuit esse, cum omnes homines tam domesticos, quam exteroa
omnis injustitiae reos peregerit coram Deo propheta cap. 1. ut re-
liqua sit ex oraculo justitia indignis conferenda, ex mera Dei in
Christo venturo ad Evangelium exhibendum gratia; ac proinde
Dei justitia, eaque ex fide, non ex operibus, ut dixi, per Evangeli
um non per legem patefacienda, et ut ait Apostolus vvv Ss %ug)g vbibou
hxamvm mQav'sgurai, de hac justitia exhibita disserens, Rom. iii*
Itaque haec tria, Justitia, Fides, vita aeterna, sive justitia ex fide,
et salus, hac dictione prophetica promittuntur gratis in Christo per

ELENCHI. 403
EvangeUI revelationem communicanda. Atque ita confirmat Apos
tolus quod de Evangelio 16 et 17 vv. scribit, quodque proemii
initio posuerat, EvangeUum fuisse a Deo ante promissum per pro-
phetas in Scripturis sanctia. Viderint igitur Uli qui negant Pro-
phetae verbis probari justitiam et salutem per Evangelium conferre :
Cum et hoc totum complexum contineatur hoc oraculo, et Apos
tolus utrumque exposuerit, et subjungat confirmationis causa, non
statum quaestionis, ut nonnulli volunt, Prophetae verbis, ut ma-
jorem autoritatem habeat oratio, sed divinum testimonium sanctia
proditum Uteris, quasi ex syngrapha, et obsignatis tabulis agere
videatur, hoc enim est #a&yj y'sygwrrai, sicut scriptum est, non
exprimendi, aut explicandi tantum sententiam suam causa, verum
etiam probandi, propheta teste omni exceptione majore, et tabulis
sanctae Scripturae authenticis confirmandi, quod testimonium pro
phetae ita urget Apostolus, ut non solum in hac Epistola, sed etiam
in ea quae est ad Galatas, et ad Hebraeos ponat pro doctrinae suae
et EvangelU fundamento : Nee mirum, cum Propheta ipse paulo infra
v. 14. eiusdem cap. ii. de cognitione gloriae Jehovae, et benedic^
tionum inde consequentium, inatar aquarum in mari, abundantia
vaticinet, et v. 20., Jehovam in templo sanctitatis suae, i.e. Deum
patrem in Christo per Spiritum sanctificantem praesentia sua Ec
clesiam suam coUocet. Et cap. Ui. in divina Ula sua, et incompa-
rabUi tephUla xa) dsqtrsi, ut loquitur Jacobus, Iv'sgyovfjb'svfi, v. 17. glo-
rietur gloriatione fidei Evangelicae propter justitiam et salutem
EvangeUcam verbis plane Evangelicis, sibi verbis singularibus Dei
gratiam et pacem in Christo EvangeUcam applicans. Verba sunt,
"quamvis ficus non effloresceret, et nullus esset proventus in vitibus,
mentiretur opus olivae, et agrorum nuUus ederet cibum, abscin-
deret hostis ab ovili gregem, et nuUum esset armentum in bubiU-
bus, Ego tamen in Jehova exultabo, gestiam in Deo salutis meae ;
Jehova Dominus robur meum, vv. 17-19." Unde videtur Apostolus
triplicem fidei gloriationem, 1. sub spe gloriae Dei, 2. in afflictioni-
bus, 3. in Deo per D. Jesum, quinto capite desumpsisse. Neo
aUunde aptius videtur sumpta iUa injustitiae humanae hmrvwursigv
quae est a v. 18. cap. 1. ad finem usque, quam ex 2. cap. huiua
2c2

404 CAPITIS PRIMI
prophetiae, post verba iUa " Justus ex fide sua vivet," nisi quod or-
dinem in sceleribus numerandis invertat Apostolus divina quadam
prudentia, nam propheta primo de ambitione et superbia, 2°. de
rapacitate et avaritia, 3°. de divitate * et truculentia, 4°. de luxu
probroso, et nefariis libidinibus ac tandem ultimo loco de im-
pietate et Idolomania, judicia sceleribus analoga tragicis verbis
exaggerans : Apostolus vero ab impietate, et injustitia in Deum
sive Idolatria exorsus, inde velut e fonte rivulos, vel potius e sen-
tina aordes, omnium flagitiorum et scelerum secundum ultionem
divinam tanquam dvri (/jto§ iav deducit, distinctis gradibus tam im-
pietatis in Deum, quam facinorum inde emergentium ex justo Dei
judicio, ut triplici in Deum culpae triplex in homines paena irro-
getur analoga, ut supra dictum est in hujus loci explicatione ; quae
omnia non minus ab Apostolo tragice, quam a Propheta exagger-
antur, ut utrobique liceat videre picturam hominis extra gratiam in
Christo egregie depictam, ac maxime gentium profanarum. In
summa praedictionem propheticam Apostolica enarratio luculentis-
sime iUustrat, non peruUam occupationem, cujusmodi hie nonnulli
comminiscuntur, sed confirmationem ejus; quod propositum fuit
ab Apostolo de EvangeUi efneacia ad veram salutem ex vera jus
titia subministrandam. Ex quibus omnibus liquido constare potest,
quod Petrus de fidei nostrae fine, i.e. salute animarum, scriptum
reliquit, 1. Epis. i. 10. Teg) %g aarrjgiag listyrriaav, xa) l^sgsvvriffav
rgo(p?jrai, ot -xsg) tfjg sig vpdg yjdgirog wgotpnrsvaavrsg etc. et v. 12.
Gig ccxsKakv<pdti, on bv% lavroig, fipiv $s hrjxovovv avrd, a vvv
avnyy'skri vfuv, ha, etc.
Sequitur altera probatio, cujus principium est a reliquiis lucis
naturalis pristinae petitum, nimirum a Dei natura sapientissimi,
potentissimi ac justissimi ut cujus perspicaciam nihU latere potest,
quantumvis occultum, quod non videat : cujus manus (ut in pro-
verbio est de Regibus) adeo longae sunt, ut eas effugere nemo possit ;
cujus justitia tanta, ut nullum peccatum reUnquat impunitum;
cujus denique aTgoouvo\ntya neque generis, neque gentis, neque
personae uIUus, quae in externis posita est, ullum respectum habet.
* [Qu. divitatione.']

ELENCHI. 405
Hoc principium natura notum c. ii. a v. 2. ad 18. adhibetur, et varie
illustratur ad omnes homines convincendos, estque propositio de-
monstrationis, " Judicium Dei est secundum veritatem in eos, qui
talia agunt," v. 2. c. U., i.e. Omnes injusti sunt condemnationi ob-
noxii ; Omnes homines extra Evangelium et Christum, sive in se,
et operibus suis considerati, sunt injusti ; Ergo omnes homines extra
Evangelium coram Deo sunt condemnationi obnoxil, ut qui sint xai
dvawo'hbyriroi, xa) dvroxardxgiroi. Ass[ertio ?] ejusdem demon-
strationis disputatur in genere a v. 18. cap. i. ad finem ejusdem, con
tra omnes homines, ad quos convincendos lux naturae in mentibus re-
Uqua, et ab iis violata reddit eos dvaTroikoyrirovg. Quod si qui sint,
qui se aliis meUoresputent, quod alios aut reprehendant, aut damnent,
in aUorum vitiis notandis cernuU ; * hoc ipso hypocritae alios dam-
nando se ipsi condemnant, quippe eorundem scelerum rei, propter
quae alios aut reprehendunt, aut damnant. Tergiversantes citat
ad tribunal Dei, justissimi judicis, qui licet ad tempus non pareat
modo, sed etiam utibilem se ac beneficum indignis praebeat, tamen
contemptum gratiae, qua ad resipiscentiam invitat improbos, tan
dem summo jure et severissime ulciscetur, et vindicabit in obfir-
matos animos, et impoenitentes. Ubi tribus nominibus lenitatem
(sive ex hypothesi improborum sibi secure in vitiis indulgentium
lentitudinem) Dei exprimit, qua abutuntur hypocritae, divini con-
sUii ignoratione, usque totidem nomina, severitatem Dei significan-
tia, inverso ordine opponit. Est autem "Xgfiarbrrig, ea facultas, qua
se Deus commodum et (ut ita dicam) utibilem praebet usibus in-
dignissimorum hominum, de male merentibus bene merendo : Cui
opponit %f/isga Biaxgitriag, qua malos male multabit, et dignas sce
leribus poenas rependet.
' Avoy?j est tolerantia, et quasi conniventia, qua ad tempus dissi-
mulat se videre, aut curare quid agant, aut admittant in se flagitii
contumaces. Cui opponit ^(Joigav dvoxa'kv-^isag, quando retecturus,
et in pubUcum coram mundo prolaturua est ra xgvtra ruv xag-
* [Sic in MS., sed ubi auctor tale verbum invenerit nulla conjectura augurari pos
sum. Si verbum perspicaces vel oculati reponas, veram fortasse auctoris mentem con-
sequeris.]

406 CAPITIS PRIMI ELENCHI.
hiuv. Denique [Aaxgodvpia, qua differt et prolatat iram, i.e. ulti-
onem, ad tempus, sed non prorsus aufert, ut, quod vulgo dici solet,
" quod differtur non aufertur," hie locum habeat. Cui opponit fas-
gavogyrjg, diem ultionis, qua vindictam sumpturus est de praefrac-
tis et cervicosis. Hac occasione sententiam propositionis syUogismi
proponit et explicat cap. ii. v. 2, et deinceps ; eamque tam genti
bus avopoig, quam Judaeis kvvopoig applicat occupando, quae in
contrarium obiici possent.

T'skog.

COMMENTARIUS IN EPIST. PAULI AD ROMANOS,
CAP. I.
Epistola Pauli ad Romanos est totius Christianismi divina
epitome ; constat autem tribus partibus — Tgo7\6yu, i.e. praeloquio,
"koyu et sitrikoyu, sive capite, corpore et calce, instar perfecti
animalis, ut loquitur Plato de omni oratione perfecta. Prologus
sive praescriptio ad 17 v. de sua vocatione, et studio erga Ro
manos quo ad scribendum incitatus fuit. De sua vocatione agit
prima periodo, ubi notanda ellipsis verbi ad affectum exprimen-
dum, quemadmodum et in salutatione. "Paulus Romanis" — sub.
siuarsKksi, seu ygdpsi. Subjectum hujus enuntiati multis argu-
mentis ampUficatur, et illustratur ab adjuncto munere, sive officio,
in genere, quod servus Christi sive publicum gerens sub Christo
rege et Domino ministerium ; in specie, quod apostolus, ad quod
munus legitime et efficaciter vocatus sit, per Antiochenum pres-
byterium, et a Deo apstrag, ab utere, i.e. aet.erno, Gal. 1. (xXqrog
autem non semper significat efficaciter vocatus, Math. xx. 16
TroXko) yog hai xkfjrbi, okiyai ft sx\sxroi, contra receptam dis-
tinetionem) nee vocatus modo, sed etiam apogidf/jsvog, separatus,
quippe autore Spiritu Sancto, Act. xiii. (ubi aperte distinguit
Spiritus Sanctus inter d<pogis^ov, et xk^triv, et hanc illo priorem
docet) ; sub. idque ad Evangelium praedicandum, quod est
subjectum sive materia, in qua tractanda versatur apostolatus
ut vocatio et separatio sunt in causis efficientibus apostolum.
EvangeUi vero causa efficiens assumitur Deus, qui est Evangelii
et autor et Dominus, ut cujus ipsum est gratuita et ultronea pro-
missio, jam inde a primo hominis lapsu in paradiso facta primum,
ac deinceps repetita, ac subinde illustrata pro vario et multiplici
gradu patefactionis, quod verbo sTtiyysi'karo significatur. Evan-

408 COMMENTARIUS,
gelium enim unum idemque re et substantia, ratione et tempore
distinguitur, ut dici possit aut promissum, in quod patres ante
Christum crediderant ; et exhibitum cum Christo et per Christum.
Unde natura EvangeUum, quippe gratuita polUcitatio legalibus ope
rum meritis opponi intelligitur. Antiquitatem indicat praepositio
ffgo, ne novitatis nomine elevetur ejus autoritas. Certitudo vero
et indubitata Veritas dupUci testimonio, eoque divino, commendatur,
quod se prophetae fuerint hujus divinae promissionis interpretes ac
testes. Sanctae vero Uterae a Spuitu Sancto, amanuensibus pro
phetis, conscriptae, et ab ipso Spiritu Sancto dictatae, tabulae
plane authenticae, ut de quarum autoritate nefas sit dubitare.
Subjectum vero Evangelii adaequatum Filius Dei, persona una dua-
bus constans naturis, humana, secundum quam filius Davidis, ac
proinde Abrahami secundum promissionem et est et dicitur Math.
i. Luc. iii. in genealogia Christi, ut Gen. xii. et xxii. et passim 2
Sam. vii. 1 Chronic, xvii., hoc est quod dicit factum, anno viz. mundi
conditi 3927, (Spiritu Sancto Mariam virginem obumbrante) ex
semine Davidis secundum carnem. Divina natura neque facta ne
que genita, sed per aeternam generationem a patre cum filio com-
municata jam inde ab omni aeternitate, et in plenitudine temporum
mundo patefacta et manifestata ; hoc enim est ogioS'svrog anno 3960.
Additur sv hvvdpst, sive ad manifestationem referas, sive ad Filium
Dei, cujus potentia declarata fuit ad ipsius divinitatem declarandam
resurrectione a mortuis, qua virtute sua, non aUena resurrexit a
morte redivivus Jesus Christus, Dominus noster, quae tres appel-
lationes includunt utramque naturam in una eademque persona, et
bfficium mediatoris et servatoris prophetico, sacerdotaU, et re<rio
munere designant. Tlvsvpu dyiuGvvqg vocat divinam naturam em-
phatice, et xar l^o-^v, cum electi Angeli, et piorum animae sint
spiritus etiam sancti; Ideo non spiritum modo vocat, sed etiam
sanctimoniae spiritum, i.e. autorem omnis sanctitatis, quae est in
electis tam angelis quam hominibus, ut qui sit ipsa sanctitas. Sic
Joan. iii. Christus Deum Spiritum esse dicit, et apostolus ad
Hebr. ix., Christum ait per aeternum Spiritum, i.e. divinam naturam,
obtulisse semet ipsum, Denique hie respondent ysvopsvov xard

cap. i. 1-7. 409
adgxa, et bgicfo'svrog xara Trvsvpa i. e. facto quoad humanam natu
ram, declarato quoad divinam. Unum igitur hie praecipuum divi-
nitatis argumentum, resurrectio a mortuis, li dvaardasug (sub. awo
vsxgav,) quae resurrectio specimen evidentissimum divinae potentiae
et argumentum longe efficacissimum fuit, quo usus est Petrus et
Paulus Act. ii. et xUi. Si resurrexit a mortuis, certe et morti tra-
ditus fuit propter peccata nostra, et excitato a morte ad justifica-
tionem nostri Rom. iv. ver. ultimo, quae duo summa sunt ac praeci
pua Evangelii capita, unde maxima ad nos duo beneficia redeunt,
expiatio peccatorum et sanctificatio, haec a resurrectione, ilia a
morte dependens, ut postea dicetur. Atque ita Dei Filius verua
homo, verusqueDeus, EvangelU subjectum describitur, in quo Evan
gelio administrando versatur apostolus, cujus apostolatus autorem
agnoscit Christum ita descriptum, Ephes. iv. 11, quem Apos
tolatum gratiam vocat, quasi gratuitum Dei donum, et beneficium
gratis in se coUatum. Objectum vero Apostolatus sui Gentes nom-
inatim expressit, addita nota universaU Omnes, ut alibi se doctorem
gentium vocat ; ergo etiam Romanorum. Finis autem et usus est
obedientia fidei, quae est effectum Evangelii, q. d. ut quaevis gentes
credant, et obediant Evangelio. Hie autem Apostolatus est
summa dignitas, ut quae sit legatio pro Christi nomine, ita enim
conjungo axoarok^v vmg rov hvbparog avrov, sic 2 Cor. v., pro
Christo legatione fungimur, ubi et summus finis attingitur, nimirum
gloria Dei in Christo ex gratuita salute electorum, quae sequitur
obedientiam fidei; finis item subordinatus et minus principalis.
Verbum skd^opsv videtur opponi Pseudo-Apostolorum violentae
irruptioni in ecclesiam, et usurpationisine justa vocatione. Romanos
fideles ex gentium numero esse, et ad suum Apostolatum pertinere
docet, unde sequitur et se ex officU necessitate scribere ad Romanos,
et Ulos ad audientiam et attentionem obstrictos esse, quae conclusio
subticetur et quo spectat tota praescriptio. Atque haec de subjecto
primi enuntiati multis argumentis Ulustrato ad Apostolicam autori
tatem Ulustrandam. Attributum sequitur, Romanis fidelibus (sub.
scribit,) quos describit a subjecto loco,, et duobus adjunctis ; locus
hie est ; omnibus qui estis Romae, quibus verbis non solum cives

410 COMMENTARIUS,
Romanos, qui Romae agebant, sed etiam incolas omnes, et inquilinos
modo fideles compeUat : fideUum vero descriptio divino amore ab
aeterno, et sancta vocatione in tempore comprehenditur, ut antea
xr^irovg Iqaov X.gio~rov efficaciter vocatos per EvangeUum ad Chris
tum fide amplectendum, et hie xXqroTg dyioig : nam ex aydrrjg rov
-hov immenso iUo Dei amore in Christo per Evangelium vocamur ad
sanctitatem, quae est divinae gratiae in nobis effectum, et imputatae
gratis obedientiae Christi in justitiam testimonium, nee minus elec-
tionis argumentum, quam aeternae vitae pignus.
Hactenus officium PauU, et munus Apostolicum erga Romanorum
Ecclesiam. Sequitur studium et benevolentia Apostolica : quae
partim salutatione, partim gratulatione explicatur, ac primo salu
tatio Apostolica, i.e. religiosa et sancta. Gratiae et pacis nominibus
fontem spiritualium benedictionum cum rivulis omnibus intelligit,
ita ut gratia justificationis ex fide, et pax erga Deum, ut est initio
v. cap., spem caelestem et caetera omnia spiritualia beneficia com-
plectantur, quae a patre in Christo per Spiritum Sanctum in
electos conferuntur. Unde ut patris, ita filii divinitas hac fausta
precatione divinae largitionis argumento arguitur: quin etiam
ApostoU erga Romanos studium et benevolentia tantorum bono
rum imprecatione commendatur ; nee minus sancta gratiarum
actione, qua Romanis fidei celebritatem ex laetitia, quam capit ex
eorum felicitate gratulatur ; — Ubi non minus Christum filium
Cum Deo patre conjungit, ex aequo tanti boni autorem. Probat
hanc suam propensionem animi et laetitiam ex feUci eorum statu
et fide, studio, quo incenditur provehendae et confirmandae iUo
rum fidei, quippe desiderio illos invisendi hanc eandem ob cau
sam ; quod desiderium arguitur precum assiduitate, et perpetua
Romanorum memoria sive mentione eorum, quam probat testi
monio divino, Deum ipsum advocans in testem, idque sine omni
fuco, ex animi sinceritate, qua Deo servit in Evangelii Christi
praedicatione (ubi nota Evangelium ut Dei patris supra, ita filii
ipsius EvangeUum hie dici, quia de filio supra v. 3.,) q. d.,
preeibus assiduis a Deo contendo ut me ad vos deducat (Ivohadh-
ffopai autem ad verbum, bene datus fuero in viam ex Dei voluntate)

cap. i. 7-16. 411
impertiendi doni spirituaUs, et vestri confirmandi causa; quod
statim sancta prudentia ac modestia temperat, ac quasi corrigit subji-
ciendo mutuam sive consolationem, sive cohortationem percipien-
dam ; ut se non minus paratum ad discendum et accipiendum in-
uuat, quam ad tradendum et docendum. Denique occurrit objec-
tioni : — Si hoc tuum est studium ac tantum desiderium nostri in
visendi, cur tam diu distulisti adventum ? Respondet se proposuisse
quidem apud se saepius, sed impeditum fuisse atque adeo vetitum
{ut innuit verbum sxukvdtfv, causam impedimenti vide xv. 22.,)
idque haud dubie divinitus, ubi finem rursus assumit pari modes-
stia, ut fructum aliquem habeat : — ut fructuosum sit ejus minis
terium Romanis, quod in accepti beneficii, ac emolumenti loco
ducit. Postremo se in aere quasi alieno, et debitorem Romanis esse,
quod Ulustrat parium aut simiUum argumento, et a genere argu-
mentatur, Omnibus cujuscunque gentis, aut ordinis, aut conditionis
sum debitor, ergo et Romanis. Ut profuit aUis Apostolatus meus,
ita veUm et paratus sum ut prosit Romanis ; quod probat affectione
animi sui, et aestimatione EvangeUi, cujus tantum abest ut eum
pudeat, ut Deo glorietur maxime, ut is cujus labor in Evangelio non
fuerit irritua in domino, ut nuper innuebat, et aUbi totidem verbis
scribit, vide infra xv., 17, 18, 19, 20. Est enim in his verbis " non
me pudet," Utotes sive yAiaeig. Cur de EvangeUo ita glorietur
causam reddit descriptione quadam EvangeUi a causa efficiente
atque effeeto, et adjuncta potentia Dei ipsius ad salutem quorumvis
hominum conficiendam ; q. d., Evangelium est organum, quo Deus
exerit potentiam suam servandis electis, tam ex gentibus, quam ex
Judaeis ; quod et ipse in me expertus sum, et quotidie in aliis ex-
perior : Non est igitur, cur me pudeat Evangelii, ut ab ejus prae
dicatione desistam, sed est cur pergam alacriter in hoc cursu Evan-
geUco ; et Romanis cum id non permittatur coram viva voce, saltern
absens scribendo suppleam. Atque ita ingreditur secundam Epis
tolae partem, quam "kbyov et ygafyqv appellavimus, quae extenditur
ad xv., 14. Cujus summa propositio sive conclusio haec est
trimembris ; Evangelium salutem affert fidem conferendo qui-

412 COMMENTARIUS,
busvis servandis. Nam quod dicit, cuivis credenti, innuit Evan
gelium esse credendi seu fidei instrumentum, quaquam obscuriua
hie in prolepsi, tamen et sequente v. si dextre inteUigatur, et in
progressu,puta cap. x. apertissime demonstrat, ubi verbum fidei quod
praedicamus appellat Evangelium. Hujus duae sunt partes ; prior,
doctrina de justificatione fidei ad salutem tam gentium quam Judae-
orum usque ad cap. xii. ; posterior, exhortatio ad sanctificationem
quorumvis tam gentium, quam Judaeorum ad xv. 14. Quod
Judaeos anteponat ordine gentibus, ideo est, quod oportuerit
Judaeis, quorum praerogativae infra ix. 4, 5, habentur, primum
annuntiari Evangelium, cujus promissionibus longe suavissimis
aUici oportuit ex oraculo Noachi Japhetum, ut habitet in tentorUs
Semi, Gen. ix. Disputatur autem justificationis ex fide doctrina
quatuor capitibus ; 5to concluditur ex ea spes salutis certissima ; et
sanctificatio justificationia effectum ac certum testimonium, atque
adeo aeterna salutis pignus 6to, 7to, et prima parte cap. 8vi. Ut
et altera ejusdem capitis parte justificatorum et sanctificatorum, atque
adeo per adoptionem fiUorum Dei aeterna salus et gloria certissima
magnificentissime concluditur, 9no, lOmo, llmo capp. tam Genti
bus, quam Judaeis communem hanc salutis et justificationis rationem,
ex aeterno Dei decreto et praedestinatione deducit. Judaeorumque
magna ex parte rejectionem ad tempus, Gentium vero quasi in lo
cum eorum substitutionem tanto ante praedictam divinis oraculis
confirmat. Aixuiotrvvri ydg hov.'] Justitia Dei quae est fide
retegitur per Evangelium ad fidem ingenerandam animis elec-
torum. Ergo Evangelium conferendo fidem, et ex fide justi
tiam, confert salutem. Justitiam Dei dvrihrixug j'ustitiae huma-
nae, et naturae viribus praestandae oppositam inteUigimus. Ean-
dem justitiam ex fide vel fidei justitiam appeUatam justitiae ope
rum opponit quemadmodum aperte, cap. Ui. v. 22, justitiam Dei
per fidem lesu Christi vocat, et c. ix. v. 30, justitiam quae est
ex fide, et cap. x. v. 3, opponit Dei justitiam propriae Judaeorum
justitiae, et justitiam quae est ex lege, v. 5, justitiae quae est ex
fide, v. 6. Itaque hie est trajectio, et ellipsis articuli; sic ero-o con
strue, foxaioavvq hov % lx nisrsug lv avru d-proxakvTrsrui lig riariv,

cap. i. 16-17. 413
ut eandem justitiam et Dei et fidei hie diversa ratione inteUigas
appelari ; eamque Evangelio patefieri non irrito conatu, sed effica
citer ad fidem gignendam ; hoc enim est slg iriartv, ut supra slg
ffurrigtav ad salutem conferendam, atque ita significatur efficacia
Evangelii sive potentia Dei perlioc suum instrumentum, quo fidem
efficit in audientium animis ad fidei justitiam apprehendendam,
quae eadem est Dei justitia, quam Deus largitur ex mera gratia ; et
ad capiendam et apprehendendam earn postquam oblata est, fidei
quasi manum confert, sine qua Christus in justitiam apprehendi
non potest. Quare et fidei, sive ex fide justitia dicitur. Nee de
bet haec trajectio violenta videri, cum crebro occurrant hujusmodi
apud Apostolum exempla, et non grata modo auribus, sed etiam
efficax ad significandum sit Ula ex fide in fidem pa[ra]nomasia :
cujusmodi compositione et vocum allusione ad sensum efficaci non
nusquam utitur Apostolus, cujus causa non veretur saepenumero
verba trajicere. Philip, c. i. v. 21.
Sequitur confimatio tam antecedentis, quam consequentis,
(quippe justitiam fidei cum fide, et salutem dari per Evangeli
um) ex oraculo prophetae Abacuc, quod oraculum est Evangeli-
cum, i.e. promissio justitiae fidei, et ex justitia fidei vitae aeterna
per EvangeUum conferenda. " Justus ex- fide victurus est."
Quae sententia apud prophetam illustratur avrihasi contrariae
infideUtatis, et exitii ex infideUtate, quemadmodum eleganter ad
Heb. x., sub finem explicatur, ubi rolg iciarswg opponit roig vitoa-
rokrjg, v. 37, ^[//Sg de ovx Ifffjuh inroffroTJjg lig dicuksiav, aXkd
tfiarsug slg TegiToiqffiv -^vy/ig, gemina antithesi fidei et infideUtatis,
salutis et exitii ; ut nemini dubium esse debeat, quin hixaiog ex
ic'usrsug sit legendum loco subjecti viz. Justus ex fide, ut justititia
ex fide supra hoc eodem versu, et passim in hac disputatione di
citur. Itaque Apostolus optimus prophetae interpres et hie et ad
Gal. iii. et ad Hebr. x., hoc dictum pro fundamento et summa
EvangeUi adhibet, quod sciUcet poUicitus fuerit Deus prophetae
fexcubias agenti, et deploranti statum ecclesiae miserandum, in
modum deformatae cum suis sceleribus, tum hostium popula-
tionibus, Christi adventum in carnem, et cum Christo exhibito

414 COMMENTARIUS,
EvangelU efficaciam ad justitiam atque salutem. Jussit enim
oraculum hoc tanquam publicum programma describi, quasi gran-
dioribus characteribus, ut quam facillime a quovis vel cursim
praetereunte legatur, aut saltem ita plane describi, ut quivis illud
vel cursim perlegat, vel legendo percurrat. Monet visionem rejec-
tam esse in longinquum tempus, sed certo asseverat suo tempore
eventuram, interea ad patienter expectandum hortatur. Ideo
Apost. ad Hebr. verba non numeravit, sed sensum appendit, atque
expressit, cap. x. v. 37. Er/ ydg fjuixgbv, hie distinguendum, deinde
oaov otrov, (quantum, quantum, i.e. quantumcunque longinquum
fuerit tempus) o sgyppsvog rfcei xai bv ygoviet. Unde inteUigas ita
prophetam de visione loqui, ut Christi adventum cum Evangelii
praedicatione, et per earn justitiae et salutis manifestatione prae-
dicet. Haud scio an affixum 1 apud prophetam verti debeat ejus,
an sua fide, utrum ad justum ex fide, an ad Christum Dominum,
(lxx. videntur ad Christum retulisse, lav vToarsiXsrai, bvx evhoxu
^ ipv-fctj pov lv avru, 6 fa Bixaiog lx itiarzwg Zfiasrai,) cujus adven
tus praedicitur, referri debeat. Certe non frustra Apostolus justi
tiam Dei ex fide scripsit, et postea cap. iii. et alibi justitiam Christi,
et fidem Christi vocat. Certe nusquam neque hie, neque ad Gal.
neque ad Hebr. affixum expressit. An ideo hoc factum ab Apostolo,
ut ambiguitatem vitaret, nee ne ? nihil affirmo ; interim non cessat
hoc verum esse in omnibus qui servantur, quod Christus uni dixit
singulariter, Fides tua te servavit. Dictio vatis Abacuc duo, vel
etiam tria in Christo beneficia pollicetur gratis per Evangelium
conferenda, nimirum veram justitiam, veram fidem, et veram vitaim
Justitiam veram, quippe Dei, et ex fide; justitiam Dei, quia donum
Dei est gratuitum, et filii Dei, qui verus Deus est in humana na
tura ad mortem usque crucis, obedientia perfecta, ac proinde Deo
omnibus modis grata atque accepta ; Fidei vero justitia, quod non
nisi instrumento fidei nostra fiat, et a nobis apprehendatur ; atque
hoc est beneficium justitiae EvangeUcum. Alteram est, fidei ipsius
naturae, et causaram ordine justitiam antegrediens, quod nobis per
Evangelii auditionem impertit Deus, cujus fidei quasi manu Chris
tum in justitiam nostram apprehendimus. Utraque igitur, tam

cap. i. 17. 415
fides, quam justitia Dei ex fide est gratuitum Dei in Christo
beneficium in nos collatum Evangelii praedicatione, quae duo
beneficia hujus effati prophetici parte antecedente comprehendun-i
tur, viz. Bixatog lx Tiareug, Justus ex fide. Unde alterum coniuga-
torum, justitia ex fide, quae fidei justitia, et justitiam, et fidem
complectitur, coniuncta quidem, sed distincta beneficia, quorum
fides se habet ut causa saltem instrumentalis, justitia vero ut effec
tum ratione communicatae nobis per fidem justitiae. Tertium be
neficium ex his duobus consequitur, quippe vita, sive salus beata ac
sempiterna in altera effati parte, Zfiaerai. Justitia enim Dei affert
vitam Dei i.e. divina justitia vitam divinam. Justitiam prae-
bens instrumentum est fides : fidem praebens instrumentum est
EvangeUum, quae visionis nomine, et Christum in Evangelio exhi-
bendum propheta significare videtur, hie est ergo ordo horum
beneficiorum. Evangelium patefaciendo justitiam Dei ex fide, dat
atque indit mentibus animiaque nostris fidem, fides data confert
justitiam Dei ex fide, divina ex fide justitia est vitae aeternae causa.
Atque haud scio an haec sit Dan. ix. justitia saeculorum quae dici
tur i.e. sempiterna, sive hominibus in mundo conferenda. At
que ita posito fundamento justitiae, et salutis per Evangelium in
Christo adipiscendae, eoque divinitus prophetica praedictione sta-
bilito, superstruit disputationem de justificatione, refutans primum
omnium et hominum et operum justitiam. Est igitur prior dispu
tatio kvaaxsvagixri. NuUus injustus ex operibus aut justitia sua
coram Deo justificabitur : Omnes homines sunt injusti : Nullus
igitur homo ex operibus vel sua justitia coram Deo justificabitur.
Est avbfotfyg negans Cesare.* Propositio habetur sub initium
cap. ii. et tractatur ad 17 v. eiusdem. Assumptio partim hoc
capite, et initio sequentis, et cap. iii. a 9 v. ad 20 in genere ; par
tim a 18 v. cap. ii. ad 9 v. cap. iii. ex parte contra Judaeos per-
tractatur. Unde conclusio infertur cap. iii. v. 20. Cohaeret v. 18
cap. i. cum praecedente. Omnes homines sunt ex se et ex operibus
legis sive naturaUa sive Mosaicae injusti, et irae divinae obnoxii,
quae est assumptio generaUs syUogismi. Ergo Dei ex fide justitia
* [Vide Whateley's Logic, ch. iii. § 4.]

416 COMMENTARIUS,
in Evangelio patefacta est ea, qua justificati servabimur, ut habet
sententia prophetae Abacuc ; non est igitur, cur se tam anxie cru-
cient logici in his connectendis.
Hominum in se injustitiam tragice exprimit Apostolus dum earn
vocat omnem impietatem et injustitiam hominum, q. d. omnes
homines in se nihil aliud esse, quam omnem iniustitiam et impie
tatem, quam exaggerat ira Dei e coelo patefacta, quae magis
magisque hanc hominum impietatem, et injustitiam divina vindicta
accumulat et coacervat, dum peccata peccatis, et scelera novis
sceleribus justo judicio justissimus judex ulciscitur. Atque hoc est
quod dicit, iram Dei revelari in omnem impietatem et injustitiam
hominum ; avrthrixug, vers, praecedente 17mo, justitia Dei ex fide
in Evangelio revelatur in fidem. Videtur enim hie coelum Evan
gelio opponere, quia coeU enarrant gloriam Dei, Ps. xix., quod est
naturae praeconium, et Uber naturae vulgo dicitur, adeo ut Anaxa-
goras interrogatus slg riuysyevtjrai ; slg hpfav (respondit) rfhiov xa)
ffsXrivqg xai ovpavov. Quasi dicat, naturae et contemplationis. Et
phUosophia tantum abest, ut justitiam conferat, ut contra, quan-r
tacunque notitia Dei per earn ex rerum contemplatione hausta
hominem reddat avaffo'koyqrov, iramque Dei e coelo, unde cog-
noscitur, effusam in ipsos homines etiam philosophos arguat. Ideo
statim postea rnv al^hiav, xa) rfjg xriasug rov xbepov eodem respi-
ciens dixit. Utrumque • probat, quippe et hominum injustitiam
cum impietate conjunctam, et hujus impietatis injustae ex divina
vindicta exuberantiam ; ac primum ex veritatis divinae injusta
detentione, hoc ipso p. 18, ut qui detineant Dei veritatem injuste.
Sunt igitur et impii in Deum, et injusti in veritatem, ut qui earn
quasi gestientem erumpere Sanctis et honestis actionibus, captivam
supprimunt et extinguunt. Hie duo spectanda, Veritas illis cog-
nita, et veritatis injusta detentio. De veritatis notitia 19 et 20 v.
De eius injusta detentione tribus sequentibus ad 24. Veritatis
nomine lumen naturale, sive theologiam, quam naturalem vocamus,
intelligit, quam cum articulo rqv dt^hiav vocat, non sine quadam
emphasi, nam non est verisimile articulum avaipopixbv esse, ut
patefactionem referat EvangeUcam, de qua supra v. 17. Veram

cap. 1. 18-19. 417
quia coeli mentionem fecit, unde omnis fere ilia cognitio naturalis
ducitur, veritatis nomine naturalem de Deo cognitionem intelligi
par est; ideoque articulum praeposuisse videtur hoc sensu: A
coelo, unde est veritatis de Deo ex operibus notitia, revelatur sive
patefit ira Dei in hominum injustitiam, eamque in Deum impiam,
in ipsos philosophos, ut qui Deum ex hac veritate naturali et philo-
sophica eognitum non glorificant, etc. sed suppressa veritate, ex qua
Deum norunt, malitiose in Deum ingrati, ac proinde impie injusti
sunt. Coelum ergo et Veritas de Deo ex coelo cognita, inque
hominc et homini manifestata, ad omnem ignorantiae praetextum
tollendum ordine consequuntur apud Apostolum. Eandem vocat ro
yvuarbv rov hov, et Qavegbv dicit esse iv avrolg, quod de luce Evan
gelica dici non potest. Hujus naturalis lucis Deum autorem prae-
dicat, et utitur verbo s<pavsguss sic a conjugatis : Deus ipsis
l<paveguff£ hanc notitiam sui, ergo to yvuarbv rov hov ler) pavsgov
lv avrotg. Quaeri solet, quomodo se Deus manifestavit homini
bus, impressionibusne insitis naturaliter, et anticipatis notionibus,
quas xoivag svvoiag et irgohJrr^eig, Cicero praenotiones et inchoatas
intelligentias vocat, an contemplatione rerum creatarum et natu-
ralium observatione in mundi opificio. Responditur utroque modo
quanquam prior modus notitiae naturalitfer insitae hie obscurius
indicetur, clarius ult. v. rb hxaiupa rov hov Ittiyv'ovrsg. Et ii. cap.
14, 15 v., videtur vocare opus legis inscriptum in cordibus, cujua
vi facimus quae sunt legis, etc. Verum sine eo nuUus alteri cog-
nitionis modo locus, quem v. 20, explicat. Principia enim nobis
quaedam ingenita, et notiones omnibus aeque eaedem, quae ab om
nibus aeque item probantur, quae sunt contemplationum omnium
quasi principia, quorum vi sensus, ut loquuntur phUosophi, cum in-
teUectu conjungitur, et tanquam unum efficitur ; in qua sententia
omnes fere phUosophi, praeter Aristotelem unum, in quo quam exi-
guua fuerit divinitatis sensus, passim ejus prodit impietaa : cogitur
tamen subinde, velit nolit, immortalis Dei vim et naturam confiteri.
Quemadmodum et Galenus, alioqui impiua, ex fabrica humani corpo-
ria de usu partium divinitus concionatur. Apostolus vero omnium
clarisaime invisibilia Dei (aeternam potentiam et divinitatem) jam
2d

418 COMMENTARIUS,
inde a mundo condito, vel mundi conditu, ex operibus intellecta
pervideri affirmat : Ubi expende illud voovpeva quod non modo
vim inteUigendi praeaupponit, quam vovv vocant Graeci, sed et ipsam
intelligentiam sive praeceptas notiones, sine quibus alia non in-
telUgimus. Dubitari potest de significatione praepositionis dxo,
ut et nominis xriasug, significetne creationem ipsam, i. e. actionem
creandi (ut exposuimus) an res ipsas creatas sine temporis nota-
tione : quod posterius non videtur propter illud, quod subjicitur de
operibus, Toirifjuaffi ; esset enim ravrokoyia, nisi ita distinguas :
— InvisibUia Dei operibus inteUecta pervidentur in mundi quasi
speculo, et ex rebus creatis perspiciuntur. Sed minus placet.
Interea docet, quousque lumen rationis et naturae progrediatur in
Deo cognoscendo, viz. ad toUendum omnem ignorantiae praetex-
tum, ut non habeant, quod pro se coram Dei tribunali in dicenda
causa obtendant, hoc enim est esse avawokoyrirov, ab usu forensi
translatione sumpta. Ceterum naturalem Theologiam ad duo capita
revocat, ad notitiam aeternae potentiae, et notitiam divinitatis,
quarum altera infinitam, immensam, simplicem Dei essentiam, altera
proprietates ceteras essentiales complectitur. Illud stg ro snai, si
finem indicat, et usum notitiae naturalis de Deo, respicit, v. 19,
superiorem, unde pendeat oportet, q.d., Deus reliquias naturaUs
lucis in homine lapso ad hue superesse voluit ad eum convincen-
dum : sin vere proxima respicit, significatur eo tantaniDei notitiam,.
ac tam claram homini reUquam esse lucem, ut praecisa sit omnia
excusandi sui aut tergiversandi causa : Ideosubdit, " propterea quod
cum Deum cognoverint," quibus verbis ingreditur notitiae Illius
abusum, quem injustam veritatis detentionem vocavif, " non glorifi-
carunt ut Deum," ideo impu ; " aut grati fuerunt," ideo injusti, gra-
titudo enim j'ustitiae species est, contra injustitiae species est in-
grati animi vitium : Atqui impietas et injustitia sunt habitus vol
untatis humanae quantum depravatae, praesertim erga Deum.
Sequitur hallucinatio et caecitas inteUectus, vanitatis, tenebrarum
et vacuitatis intelligentiae verbis expressa, sponte, et ultro, atque
adeo opera et industria nostra consulto accersita, ut sit ayvoia xaxrig
had'sasug, ut cum ratione insaniamus, et ratiocinando, et curiosi-

cap. i. 20-23. 419
tati ingeniorum indulgendo rationem omnem perdamua, cum a prin^
cipUs natura notis ad cerebri nostri deliramenta ac figmenta delabi-
mur : cujusmodi exempla videre est apud philosophos, et Platonem
ipsum in Socraticis dialogismis : Verbis hie utitur valde signatis et
significantibus. Confer cum iv. cap. 18, 17, versu ad Ephes. ubi
habes paraibrrjra rov voog avruv, xa) saxortap'svovg rq havbta did
rfjv dyvoiav rrjv ovaav lv avrolg, ha rrjv iruguaiv rrjg xagh'ag
avruv. Aavvsrog quid sit et avvsaig vide Camerar. in Ethic.
Arist.
, Atque haec voluntatis et intellectus corruptela et coecitas, imo
insana amentia quoad internam idolatriam. Externa sequitur 22
et 23 v. quae est fJougoaopia. Sapientiam professi (ut Graeci pri-
mum cotpoi, sapientes, postea <pikbo~o<pot, sapientiae studiosi a Pyr
thagora sunt appellati, de quo Cic. Tusc. 5, puram, putam fatui-
tatem, et insulsam stoliditatem, impiamque stultitiam dictis, 22
v. factis 23 versu, aperte produnt. Emphaticum est paaxovrsg,
sapientiae persuasionem et jactantiam ob oculos ponens ; quin et tria
verba, eparaiudriffav, strxoriadt], Ij/jugdvdrjffav passiva cum incre-
mento progressum habent, et reciprocam, ut opinor, ex Hebraismo,
significationem : Ut significetur, ipsos se homines et dementasse et
infatuasse, donee dementes, insipientes, et fatui prorsus evaserint.
Idolum mens concipit, manus parit, ideo sequitur 23 v. " Mutarunt
gloriam incorruptibilis Dei, etc," Observa antithesin, gloriam,
simUitudinem imaginis ; corruptibUis, incorruptibilis ; Dei creatoris,
.creaturae gradatim vUescentis, quippe hominis, volucrum, quad-
rupedum, serpentum. Vide quasi in pictura idolomaniam Gentium,
et mysticam Aegyptiorum theologiam, omnigenumque Deum mon-
stra, ut habet poeta. Atque hactenus veritatis captivae ex impietate
et injustitia detentio ad impietatem et injustitiam hominum tradu-
cendam. Sequitur divina vindicta in impie injustos et injuste
impios homines, cujusmodi natura sumus omnes ; estque paena
peccato analoga ex Dei justitia et quasi lege talionis : Nam hoi-
mines in Deum contumeUoai atque injurii permittuntur aibi, ut ae
contumelUs atque injuriia mutuo inter se afficiant : imo Deus jus-
tissimus judex hominpm suis cupiditatibus, foedis affectibus, et cor-
2 d2

420 COMMENTARIUS,
rupto judicio tanquam carnificibus tradidit, obtorto coUo per omne
flagitiorum et scelerum genus turpiter et crudeliter abripiendos, ut
injustitiae et impietatis nuUus sit vel pudor vel modus. Trea
gradus vindictae sive ultionis divinae respondent superioribus tri-
bus gradibus injustae in Deum impietatis, inverso ordine : Primus
gradus poenae, 24 v., vagarum libidinum impuritas, qua sua ipsi
corpora conspurcant homines, respondet ultimo gradui impietatis,
et externae Idolomaniae, v. 22 et 23, quaerepetitur tanquam causa
horrendi judicii divini in idololatras, v. 25, ut qui mutarint verita
tem Dei in mendaeium, i.e. Deum verum in commentitium idolum,
ut supra, v. 23. Mutarunt gloriam incorruptibUis Dei, i. e. glorio-
sum et incorruptibilem Deum, &c. Quod dicit, praeterito crea-
tore semper praedicando et celebrando, laudibus creaturam vene
rates esse et coluisse, significat idololatras verum Deum nullo modo
colere, ideo vocat, Ephes. ii. 12, dhovg lv ru xbapu. Deinde dum
colunter imagines rerum creatarum ipsas creaturas divinis honori-
bus non sine summo sacrUegio affici; atque ita non colitur Deus,
contra primam tabulam omnem, et coUtur idolum itidem contra
primum et secundum praeceptum, atque adeo tertium prioris tabu
lae. Secundus gradus divinae ultionis, quam avnpie'&iav irkdvqg
vocat, portentosae et nefariae praeter naturam Ubidines, quibus se
promiscue contaminant 26 et 27 v. Analoga secundo gradui im
pietatis in Deum, quem ifhavi)V vocat, quippe portentosis et mon-
strosis de Deo, cultuque divino opinionibus et erroribus, v. 21.
Tertius gradus ultionis divinae illustratur simUitudine peccati, v.
,28. Quemadmodum non probarunt Deum habere in agnitione;
quod idem est cum eo, quod 21 v. habetur ; Non ut Deum glorifi-
carunt, aut grati fuerunt, peccatum, ut dixi, voluntatis profanae et
deploratae : Sic tradidit eos Deus elg vovv dhbxipov, i.e. mentem repro-
bam, spuriam, adulteratam, instar falsae monetae, corrupto nimirum
judicio, et sublato rerum delectu, nuUo justi, injusti, sancti, profani,
turpis, honesti habito discrimine, ut vovg non mentis modo judicium,
sed multo magis voluntatis Tgodigstriv et electionem indicet, quod
etiam inteUigi potest ex verbo sboxipaoav, non probarunt, id quod
Latini dicunt, non visum est iis, non placuit, neque gratum neque

cap. i. 24-32. 421
acceptum fuit, ut nuUo modo propenderet in Dei agnitionem vo
luntas. Ideo tradidit quasi in manus corruptae voluntatis, et omnis
sani judicii et bonae electionis expertis ; unde manarent a malis
vitiorum habitibus omnia scelerum et flagitiorum genera, quae
vocat ru prj xadrjxovra, generali nomine xard p'siutriv, quasi dicas
non consentanea officio, i. e. ab officio discrepantia et repugnantia
maxime. Observa maU fontem vovv dhbxipov, i. e. justo Dei judicio
corruptam voluntatem, in voluntate vitiosos ad summum habitus,
quos significat his verbis, icsTkrjgup'svovg icdar] ahx)a, pssrovg ; et
nominibus habitum significantibus, ¦^iidvgisug, &c. Deinde pravas
actiones ab ipsis habitibus exundantes, toiSv ra pr) xadqxovra.
Egregia ac luculenta pictura hominis non regeniti, et concio le
galis subjiciens oculls praeclarum scilicet liberi arbitri in natura
humana post lapsum reliqui facultatem. Enumeratio 23 vitiorum
nomimbus conatat, quorum quaedam generalia, ut dhx)a, xuxia,
quaedam speciaUa magis, ut irovrjgia contra aextum praeceptum,
icogvsia contra septimum decalogi, pleonexia contra octavum;
<pdbvog, pbvog, 'igig, hokog, xaxorihia contra sextum; -^idvgiBrai, xard-
"ka\oi contra nonum ; ©soarvysig contra primum prioris, si minus, to-
tam prioris tabulam; vfigiarai, contumeliosi in Deum, et injuriosi in
homines ; virsgripavoi, dikdZpveg, superbia et jactantia Deo et homi
nibus invisi, infesti ; s(pevgsrai xuxuv, scelerum novorum inventores
monstra hominum ; yovsvaiv aicsideig, parentibus rebeUea contra
quintum mandatum. Sequuntur quinque composita nomina cum
a privandi particula, ut et superius proximum, quae ita absentiam
innuit et vacuitatem laudabUis qualitatis ac bonae affectionis, quam
altera pars compositionis significat ut ne pilum quidem boni viri,
aut guttam humanitatia reliquam esse demonstret ; et crescit miri-
fice in immensum oratio, ut pestes humani generis depictas graphice
ab Apostolo et subjectas oculis in oratione Paulina videas, quasi
dicas, alienos ab omni sana intelligentia veri aut boni, alienos a
pactis conventis, et foederum servandorum religione et fide ; vacuoa
affectus naturalis in Uberos aut parentes, qui omnium animalium
communis est ; implacabiles et irreconciliabiles, immisericordes et
truculentos. Quibus 23 scelerum monstris adjicit v. ult. haec omnia

422 COMMENTARIUS,
malitiose et contra conscientiam non patrari solum ab ipsis homi
nibus, sed etiam applausu et patrocinio, cum ab aliis patrantur, ap-
probari, atque defend!, idque contra hxdiupa hov, i. e. jus divinum
plane agnitum, nimirum talium scelerum, talium facinorum, talium
flagitiorum autores et populares aeternam mortem promereri ; nuUo
tamen vel numinis, cujus vindictam non exhorrescunt, vel poenae,
cujus gravitatem non reformidant, metu aut formidine maleficio sub-
moventur, aut praecipitem in omne scelus impetum sistunt. Haec
juris divini agnitio procul omni dubio principium habet ab ingene-
ratis a natura notitiis, quae ratione et sensu provehuntur, et cum
aetate accrescunt in earn agnitionem justitiae divinae, et scelerum
conscientia mentes hominum constrictae teneantur. Atque haec
generalis est generis humani, in hac miseranda lapsus ruina, convic-
tio, quod impiae in Deum, quem natura cognitum habent, injusti-
tiae rei, voluntatis a Deo aversione, mentis circa Deum aberratione,
dictorum et factorum contra Deum externa liBukopaviag deformi-
tate seu absurditate accersunt sibi, et quasi extorquent a summo
judice triplicem triplicis injustae in Deum impietatis avripitfoiav,
qua seipse tanquam carnifices afficiunt et plectunt, sed ita quidemj
ut paena culpae analoga culpam augeat, et impietatem et injustiti
am hominum nova impietatis et injustitiae accessione cumulet in
immensum, et cum scientes, prudentes ita peccent in Deum et in
se homines, non possunt non esse inexcusabUes. Unde infert
apostolus initio secundi capitis ex hoc antecedente, omnes homines
sunt injusti. Ergo et tu hypocrita quisquis es, qui belle vitia tua
dissimulas, et virtutem ac sanctimoniam prae te fers aliorum vitia
acriter et acerbe insectando et objurgando, es inexcusabiUs.

cap. ii. 1-13. 423

SECUNDUM CAPUT.

Hermogenes Rhetor negare ausus est apostrophas gravitati ora-
tionis figuras ; sed apostolica autoritate Graeculo Uli ne credatur
Sunt alii" palam flagitiosi, alii larva sanctitatis et innocentiae tam
sibi quam aUis imponunt. Prius illud genus hominum tanquam
satis superque convictum relinquit ; alterum vero genus persona-
torum hominum, conversa ad eos per apostrophen oratione, perse-?
quitur, et ut vividius affieiat, et acrius pungat hypocritas, singula^
riter, quasi cum homine uno sibi negotium sit, aggreditur, et homi-
nem vocans, eum qui seipsum fallit fiducia virtutis suae a genere
ad speciem argumentatur hoc modo : — Homo es, ergo avairo'hbyrj-
rog. Consequentia patet ex superiore disputatione. Item, AUum
damnas hominem, ergo teipsum condemnas ; argumentum a pari
bus, quia in eadem causa es, cum eorundem scelerum reus sis cum
eo, quem damnas, ac proinde iUum damnando teipsum condemnas
et una eademque opera in teipsum juxta ac ilium damnatoriam sen
tentiam pronuncias. Verum quia negaret hypocrita cum Phari-
saeo se publicani simUem esse, quod lateret homines ejus impro.-
bitas, apostolus eum citat ad tribunal Dei, eujus judicium est se-r
cundum veritatem, quem in causa cognoscenda latere nihU potest,
qui non externam speciem spectare solet, aut personam (quod dicit)
in judicio excipere, sed intimos animorum sensus perscrutari, et
secundum aequitatem, causam ipsam solummodo intuens, senten
tiam ferre. Atque hoc principium est naturalis theologiae, unde
Apostolus argumentum ducit ad quosvis homines naturae luce
coarguendos : ideo dicit oidapev, scimus et compertum habemus,
tanquam publico omnium hominum testimonio, et universaU con-
sessu comprobatam sententiam, in medium adducens ; et certe multa
hujus generis in hanc sententiam extant apud profanos autores,
og xdvr spogd xa) icdvr Ixaxovet, 'i%ei hog svhxov oppa. Sic

424 COMMENTARIUS,
igitur argumentatur ; Deus est Justus judex in injustos, sive in eos,
qui talia agunt ; atqui tu hypocrita injustus es, et talia agis ; Ergo,
Deus in te erit Justus judex, et quod idem est, Dei judicium non
effugies. Rursus hominem appeUat et praefidentiam objicit, et
interrogationem figurans orationem acrius pungit hypocritam ad
larvam detrahendam ; ideoque repetit a paribus argumentum, quo
suo ipsius judicio ipsum condemnatum arguat. Deinde spem im-
punitatis anticipat coUectam ex poenae dilatione, acsi sic ageret
hypocrita : Cum Deus sit xaghoyvuarr\g ac norit omnia etiam occul-
tissima, mihi, si eorundem scelerum reus essem, quae damno in
alUs, mihi, inquam, tam diu non pepercisset. Hanc divinae leni-
tatis et tolerantiae exceptionem retorquet Apostolus, docetque alium
in finem spectare, non ut spe impunitatis pergat amplius peccare,
sed ut, faciUtatis divinae suavitate ad resipiscentiam invitantis,
vitam in melius commutet, et quod gravius est, tantae benignitatia
contemptus reum peragit, imo vero ob duritiem cordis et obfirma-
tum in malo animum, certum et grave exitium interminatur meri-
tissimo : quod verbo drjoavgiZfig signate expressit, ubi universo
ordine bgyrjv rjj paxgodvpia., ancoxahv-fyiv rrj avoy^, et hxaioxgiaiav
VJ7 "Xgriarbrrjri opponit, q, d. Deus, qui hactenus facilis et indulgens
pater fuit, futurus est mature Justus judex et inexorabilis ; quod
probat 6 v. generaU sententia divinae justitiae consentanea, reddet
cuique Deus secundum opera sua ; ac statim distributione utitur
per concessionem, quasi alU justi natura, aUi injusti essent ; atque
ita justis salutem aeternam, injustis denuntiat exitium sempiternum,
sive illi Judaei fuerint, sive Graeci, i. e. sublato personarum discri-
mine ; ubi notanda propositionis generalis sententia hie compre-
hensa. Nullus injustus ex operibus coram Deo justificabitur, cum
ratione, quia Deus est Justus judex redditurus unicuique secundum
opera sua, ita ut bonis bene, mails male sit futurum a Deo ; sicque
Ulustrat antithesi et contrario bonorum praemio exitium quod
malis impendit. Pluribus describit tam bonos quam malos, et
bonorum praemia, malorum supplicia, oratione etiam ad captum
ethnicorum attemperata, ut in tota superiore disceptatione. Vide
tur autem malos appellare rovg e| sgihiag, injuriosos in homines et

cap. ii. 1-13. 425
in Deum contumeliosos, contentiosos, quasi ex contentione con-
flatos, vel illarum partium et factionis, quae litem Deo intendit, et
refractarie rebeUis sibi justitiam propriae virtutis falso arrogat.
Contra vero bonos, quorum neminem prefer unum Christum inve-
nias, vocat rovg xa6 vnopovrjv, i. e. patientes injuriarum, et con-
stantes in bono. Insertum v. 7, illud 'igyov dyadov, utrum cum
praecedenti vropovriv, an cum subsequente cohaereat, h. e. cum
subjecta persona ; an attribute praemio ; ad rem vero et senten
tiam non videtur multum interesse. Observanda e nota universi
generis, e. g. sti itdsav ipvx/jv, ubi expressa habetur sententia (ut
dixi) propo. syUo. generalis accommodata tam Judaeis quam genti
bus, i. e. omnibus hominibus, et ex consequente intelligendum an-
tecedens, ut ex ira et excandescentia condemnatio et supplicium, ex
oppressione et angustia, non solum metaphorice extremum quodque
exitium, sed etiam, metonymia effecti, ipsa condemnatio. Idem est
ergo quoad sensum, oppressio et angustia incumbet in omnem
animam hominis perpetrantis malum, atque nullus injustus ex ope
ribus coram Deo justificabitur. Plane sententiam generalem Ju
daeis et Gentibus applicatam Ulustrat antithesi, Judaeis pariter et
Gentibus applicata. Cujus sententia est, bene et beate erit bonis
omnibus sive Judaeis sive Gentibus, quam beatitudinem gloriae et
honoris et pads nominibus explanat, atque hoc idem est acsi
diceret, omnis perfecte Justus aut bonus coram Deo ex operibus
justificabitur; justum vero atque injustum in hac disputatione
describit ab effectis operam bonorum aut malorum. Subjicit v. 11,
rationem a natura Dei summe justa, apud quem- nulla est vrgoffu-
<xo~lw>\iia, 12 v. Occupat xard itgokr\^iv quod a Gentibus et
Judaeis objici potuit, gentes legis Mosaicae ignorationem, Judaei
vero ejusdem cognitionem et quasi possessionem obtenderent.
Quibus respondet, peccantes tam ex Judaeis quam ex Gentibus
perituros, ac proinde condemnatum iri gentes quidem absque lege
Mosis, Judaeos vero ex ipsa lege. Rationem affert condemna
tionis Judaeorum, v, 13, diversorum argumento : Non qui audiunt,
sed qui praestant legem, apud Deum justificandi ; condemnationis
vero gentium duobus sequentibua 14, 15, causam reddit, quod licet

426 COMMENTARIUS,
legem Mosaicam non habeant, tamen naturae legem habent, propter
cujus transgressionemdamnentur,etcujus vim ac sensum animis men-
tibusque impressum docent opera, quae vi naturae faciunt, jubendo
et approbando quod bonum est, quo spectat etiam conscientiae
testimonium. Denique rationum momenta, inter se conflictu mutuo
pugnantia, sive accusent, sive excusent. Sunt igitur hie tria argu-
menta legis naturalis in omnium hominum animis impressae altius,
opus legis, quod est iubere bonum et vetare malum, testimonium con-r
scientiae, et vis rationis excogitans in hanc aut Ulam partem argu-
menta ad accusandum aut defendendum. IUud autem 16 v. sv
Vpsga quando Indicabit Deus, videtur pendere a verbis 12 et 13 v.
wrokovvrat, xgidrjtrovrai, dixaiuDfoovrat, et non cohaerere cum
proxime praecedentibus in hac eadem periodo. Caeterum rursus
urget Dei judicium cum notatione temporis, ut supra, v. 5, cum
nihil sit tam occultum, quod eum latere possit, ad terrendos hypo-
critas et confessionem peccati extorquendam omnibus ; quia transit
a propositionis sententia, quam pluribus confirmavit, et relabitur
ad assumptionem, praecipue in Judaeos stringendam et evincendam.
Et hoc judicium a Christo judice exercendum, et exigendum ad
normam Evangelii, quod suum vocat Apostolus, quod sibi fuit
commune cum ceteris Apostolis omnibus, sacri ministerii ratione.
Qui enim non crediderit in fiUum hominis, et, ut iii. Johan, dicitur,
o aiceiduv rw viu, non videbit vitam, sed ira Dei manebit super
ipsum. Vel potius Evangelii meminit, quod ex eo constet, Christum
foVe in glorioso adventu suo omnium judicem, ut etiam in Symbolo
confitemur. Hactenus propositio summa v. 2, 8, 9, inclusa, reli-
quis disputata et confirmata, quippe, nullum injustum ex operibus
uUius legis coram Deo justificatum iri ; ab hac (ut dixi) redit ad
assumptionem. Et quia Judaei superbi ac cervicosi legem et cir-
cumcisionem obtendebant, ¦rinticipatrtomnem praefidentem illorum
gloriationem per concessionem omnium praerogativarum, et privi-
legiorum, quibus freti gloriabantur, a v. 17 ad 21, in quibus recen-
sendis grandi ac pene fastuosa xar a piprjoiv oratione utitur. Re
spondet autem usque ad capitis finem, cujus responsionis summa
est, Nihil aut legem, aut circumcisionem Ulis ad justitiam prodesse,

cap. ii. 13-17. 427
cum circumcisio obUget ad legem servandam, quam illi cum Dei
et Judaismi ignominia transgrediuntur. Quod probat divino
Scripturae veteris testimonio. In praerogativis prima est cogno-
mentum Judaei, honorificum sane Ulud propter tribum Juda, et
regnum in ea tribu, et Davidem, unde Messias oriundus : dicti prius
IsraeUtae ab Israele, et Hebraei ab Hebero ; sed tertium illud Ju
daei nomen et cetera omnia comprehendit, et divinae laudis profes-
sorem, et praedicatorem ostentat, et erat ea aetate commune omni
bus IsraeUtis, et aliis Gentibus notissimum. 2da, Lex ipsa, cui sua-
viter et secure quasi indormientes in ea acquiescebant, sed nomine
tenus. 3a, Deus, qui Abrahami Isaaci, Jacobi, atque adeo populi
hujus Deum se nominat, et foedere pacto cum iis habitare quasi
praesens aspectabili modo dignatus est. Notentur grandia et sig-
nata verba iTovopdfy], Incavaicdvrj, xavyfiaui pro xavyjx. 4a, Di
vinae voluntatis notitia, quam oraculis et Prophetarum vocibus
familiarius huic populo manifestavit. 5a, Videtur huic affinis ex-
ploratio et dijudicatio eorum, quae cum divina lege pugnant, nisi
mavis diap'sgovra, praestabUia, eximia et selectissima quaeque ex
mente Judaeorum significari : hanc quamcunque explorandi et pro-
bandi facultatem ex auditione legis viva voce traditae (hoc enim
vult xarriyjovpsvog) collectam docet. Ex hac scientiae legalis per-
suasione sequuntur fastuosi tituli quatuor, quibus sibi magisterium
superbe in alios, tanquam ignaros et caecos tenebriones, et impru-
dentes infantes vendicabant. Hue spectant nomina Pharisaei,
vopixo), vopodiddffxakoi, ygappareig, Rabbi, Rabbinu, Rabbotenu,
vide Math, xxiii. ad quos ut legem edoctos et legis doctores, cujus
tradendae methodum et viam compendiariant, superciliose vendita-
bant, hi quatuor tituU, quorum duo metaphorici, et totidem pro-
¦priis verbis expressi, peculiariter accommodantur ; ideo dicit syjovra
rr)v pbgputriv rrjg yvuvsug xa) rrjg d"kr\hiag. : Unde videri potest cer
tain tradendae legis quasi praescriptam formulam tum in illorum
synagogis frequentatam fuisse. Magna emphasis et efficacia in
particulis id's ffv, et apostrophe; atque haec de praerogativis, e*
inflatis titulis, v. 21, refutatio : Qui igitur doces, etc. Vulgatum
test, " turpe est doctori, etc." Interrogatio est hie cum admiratione.

428 COMMENTARIUS,
Summa est : Qui pharisaice vetas in legem peccare, cum omnia
peccati in speciem detestatione, quae vetas, facis vel eadem, vel
graviora, cum nominis divini contumelia, quod probat Ezech.
xxxvi. 23, ut videtur, obsignatis agens tabulis ad eos convin
cendos : Atque ita omnibus cum lege praerogativis transgressionem
legis opponit ; qua una etiam circumcisionis exceptionem repellit,
quamquam circumcisum esse et Judaeum esse re unum sint : Ideo
cum praeputio comparat, quo nomine et praeputiatum ex Gentibus
inteUigit, atque etiam GentUismum. Dicitur autem uxgofivariu a
tegendo summam naturae partem, quam Celsus glandem vocat ;
Latine vero praeputium contrario sensu, quod pellicula glandem
tegens circumcisione praeputiaretur : hinc Judaeus Apella apud
profanum poetam, et Recutitus, et alia ejusmodi probri loco a pro-
fanis objecta. Adverte Apostolum in tota hac comparatione exhypo-
thesi disputare, ne quis existimet cum Papanis aut Judaeum aut
Gentilem ullum perfecte legem in hac vita praestare posse : Sed
hoc vult Apostolus circumcisionem ad operum justitiam sine legis
observatione nihil posse : ideo dicit 25 v. circumcisionem fieri
praeputium, i.e. externum ejusmodi Judaismum violata lege pro
GentUismo habendum, nee alterum altero quicquam magis ad justi-
ficationem ex operibus coram Deo conferre. Sic 26 v. dum prae
putio tribuit, i.e. gentili, et praeputiato custodiam legis vel insti-
tutorum legalium, nihil affirmat nisi ex conditione, si esset ullus
hujusmodi, ejus Gentilismus ei pro Judaismo imputaretur, et Gen-
tilis pro Judaeo merito haberetur. ConsimiUs conditio est v. 27,
quod est ex natura praeputium, i.e. Gentilis naturaliter praeputiatus
legem perficiens aut praestans, non quod praestet aut perficiat nisi
in Christo fide apprehenso, ut omnes vere Christiani : sed nihil hoc
ad justitiam operum, de qua hie disputat. Judaeum vocat rbv did
ygdpparogxai Ksgiroprjg, i.e. litera et circumcisione praeditum aut
fretum, et legis et circumcisionis externae fiducia peccantem contra
legem. Quod ergo ait, Gentilem legis custodem damnaturum Ju
daeum legis transgressorem, ex hypothesi ait, nisi fidelem ex Gen
tibus et Christianum forte inteUigas : ideoque 28 v. definit verum
Judaeum, et veram circumcisionem non externa profesaionis nota,

CAP. ii. 18.— iii. 2. 429
sive lege et circumcisione, sed interna Spiritus efficacia, i.e. resip-
iscentia et fide, cui opponit ygdppa, i. e. literam legis sine Christo
emortuam et occidentem, ut 2. Cor. iu. c. luculente exponit : sic
carnem cordi opponit, ut Uteram Spiritui 29 v. — [ou b sraivog'] cujus
Judaei, qui dignus hoc nomine, laus non ex hominibus, qui ex
terna tantum spectant, sed ex Deo, qui interiorem cordis conver-
sionem intuetur, atque acceptam habet.

TERTIUM CAPUT.
Occupatio orta ex occasione superioris responsi et capitis fine : — Si
nihU externus Judaismus et externa circumcisio prodest ad justi
tiam operum, Judaeus GentUi quid interest ? aut quo mihi circum
cisio ? Cum hie articulum [proponitur] tam Judaeo, quam circumci-
sioni, quaeri potest, moveaturne quaestio de vero Judaeo et vero cir
cumcisione, cujusmodi modo definivit ? an universe et in genere vel
definite loquatur ? ac nititur haec objectio pluribus Scripturae locis
ut Exod. xvui. ; Deut. iv. ; Psal. cxlvii. ro tfsgiasov significat ampUus
quid, quam habeat GentUis, quo tanquam dignitatis et excellentiae
praerogativa gaudeat. Subjicit responsionem, toXv xara irdvra
rgonto~v, multam magnamque modis omnibus esse excellentiam veri
(ut videtur) Judaei, et verae circumcisionis, cujusmodi fuit Abra-
hami, aliorumque fideUum Judaeorum, Ratio est, quia primarium
et quasi palmarium hoc est in divinis beneficUs in veros Judaeos
ooUatis, quod eloquia Dei, h. e. oracula divina de foedere non solum
operam, sed etiam gratiae apud eos deposita fuerint, et illorum
fidei concredita : ex quibus non solum pracepta legis, sed etiam
promissiones de Christo Evangelicas percipere potuerant ; %.byia
•hie est quarti casus post verbum STiarevdrjffav, ut alibi didxoviav
Tsviarsvpai. Sed 1 Tim. iii. 16. dicitur de Christo, sriffrevdrj
lv xotrpai ; ac forte et hie significatur Patriarchas divinis de Christo
promissionibus fidem habuisse et credidisse : nisi quis malit utram-
que significationem hujus verbi hie intelligere, ut sit sensus ; Ju-

430 COMMENTARIUS,
daeis coricredita fuisse divina oracula quibus crediderunt. Atque
haec est Judaei praerogativa ex parte ;Dei, et gratia, non ex operi
bus aut natura. . Altera occupatio : — Quid si Judaei aliqui frierint
perfidi, deserto foedere, vel infideles, ut qui fidem promissionibus
gratiae non habuerint : Respondet, illorum perfidia Dei fidem, et
constantem in servandis promissis veritatem labefactari non posse ;
imo licet omnes homines (ut reapte sunt natura sua) sint mendaces
et perfidi, tamen illibatam mansuram esse Dei fidem ac veritatem,
quod Davidis exemplo et divino testimonio ex Ps. li. confirmat,
"Ut justificeris, etc." Quibus verbis veritatem et justitiam Dei, Da
vidis perfidia et injustitia in negotio Bersabe, et Uriae caede non
modo labefactatam non fuisse sed etiam summopere illustratam, ut
cum David contra fidem datam multiplici, eoque gravissimo scelere
se obtrinxisset, Deus ex foedere gratiae in Christo et resipiscen-
tiam Davidi, et veniam peccatorum omnium indulsit, et promissa
sua omnia cumulate praestitit. In comminationibus etiam judici-
orum, et comminationum executionibus non minus item fidelem sej
quam justum exhibuit, sive Deus hunc finem ob oculos habuit, cum
Davidem labi permitteret ad veritatem et justitiam declarandam :
sive David in agnitione et confessione sceleris sui hue respexit, ad
gloriam Deo ex sua ignominia praebendam. Hinc nascitur una et
item altera objectio de justitia et veritate Dei ; Davidis injustitia
et mendacio illustrata, quam utramque quaestionem inverso ordine
proponit, ac primum de justitia dei judiciorum, quod fuit posterius
in verbis Davidis : Num Deus injustus, qui puniat eum, cujus in
justitia iUustratur justitia Dei. Respondet temperando objectio
nem, quod ex aliorum hominum profanorum, non ex suo sensu sit
deprompta, et amoliendo blasphemiam tanquam absurdam ; eamque
refutat ab officio et effecto Dei futuro in ultimo mundi totius judir
cio, q. d. Deus mundum, cujus injustitia justitia suae gloriam Ulus-
trabit, est juste judicaturas, et, ad gloriam justitiae suae iUustran-
dam, sempiternis suppliciis mactaturus. Altera objectio de veri-i
tate, v. 7, Si Veritas Dei hominum mendacio ad gloriam Dei amplii-
ficata illucescit, cur homines mendaces et perfidi damnentur ut
peccatores : quam objectionem auget majori absurditate, cur non

cap. iii. 3-12. 431
faciamus mala, ut bona eveniant. Hanc objectionem blasphemiam
et calumniam vocat, qua se suamque doctrinam adversarii gratiae
gravare soliti sunt, ideo tantum absurditatem et falsitatem non alio
dignatur responso, quam justi judicii, et meriti exitii in autores
denuntiatione, 8 v. xai pn (sub. faciemus mala, ut bona eveniant,)
sicut male de nobis dicitur, et sicut aiunt nos dicere, faciamus
mala, ut bona eveniant. Est igitur ellipsis sine ulla parenthesi le-
genda. Notandum in Davidis verbis justitiam sermonibus divinis,
victoriam judiciis tribui. Justitia verborum veritatem Dei, victoria'
judiciorum justitiam (ut interpretatur Apost.) intelligi, et sic in He-
braeo purus Deus in judicando dicitur, Ps. li. 9. Quinta occupatio
hujus capitis orta ex responsione primae objectionis. Nos ne ergo',
Judaei gentibus praecellimus ? Respondet, nuUo modo, quam enim
exceUentiam tribuerat, v. 2, fuit ex parte Dei in Christo, ex foedere
gratiae communis omnibus Christianis, quamquam supra communem
aUarum gentium sortem data lege, et circumcisione, aliisque collar
tis beneficiis quam plurimis universum Judaicum populum extule-
rat olim Deus : nunc vero negat ullum natura discrimen esse, quoad
causam justificationis operum, inter Judaeos et gentes, quod supe^
riore demonstratione a se demonstratum et confectum docet.'
Utitur verbo forensi itgor]riaadps6u, i. e. ante criminati sumus, vel
potius accusando et criminando reos peregimus et convicimus 1. et
2 cap. Quam convictionem Judaeis et gentibus communem Ju
daeorum causa potissimum divinis testimoniis obsignat. Ubi rur-
sus habes picturam hominis non regeniti, longe luculentissimam;
peniciUo Spirito Sancto in sacris tabulis descriptam, et depietam
vivis coloribus. Adimit universis et singulis hominibus primo jus
titiam omnem, deinde sanam inteUigentiam, tum studium omne
pietatis aut Dei quaerendi : mox omnium defectionem docet, adeo
ut facti inutiles boni faciant nihil, ne unus quidem ; atque haec v.
10, 11, et 12, ex Ps. xiv. et liii. Ubi Deum ut omnium rerum e
coelo speculatorem et cognitorem inducit Propheta non testifican-
tem modo, sed etiam judicium ferentem de genere humano, quod
universum arguit aToaratridg, v. 13, 14, 15, ex Ps. v. 10, et cxl;
4, et x. 7; Esaiae, Ux. 7. Organa vocis fere omnia numero qua^

432 COMMENTARIUS,
tuor, guttur, linguam, labia, et os cordis venenum et diritatem
plua quam Cyclopicam effundere, et pedea ad sanguinem ftm-
dendum, et obvia quaeque conterenda, instar grandinis aut bel-
luarum immanium properare testatur, denique viam pacis ignorare,
i. e. expertes omnis humanitatis, et truculentia prorsus efferatos
ritu ferarum esse ; atque haec quoad secundam tabulam, et officia
erga homines ad colendam societatem : fons autem vitiorum om
nium 18 v. aperitur, quippe metus numinis divini vacuitas, et im-
pietas contra tabulam primam. Conferatur ergo cum hac ex Dei
verbo, et ilia altera naturalis, cap. 1, humanae corruptelae descriptio,
et opponatur omnibus omnium sophistaram nugamentis 19 v. sub-
jungit ultimo loco valentissimum ad Judaeos convincendos argu
mentum a fine et usu traditae legis Mosaicae, quemadmodum supra,
1 cap. v. 20, a fine lucis et legis naturalis argumentatus contra
omnes gentes, et hunc usum legis, tanquam notum omnibus et com-
muni sensu comprobatum esse, verbo bidapsv affirmat, nisi malis
hoc restringere ad Apostolum, et alios vere Christianos. Scimus (in-
quit) quaecunque lex, o vbpog, viz. Mosis dicit (XaXe?), i.e. famUiari-
ter et sediflo exponit, atque explanat eadem omnia, atque applicat
omnium conscientiis, ad omnes et singulos violatae legis in omni
bus et singulis mandatis reos peragendos : notanda enim distinctio
inter "keyei et "KaXsi, et ekXer^ig correlativa ad offa. Tit. ii. 1,
<rv 5g 7m"Ksi a itgsicsi rr) vyiaivovo-rj didaexu'kiu, et v. 15, ravra
'kd'ket. Item 1 Pet. iv. 11. (Eirig \aksi ug "kbyiu hov), edicit,
jubet, vetat, imperat iis qui in lege vel sub lege sunt loqui, ut
omne os obturetur, i. e. ut non solum gentes jam convictae lege
naturae, sed etiam Judaei lege Mosis ac proinde omnes homines
sint dvaTdkbyriroi, ut ne verbum quidem ullum ad sui defensionem
queant proferre, atque ita mundus universus fiat obnoxius divinae
condemnationi. Hinc infert 20 v. ex operibus uUius legis sive
naturalis sive Mosaicae mortalium neminem coram Deo justificari :
rationem subjicit, quia per legem est peccati agnitio, nihil enim
tam pugnat cum justitia quam injustitia; per legem omnem
arguitur et agnoscitur injustitia, Ergo per legem nullam, et,
quod idem est, Ex operibus nuUius legis coram Deo quisquam

cap. m. 13-20. 433
justificetur, nam arguere peccatum ac injustitiam, et justificare vel
justum pronuntiare sunt dissentanea atque opposita. Omnem car-
nem vocat omnes homines in Adamo natura corruptos, ac proinde
irae filios, ut vio) rrjg a<reid'stag, Ephes. ii. 2. Nbpov hie sine
articulo posuit, ut tam naturae quam Mosis legem a justificatione
excluderet. In hujus autem vocis unius varia repetitione est di
vina ape\orr\g et simplex (ut ita loquar) mundities non ad suavi-
tatem modo, sed multo magis efficaciam. 'O vbpog, rov vbpov,
wo rov vbpov, sgyuv vbpov, did vbpov, %ug)g vbpov, ter cum arti
culo Mosis legem indicat, totidem vocibus sine articulo universe
accipitur. Justificandi verbum forense hie est, ut cetera fere omnia
in hac disputatione, et condemnationi opponitur, ut apud Solomo-
nem et passim. Haec partieula diori ex usu Graecae Unguae et
hujus ApostoU causalis est, sic passim Aristoteles maxime in Pro-
blematis, sic Apostolus supra cap. i. 19 et 21, et ad Gal. iii.
Sic Graeci omnes et Latini, sic Syrus interpres et Vulg. et Eras
mus, sic Complut. et Philip. Biblia distinguunt puncto in summa
linea. Quid multa ? res ipsa hoc vult, argumento a genere ad spe
ciem, sive a lege in genere ad legem Mosis. NuUus homo ex ullius
legis operibus justificatur coram Deo ; Ergo nee Judaei ex lege Mo-
saica, aut, ut loquitur Apostolus, Quaecunque lex Mosaica jubet aut
vetat, eadem Judaeis instiUat, ut eis convictis violatae legis omnes
homines convincantur, et subjiciantur divinae condemnationi ; atque
hoc est, quod Apostolus effectum voluit jam inde a 18 v. 1 cap.
Omnes homines esse dvaito\oyr\rovg et wodixovg ru hu. Fefelli
fortasse in terpretis nescio quae opinio prolepseos v. 19, cum sit novum
argumentum, idque valentissimum a fine legis, quo et alibi utitur
Apostolus. Est uvrbdei'izig Apostolica, cujus propositio subtieetur,
assumptio conclusionem sequitur, assumptionem vero ejusdem pro-
batio. Expende diligentius. Syrus habet inscriptionem ante v. 19,
Lectio Martyrum.* Unde inteUigas v. 19 a 18 disjungi, et sensu
distingui, et sectione nova novam inchoari sententiam. Hac
tenus ergo ostendit jam inde a 18. v. 1 cap. nullam in hominibus
ullius gentis, aut ordinis justitiam per naturam esse, cujus merito
* [ljou»! Ur°]
2 E

434 COMMENTARIUS,
coram coelesti judiee absolvantur. Quid superest ergo, nisi ut
genus hominum funditus pereat universum ? bona verba, Quin por
tius exclusa ex naturae viribus operum justitia ad Dei justitiam ex
fide in Evangelio patefacfam confugiamus. V- 21, Nvv) ds. Nunc
autem, inquit Apostolus, absque lege, justitia Dei patefacta est,
quippe per EvangeUum, v. 17, cap. 1. haec igitur justitia neque
legalis est, quia absque lege, neque humana, quia Dei justitia
gst, et nunc primum in Christo palam exhibita: verum pagrv-
govpsvr,, i. e., contestata, Legis et Prophetarum testimoniis tanto
ante comprobata, ut de Evangelio, v. 2. cap. 1. praefatus est. Nee
Dei solum est haec justitia, sed etiam fidei : ideo subjungit, v. 22,
Justitia autem Dei per fidem, ut 1. cap. 17 v., Justitia Dei ex
fide. Mox additur, Jesu Christi, ut fidei objectum proprium assig-
netur non tam Deus aut Dei verbum in genere, quam Deus et pro-
missiones Dei in Christo pro objecto fidei inteUigamus, ad quem
Jesum Christum nobis in salutem omnium communicandum cetera
omnia referuntur. Sic postea hoc eodem capite fidem Jesu voca-
bit fidem justificantem : quam vero late pateat haec justitia Evan
gelica, docent verba " In omnes et super omnes sine ullo person-
arum aut Gentium discrimine," addita tamen fidei conditioner hoc
enim est quod vult participio rovg iciar'svovrag, praesenti tempore.
constantiam fidei, et in fide ad extremum usque perseverantiam
innuens : Cujus fidei etiam in electis gignendae Evangelium est
efficax instrumentum, ut dictum est supra. Rationem subdit, cur
haec Dei et fidei justitia sit Judaeorum et Gentium communis,
quod nimirum ambo, aeque peccatores per naturam aeque sint
miseri ; Omnes enim homines aberrarunt injustitiae viam ingressi,
et defect! viribus per naturam a tergo relinquuntur, nee ad metam
divinae, gloriae queunt pertipgere : nee mirum, cum verae virtutis
et sapientiae viam, quae sola ad beatitudinem ducit, vix ac ne vix
quidem ingressi in avia et praecipitia caeco impetu ferantur : Duo
igitur interveniunt impedimenta naturae caecitate et corruptione,
omnibus hominibus communia, Aberratio a recta via, et virium
cjlefectus et imbecillitas, ne metam coelestia vitae et gloriae contin-
gamua. Cum haec impedimenta omnibus a natura pariter objici-

cap. iii. 21-26. 435
antur, sequitur omnibus justificandis supra naturam assurgendum
esse, et Judaeis non minus quam Gentibus divina in Christo per
Evangelium conferenda justitia necessario opus esse, cujus justitiae
justificantis causas omnes accurate et luculenter tribus versibus,
24, 25, 26, explicat. Aixaiovpsvoi, ut qui justificemur, v. 3, omnes,
Le. a peccatis absolvamur, dugsav, dono quo nos Pater donat in
Christo per Spiritum Sanctum, rrj avrov %dgiri sua ipsius mera
gratia, ut neque sit in nobis a natura vel recipiendi facultas, vel
promerendi virtus, cum causa (siquidem causae nomen hie rite ad-
hibere fas sit) tam efficiens quam impellens et procurans extra su-
praque nos sit, nostramque naturam, quin et Christus est nostrum
Illud avrikvrgov, cujus satisfactione tanquam pretio pro nobis exo-
luto in libertatem vindicamur ; ad gratiam ergo Dei Patris accedit
Christi obedientia ad mortem usque crucis de paternae voluntatis
aeterno decreto : Nam Deus Pater, v. 25, ante mundum conditum
proposuit secum (hoc enim est wgothro) filium suum Jesum Chris
tum tkaarrjgtov, i.e. placamentum, legali propitiatorio patribus adum-
bratum sub. lege, idque per fundendum sanguinem suum, legalium
victimarum umbratUi sanguine adumbratum et praefiguratum ;
nobis vero et Patribus sub lege fidelibus per fidem Spiritus
Sancti virtute apprehendendum. Finis autem consilii divini ab
aeterno, et Christi populo veteri legalibus umbris olim praefigurati,
fuit justitiae divinae in Christi adventu his temporibus ostensio, non
secus ac siquis digitum ad earn intendat, hoc enim est lig evdei%iv*
Sed quaerat merito aliquis, quorsum opus demonstratione justitiae
Dei ; Respondet Apostolus, propter praeteritionem (hoc enim est
vdgestg) id est quasi conniventiam et dissimulationem ante com-
missoram peccatorum jam inde a lapsu primi hominis, quae expiata,,
ante Christum in carne exhibitum, ullo piaculari sacrificio non fu-
erant, idque ex tolerantia Dei, cujus justitiae pro Electorum peccatis
satisfactum ante non fuerat. Ad demonstrationem inquam (sic enim
urget finem divini decreti et adumbrationis tanti mysterii sub lege)
divinae justitiae in praesenti tempore, quae justitia prius semper
latere occulta videbatur, quam per aeternum Christus Spiritum
aeipaum obtulit, aeternum redemptionem adeptua, Heb. ix. Hujus
2 e2

436 commentarius,
autem declaratur justitiae finis, ut non solum constet, et liquido
appareat omnibus Deum esse justum, ut qui, in morte filii acerbis-
sima et ignominiosissima, summo jure, ultus sit omnem et Patrum
omnium, et nostrum, et posterorum servandorum injustitiam, sed
etiam gratis in Christo propter ejus meritum justificet omnes, qui
fide obedientiam Christi in justitiam apprehendunt. Itaque justi
tia salutaris, qua nos coram Deo justificamur, non est humana, sed
divina, non legalis, sed Evangelica, nee amplius umbris legalibus
obtecta, sed cum Deo in carne patefacto et ipsa patefacta, et in
bono Evangelii lumine collocata, nee nunc primum nata aut cog-
nita, sed jam olim a lege et Prophetis praefigurata et praenuntiata,
atque adeo etiamnum habens divinum et indubitatum a lege et
prophetis testimonium, ut habet, v. 21. Nee Dei solum justitia est,
sed etiam per fidem Christi justitia est, ideoque et fidei et Christi
justitia et est et dicitur. Denique est omnium fideUum communis
dixaioavvrj hov lx Ttareug, hoc est, quod ait Apostolus : In omnes
et super omnes credentes, quia ad omnes pertingit, et ea induti ves-
tiuntur omnes, ne eorum pudenda appareat nuditas : Sic enim dis-
tinguo, slg icdvrag xa) It) Tuvrag. An slg Tavrug de imputata,
\t) Tavrag de inhaerente dicitur ? Expende, ut altera expiati
reconcilientur Deo, altera induti atque ornati conformes reddantur
Deo. Communitatis ratio duplex, eaque communis omnibus aber
ratio et infirmitas, translation e a ludis Circensibus illustrata : hinc
enim sumptae voces dpagrdveiv et varsgSa^ai, quod posterius est de-
fectu virium et defatigatione a tergo in cursu relinqui, et ad
metam non pervenire, nedum ad praemium et coronam, v. 23. Est
igitur justitia Dei ex fide Christi communis Judaeis et Gentibus,
cujus causae omnes in Deo Patre et Filio et Spiritus Sanctus quae-
rendae et inveniendae, ut docet, v. 24 et 25, enucleate exponit.
Aixaiovpsvoi sub. lapsv vel ela), Ellipsis verbi substantivi, ut qui
justificentur. Augeav, dono fidei per Spiritum Sanctum ingeneratae,
qua justitiam hanc dono item coUatam apprehendimus. T5; avrov
%dgiri, ipsius Dei Patris gratia, xara rrjv svdoxiav rov Sskyparog
avrov, et Christum et Spiritum et fidem in Christo per Spiritum no
bis impertiens ; Nostra autem justitia est redemptio per Christum-

cap. iii. 21-26. 437
parta, has tres causas explanat, Gratiam Patris aeterno ejus pro
posito, quo praedestinavit pacificatorem, et propitiatorem ; Meri-
tum Christi, qui propositus ab aeterno de sententia Patris, et sub
lege umbratili propitiatorio hircorum piaculari sanguine asperso
praefiguratus, et ipse tandem in plenitudine temporum verum
placamentum suo ipsius sanguine irroratum exhibitus : hunc Chris
tum, ikaarfjgiov xai iKaapbv nostrum, recipimus per fidem eflicaci
operatione Spiritus Sanctus, atque ita conjungo ikaarngiOv cum lv ru
avrov aipari, et ita docetur Christum et justitiam EvangeUcam a
lege testimonium habere. Sequitur quarta causa communis Patri,
Filio et Spiritui Sancto, tametsi Deo Patri peculiariter tribui vide-
atur : finis enim est divinae justitiae celebratio seu illustratio, quae
finis ob majorem efficacitatem et evidentiam semel atque iterum
posita est, et quia declaratae justitiae Dei causam interposuit, ne-
cessario repetenda fuit. Causa autem ostendendae hujus justitiae
fuit ejus sub veteri Testamento quasi obscuratio, non aUter ac si
Deus dissimulasset suam justitiam ex indulgentia erga electos,
cum nondum iUi pro ipsorum peccatis reapse factum esset satis.
Hue spectat praepositio did cum quarto casu, et nomen Tidgsaig,
quae nunquam significat gratuitam condonationem et veniam pec-
catorum, sed apsaig apud Apostolum et alios Graece loquutos. Terr
tio, causa rrjg Tageaeug non est pura puta misericordia hoc loco, quae
sola est causa remissionis peccatorum, sed avoy/j hov, tolerantia
Dei, quae poenam et ultionem non prorsus tollit, sed differt ad
tempus. Denique Tgoysyovbra dpagrfipura, ante Christum exhi-
bitum commissa peccata, conferuntur cum praesenti tempore, quo,
Christo pro peccatis mortuo, declarator justitia Dei, quam ego
interpreter, severitatem, qua ne filio quidem suo pepercit, sed in
mortem tradidit iUum, ut suae justitiae satisfieret. Unde emergit
justitia, qua nos justificamur, et divinae veritatis et fidei secundum
gratiosam in Christo promissionem praestatio et complementum.
Ideoque finem repetit atque explicat, lig rb sivui avrbv dixaiov,
ubi eivai est idem quod pavsguSrjvui, alioqui Deus ab aeterno Justus,
et hoc sensu Deum esse et justum esse est idem. K.ai dixatovvret,
rbv lx Tiarsug 'Irjaov] Cum summa justitia conjungitur hie summa

438 COMMENTARIUS,
misericordia qua Deus justificat gratis ex mera gratia eum qui est
ex fide lesu, i.e. qui in Christum credit, aUoqui per naturam impius
ut cap. iv., " Qui justificat impium." Fides lesu dicitur non qua
credit, aut quam habet Christus, sed qua creditur et quae habetur
Christo, v. 27. Sic descripta et explicata justitia fidei EvangeUca
ex omnibus ejus causis (quarum nulla extra Deum, sed in Deo om
nes, et a Deo repetendae) infert novum argumentum pro stabili-
enda fidei justitia contra justitiam operum. NuUa homini super
est in se aut suis virtutibus, aut viribus gloriandi materia, acsi ita
dissereret : Ea justitia justificamur, quae nulla homini gloriandi
materiam relinquit, omnem Deo tribuit gloriandi. At fidei justitia
nullam relinquit homini, omnem Deo tribuit gloriandi materiam ;
contra vero se habet operum justitia : Unde concludit seq. ver.,
Fide, non operibus justificamur. Syllogismi assumptio hoc versu
dialogismo tractatur, et figuratur interrogatione, qua velut insultat
Pharisaicae operariorum praefidentiae. Ubi igitur gloriatio, i. e.
homini in se suisque operibus gloriandi materia, cum de justifica-
tione agitur. Respondet, Exclusa est, i. e. nulla homini reliqua est,
cum non ab homine, sed a Deo sint ejus causae omnes. Per quam
legem quaerit, an naturae, an Mosis, quae justitiam operum exigunt,
quam nemo mortalium est solvendo : subjicit, non, i. e. neque per
naturalis, neque per Mosaicae legis justificationem adimatur ho
mini omnis gloriandi in se materia, nee omnis gloria Deo tribuitur,
sed per legem fidei, i. e. justificationem fidei vel justitiam Dei
ex fide, per Evangelium patefactam et collatam, omnis Deo, nulla
homini tribuitur gloria. Si homo vel in solidum, vel ex parte,
i. e. vel solis operibus, vel partim fide, partim operibus justifica-
retur, vera gloria detraheretur Deo, falsa homini affingeretur. Hie
legis nomen mirifice et modificate, sed divinitus et significanter fidei
tribuitur. "hoyi^opeda ovv, 28 v.J Conclusio generalis et bimem-
bris totius disputationis a 18, v. i. cap. Ergo fide justificamur, ope
ribus autem nullis, et quod idem est, sola fide justificamur : Nam
excludendi particula in hac enuntiatione tantum opera excludit,
quod disertis verbis facit Apostolus %»g'S sgyuv vbpov absque ope
ribus legis ullius, sive naturalis sive Mosaicae, aut moralis* aut

cap. iii. 27-31. 439
judicialis, aut ceremonialis ; absentia enim articuli significat no
men hie usurpari in genere, ut contra articulo addito restrin-
gitur ad legem Mosis, et supra et infra exempla extant ebmplu-
ria. Vetus interpres vertit arbitramur, verbo forensi a pleris-
que male intellecto ut arbiter, et arbitrium boni viri apud Jure-
consultos : unde errandi occasionem non oblatam temere arripue-
runt Pontificii, qui dubitanter, non asseveranter Apostolum hie loqui
voluerunt. At arbitrari non est semper dubitare, ut neque verbum
putare, cum de putandis rationibus agitur ; unde sumpta est simili-
tudo, quae exprimitur verbo \oytZbpe6a apud Apostolum ab Arith-
meticis et ratiocinatoribuS, qui rationes seu ratiocinia ineunt et sub-
ducunt, sumpta translatione. Unde manavit verbi usus logicus a
logistico nimirum, frequens apud philosophos, ut "koyiZf&ai ratione
uti, ratiocinari, syUogismum seu ratiocinationem concludere, ut hoc
loco. Significat igitur Apostolus se, quasi initis et subductis omni
bus superiore disputatione rationibus, concludere duplicem syUogis
mum demonstrativum, alteram affirmantem pro fidei justitia, alte
ram negantem contra operum justitiam. Subjectum est dv&guTbg
speciem humanam significans : homines universos et singulos in se
complectens, qui coram Deo justificantur. Justificandi autem ver
bum hie, ut supra, et in tota hac disputatione, condemnationi
opponitur, quod clarum evadit Rom; viii. 33, 34, hog b dtxatuv,
rig o xaraxgivuv ; Fidei nomen verbo justificandi junctum, non hie
consideratur absolute, tanquam infusa solum qualitas, ut interpre-
tantur Sophistae, sed relatione ad Christum, cujus apprehendendi
idoneum est instrumentum. Ideo non est ipsa per se fides seorsim
in se considerata, cujus dignitate et merito justificamur, sed Chris
tus, Christique perfecta ad mortem usque crucis obedientia, quam
fides justificans apprehendit. Quare metonymica est locutio, cum
fide justificati dicimur, aut fides justitia nostra. Atque haec de
conclusione generali hujus syUogismi, Nullus injustus ex operibus
coram Deo justificabitur. Omnes homines sunt injusti, &c. V. 29
ad communionem hujus justificationis explicandam regreditur, dia-
logismo usus, ut supra 27 v. cum doceret laudem hujus justitiae
omnem. Deo acceptam prorsus deberi, ut cujus sit in soUdum autor

440 COMMENTARIUS,
et causa omnia, unde et Dei justitia est toties appellata. Fidei
justitiam esse, 28 v. conclusit; nunc, quod tertium est, communem
Judaeis et Gentibus earn demonstrat ; illos Tegiropr\v, has dxgojiv-
ariav metonymice more suo appellans, v. 29. Prior ratio est a sub
jecto sumpta cum mutua affectione. Deus est tam Gentium, quam
Judaeorum Deus, ergo fidei justificatio communis est Gentibus et
Judaeis. Altera ratio, 30 v., sumpta ab unitate Dei, cujus una
simplicissimaque essentia, voluntas, atque justitia, quae (ut dixi) in
Deo unum sunt cum ipso Deo, non patitur alio Judaeos, alio Gentes
modo justificati: Verum ut unus est Spiritus Sanctus unus Dominus,
unus Deus, ita est una fides, quae unum Christum Dominum nobis
applicat in justitiam : hoc enim sibi vult articulus in altero membro
additus de Gentibus, qui priori membro de Judaeis appositus non
fuit : vim enim habet avapogixrjv, qua significatur hac, ilia eadem-
que fide, qua Judaei, etiam Gentes justificari : Ubi nota sx Tiarsug
et dia Tiarsug, et Tiarei dixaiova'bai prorsus idem esse, quibus locu-
tionibus significatur, fidem esse divinam illam manum, quae justi
tiam nostram prehendens nobis earn confert. Stabilita Dei, quae
et fidei, et communis promiscue, justitia, occurrit objectioni obortae
ex general! conclusione, et nomine legis saepius repetitae, et a
justitia exclusae. Si justificamur fide sine legis operibus, videtur
fides quasi enervare legem, ejusque vim inefficacem et otiosam red-
dere : hoc enim est xaragv&v atque ita legem prorsus antiquare.
Hanc objectionem tollit aversando earn tanquam absurdam et blas-
phemam, contrariumque fidei effectum substituendo, legem, viz.
stabiliri, i.e. Christo doctrinam hanc apostolicam de evangeUca fidei
justitia doctrinam legis et vim promovere magis et iUustrare, ut
postea est dictum.

QUARTUM CAPUT.
Altera objectio, quam praevertendo fidei justitiam omnibus ser-
vandis communem Abrahami exemplo confirmat. Sic ergo disserit,
quomodo justificatus Abraham fuit, eodem omnes servandi justifi-

cap. iv. 1-13. 441
cabuntur : At Abraham fide justificatus fuit : Ergo servandi, sive
electi, omnes fide justificabuntur. Propositionis sententia tribus ul-
timisversibus comprehenditur; Assumptio octo primis; Conclusio re-
Uquis. Ti ovv, assumptionis sententia contrario illustrator; Abraham
ex operibus justificatus non fuit. Interrogatio enim negat hoc loco :
Abrahamum vero patrem vocat non tam naturae respectu, quam
gratiae. Secundum carnem idem est, quod meritis operum, q. d.
Ne Abraham quidem, quanquam Spiritualis omnium filiorum Dei
Pater, et verae justificationis exemplar, operibus justitiae laudem
est consecutus. Ratio per distinctionem redditur, v. 2. Aliud est
coram Deo, aliud coram hominibus justitiae laudem rnereri : hoc
Abraham fortasse potuit, iUud nullatenus. Coram Deo nihU potu-
isse vel sanctissima opera Abrahami, probat divino testimonio, v.
3, atque ita ingreditur confirmationem justitiae fidei, quam antea
legali propitiatorio confirmavit, propheticis testimoniis comprobare.
Abrahami fides ad justitiam imputata fuit, xv. Genes, quod illustrat
antithesi contrarioram, iv. 5. Ubi observa mercedem aliam gra-
tuitam, aliam debitam : hanc rependi operibus, iUam ex gratia
donari, ut quae impio et nihU boni promerito gratis tribuatur, quo
spectat propheticum Davidis oraculum, justitiam absque operum
meritis beatitudinis nomine praedicans, 6, 7, 8, v., eamque in pec-
eatorum remissione collocans, unde petenda vera justificationis sen
tentia. Atque haec paucis de assumptione ; Conclusio disputatur
pluribus per dialogismum a 9 v. ad 23, communem sc. justificandi
rationem justificandis omnibus tam Gentibus quam Judaeis, ad quam
conclusionem Ulustrandam urgetur hoc idem Abrahami exemplum
cum temporis notatione, et duplici statu : altero quidem in praeputio,
quum nondum esset circumcisus, fide tamen justificatus : altero cum
circumcideretur, et justitiae fidei tanquam sigiUo obsignaretur.
Abraham igitur ut incircumcisus Gentium, ut circumcisus Judae
orum exemplar fuisse tradit, sed neque circumcisionis, neque prae-
putii ratione, sed soliua fidei justificatione, quod probat Abrahami
item exemplo, qui non lege aut operibus est hanc dignitatem adep-
tus, ut esset Ecclesiae ex Judaeis et Gentibus colligendae Pater,
sed gratuita fidei justitia. Ratio quod operum justitia non

442 COMMENTARIUS,
Abrahamo patri solum, sed etiam filiis ex Judaeis et Gentibus
haereditatem confirmet. To xkrjgbvopov etvai haeredem, i. e. domi
num jure paternitatis spiritualis ; haeredis enim nomine Domi-
nus intelligebatur, ait Festus. Ps. cxxvii. 3., Heb. i. 2., Rom. viii.
v. 17. Fides Abrahami supra naturam assurgens ex promissione
divina accurate describitur, cujus vi promissionem amplexus reU-
quit exemplum posteris, fidem illis injustitiam imputatum iri : quae
enim de Abrahamo in hanc sententiam scripta extant, fihorum, i.e.
eorum omnium, qui in posterum credituri essent, gratia Uteris pro-
dita sunt. Denique Abrahami exemplum vim habet a jure patera
nitatis ad jus filiationis, quod non alia ratione ac modo acquirant
liberi, quam pater; ideoque, 1. v., Abrahamum patrem nostrum
vocat, i.e. omnium electorum tam ex Gentibus, quam ex Judaeis.
Ideo haeredem mundi, et patrem multarum Gentium eodem sensu
nominat, quam dignitatem non ex operum sed fidei justitia est
adeptus, quod promissioni fidem haberet, cujus signum et sigillum
non solum fuit nota circumcisionis, sed etiam litera cum uxoris,
tum suo nomini adjecta, quod nomen interpretatur Deus, Abraham,
i.e. patrem multarum gentium : estque paternitas ea ex pro
missione spiritualis, qua non solum Judaei, sed etiam Gentes per
fidem in Christum conseantu-r in Abrahami semine, adeo ut
Abrahami fiUum, et filium Dei hoc sensu pro eodem dici aestimetur.
Caeterum fidem imputari in justitiam, justitiam imputari sine operi
bus, et peccatum non imputari, pro eodem accipi videatur. Unde
justificatio de qua agit, tota in remissione peccatorum posita esse
videatur, nee video quid addi possit ad plenam absolutionem a pec
catis, quam justificationem appellavimus, quae tota pendet a morte
Christi, sine cujus sanguinis effusione nulla remissio, Heb. ix. Et
vero non solum quae omissionis et commissionis peccata dicuntur,
quae vulgo actualia peccata appellantur, sed etiam labes iUa haere-
ditaria, cujus reliquiae haerent in Sanctis, quae et ipsae in peccati
rationem veniunt, nee alia ratione quam unico mortis Christi saerificio
purgantur, et, ne in rationem coram Deo veniant, expiantur : Neque
enim conceptus Christi, et nostrae in Christo naturae sanctificatio
expiat sordes in natura nostra reliquas, neque per omnem vitam

cap. iv. 14-25. 443
obedientia Christi perfecta, qua plene legem praestitit, defectum
legalis obedientiae supplevit in nobis ; verum uterque hie indigni-
tatis nostrae morbus non alio remedio, quam Christi morte curatur,
non secus atque cetera peccata omnia, quae admittimus et patramus.
Sed quaerat aliquis, quo nobis ilia Christi in carne exinanitio, nos-
traeque naturae in ipso conceptu sanctificatio, ut cui usui tantos
tamque perfectus amor Dei, et proximi, atque adeo in factis, dictis
cogitatis plena legalis obedientia, nisi et ilia sanctificatio, et haec
plena legis praestatio nobis imputetur tum ad tegendam naturae nos
trae impuritatem, turn ad supplendum legalis obedientiae defectum
in nobis. Respondeo cum Apostolo decuisse nostrum pontificem
oatov, axaxov, apiavrov aval, non secus atque oportuit pacificatorem
nostrum esse veram Deum, verumque hominem : haec igitur erant
necessaria ad personam idoneam constituendam, quae sacerdotium
susciperet, et suscepto fungeretur, et victimam idoneam, quae pro
peccatis electorum Deo Patri offerretur ; et quemadmodum Deum
ab aeterno, et hominem xara xaigov perfectae aetatis, xai re~knov,
ita sanctum etiam et justum ante esse oportuit, quam sacrificium
offerret, aut sacerdotio fungeretur. Quare quae ad personae ixa-
vorrjra pertinebant, ea non debent inutilia censeri, cum fuerint
apprime necessaria, neque tamen confundi cum actionibus sacer-
dotalibus, cujusmodi est oblatio sacrificii expiatorii pro peccatis
omnibus. In summa sanctificatio, et activa (ut loquuntor) in vita
obedientia ad qualificandam (ut ita loquar) Mediatoris personam
requirebantur, ut non solum Christus sacerdos idoneus, sed etiam
idonea victima esset, cujus per aeternum Spiritum oblatione sancti-
ficaret in perpetuum credentes, et perficeret qui sanctificantur. Et
cui condonata sunt peccata omnia, condonatae quoque iUi naturae
sordes reliquae, et carentia* omnia, atque defectus legalis obedien
tiae: quoniam tam hie defectus, quam Ulae sordes, non secus atque
alia peccata Christi sanguine abluuntur ; et cui haec omnia condo-
nantur, cur non habeatur pro sancto et justo, ut cui non imputetur
sua vel impuritas, vel injustitia : habetur enim eo loco, quo habere-
tur si sanctus legem praestitisset. Superest igitur sola mors Christi
* [Sic in MS. ; sed novo et nulla auctoritate munito verbo usus est auctor.]

444 COMMENTARIUS,
veri Dei, verique hominis perfecte sancti, et perfecte justi, Cujus.
merito purgamur a peccatis nostris, et hac gratuita peccatorum
remissione coram Deo justificamur, i. e. plene absolvimur, acsi nun-
quam peccassemus. Veram accedit aliud beneficium cum hoc priore
conjunctum tempore, sed ratione disjungendum, nimirum sancti
ficatio, quae pendet a Christi resurrectione et vita rediviva, qua fit,
ut nos quoque in novam vitam resurgamus, de qua posterius, Rom*
x. " Corde creditor ad justitiam, ore fit confessio ad salutem :" oris
confessio pro sanctificatione. Atquehaecsuntduoillabeneficia,quae
percipiunt credentes in eum, qui excitavit Iesum Dominum nostrum
a mortuis, qui traditus fuit proper peccata nostra, et excitatus est
propter justificationem nostram. Fortassis justificationis nomine
Apostolum eo loco sanctificationem intelligit, quamvis alii efficaci
am, qua applicator meritum mortis Christi nobis ad expianda pec
cata, et nos justificandos, i.e. a peccato absolvendos, vel (ut alii
volunt)^ ad imputandam nobis legalem Christi, et activam in vita
justitiam, quae tamen mortem antecessit, qua morte opus non fuis
set, si praecedens vitae obedientia ad justitiam imputaretur, neque
resurrectionis beneficium dici possit, qua Christus redivivus non
amplius moritur, sed vivit Deo. Excutiantur verba singula operosae
iUius descriptionis fidei Abrahamicae, cujus objectum non solum ex
promissione Dei misericordia, sed etiam potentia, quam ut impo-
tentiae naturae, sic omnibus impedimentis opposuit, adeo ut contra
spem, ubi nuUa esset humanitus, aut per naturam sperandi materia,
sub spe tamen crederet ; adeo ut neque corporis effoeti, et uxorisj
et sui contemplatione fides ipsius aut infirmaretur, aut spes infrin-
geretur sed e contrario, (ut pluribus explicat Apostolus a quo dicitur
Tkngopogrjh)g, plene persuasus certa fiducia), cursum fidei teneret,
non secus ac secundo vento plenis velis impulsa navis ferri solet,
Quod sequitur o lTr)yyekrai, vertunt omnes, qui promisit ; videtur
vertendum potius, quod promis sum fuerat. Est enim verbum pas-
sivum, neque articulus masculini generis praepositivus cum verbo
jungeretur, et scribendum fuisset og STriyysikaro, 21, v. Observa
hoc quarto capite undecies verbum hoyitprat pro imputata justitia,
contra Sophistas, earn non minus impie, quam impudenter negantes.

cap. v. 1-2. 445

QUINTUM CAPUT.

Infert cap. v. ex justificatione fidei beneficium pacis cum Deo
(contra vero. cap. i., v. 18, aTOxaXvTrsrat yag bgyr) hov) quam
multi interpretatur tranquillitatem conscientiae, nos vero reconcilia-
tionem, hujus tranquillitatis causam, cum Apostolo qui v. 9, 10, 11,
reconciliationem cum justificatione conjungit. Vide Ephes. ii.
toiuv slgr]vr]v, xai aTOxaraWdfyj, &c, aToxr'sivag rr]v eyjgav, et
\vYjyye\iaaro slgrjvrjv, ot; Bi avrov v&opsv rr)v Tgoaayuyrjv lv sv)
TVivpari Tgoj rov Tursga. Unde manat triplex ilia fidei gloriatio
sub spe gloriae Dei, v. 2, in afflictionibus, v. 3, in Deo per Domi
num nostrum Jesum Christum, per quem nunc reconciliationem
adepti sumus, v. 11. Unde enim ilia gloriatio nisi ab efficacia Spi
ritus Christi persuadentis nobis amorem Dei in Christo, qui morte
et sanguine Filii nos, cum peccatores essemus, justificatos ; et cum
hostes essemus, reconciliatos, est in vita servaturus per vitam Filii
sui; atque hoc quid aliud est, quam certa salus, quae justitiam
fidei consequitur. Tantundem ergo dicit hoc cap. acsi diceret,
justificati fide certe servabimur, sive salutem aeternam conseque-
mur, quemadmodum dixerat cap. i. Evangelium esse potentiam
Dei ad salutem, quia per Ulud justitia Dei ex fide retegeretur
in fidem. Ut igitur hactenus veram justitiam pervestigavit, ita
hoc cap. certitudinem salutis aeternae ex ea justitia derivat, atque
demonstrat. Justificationem hanc vocat abductionem per fidem in
gratiam; qua adducti fuimus (Deo trahente, cum antea aversi esse
mus) per fidem in gratiam, in qua nunc stamus. Pacem vero cum
Deo, sive reconcUiationem nostram, gratiam iUam, in qua nunc
stamus. Standi verbo significat perseverantiae donum, quod cum
justificationis et reconciliationis beneficio indissolubili vinculo co-
haeret, unde spes certa nascitur salutis, et vitae aeternae. Non
tam igitur justitiam fidei hoc cap. explicat ab effectis, quam ex jus
titia fidei deducit reconciliationem cum Deo, perseverantiae donum,
spem salutis, consolationem in adversis, et certitudinem aeternae

446 COMMENTARIUS,
vitae et gloriae, quae sunt effecta Spiritus Sancti in Christo, ex
gratia Dei Patris, justificationem fidei naturae ordine consequen-
tia. Spes autem gloriae divinae et vitae aeternae corroboratur in
nobis afflictionibus, vi Spiritus Sancti qui datus est nobis a Patre
in Christo, effundens Ulum Dei paternum amorem in corda nostra,
ut sub cruce exerciti, paternam ferulam ex paterno affectu in bonum
nostrum profectam agnoscamus, quos adoptione fiUos non tam
punit ut judex, quam castigat ut pater. Observetur hoc Christi-
anum paradoxon, oppressio effiat patientiam, patientia experien-
tiam, i.e. exploratam et compertam reddit Dei praesentiam, et be
nevolentiam in nobis opitulandis, et sustentandis, ne ullis rerum
adversarum casibus succumbamus, quae experientia spem divini
auxilii, et liberationis, et vitae in nobis confirmat ; nee sperata nos
frustra habet, quia Deus nunc amore nos in Christo prosequitur,
quo nos, cum adhuc nullis viribus et impii essemus, amplectebatur ;
ut qui filium pro nobis in mortem et peccatoribus, et hostibus tradi-
derit ; unde colligit, quanto magis nunc justificatos, et reconciliatoa
servaturus sit per vitam ejus. Quod vero ait, vix pro justo quem-
quam emoriturum, fortasse pro bono (ubi nota artic. rov ayadov
qui abest a voce dtxaiov) aliquis emori ausit, id ad amplificandum
Dei in nos amorem positum est, qui neque justi neque boni fuera-
mus, cum Christus pro nobis vitam effunderet; haud scio an rov.
ayadov nomine significet ayadoTOiovvra, beneficum, et bene meri-
tum de nobis, an idem fere quod dixatog, propter articulum for-
tassis hoc in loco avaQogtxbv. Certe videtur dtxaiov upagruhoigy
et ayadov l-ffigaig opponere, sic ut crescat oratio, et amoris divini
in Christo amplitudo, qui, non solum pro nobis peccatoribus, qui
neque boni, neque justi eramus, verum et peccatores et hostes,
filium in mortem exposuit, cum vix pro justo quis emoriatur, tam-
etsi forte pro amico, et bene merito de se aliquis mori sustineat.
Notandum quod, v. 9, ex justificatione deducat conservationem ab
ira, i. e. liberationem ab ultione divina propter, peccatum, et ex re-
conciliatione conservationem in vita, ex sensu divini amoris erga
nos, cujus autor atque effector est Spiritus Sanctus in nobis, v. 11.
Tertia gloriatio, gradatim enim et per gradus tres procedit orta ex

cap. v. 3-17. 447
fide gloriandi fiducia, prima fuit sub spe gloriae Dei, v. 2. ; 2a, in
adversis v. 3.; 3a, v. 11, in Deo per Dominum nostrum Iesum
Christum, nam aUbi dicit, absit mihi gloriari, nisi in cruce Domini
nostri, etc., et qui gloriatur, in Domino glorietur. Sed et spem
salutis et solatium in adversis a Deo esse in Christo per Spiritum
Sanctum agnoscit Apostolus, et utriusque causam hujus tertiae glo-
riationis materiam esse. Materia ergo hujus gloriationis est recon-
cUiationis, unde pendet salus, beneficium a justificatione pendens.
Ideo dicit, per quem reconcUiationem adepti sumus, v. 12. Aim
rovro qaTSg.] Quamobrem sicut ingressum est peccatum in mun-
dum, et per peccatum mors ; ita etiam mors subingressa pervasit
omnes homines. Ep u Tavreg npagrov, ab eum, ob quem omnes
peccarunt. Est enim ep> u ambiguum, generis vel masculini de
Adamo, vel neutri causam indicans. Videtur autem haec non
mutila, sed plena simiUtudo, qua alte repetit argumentum fidueiae
et gloriationis nostrae a Dei voluntate, etiam tum, cum primum
permitteret hominem labi in peccatum et mortem, q, d, propterea,
ut esset nobis ampla gloriandi in Deo per Christum materia, non
solum peccavit Adam, et ob peccatum morti obnoxius fuit, verum
etiam mortem cum peccato transfudit in omnes ejus posteros ;
atque ita uaareg et ovrug inter se respondent, ut notae similitudinia
protasin et apodosin inter se conjun gentes, xai vero particula non
redundat, sed auget sensum, ut Latine sic etiam- Duo igitur sunt,
peccatum et mors, quibus duo attribuuntur, nimirum ingressus et
privatio, Graece melius siarjlJr], KaidtfiXOrj, sicut peccatum et mors
ingressa sunt humanum genus per primum hominem, sic pervase-
runt omnes homines, ut jam inde a lapsu frierint peccatores et
mortales, et mortales quia peccatores, et peccatores propterea
quod in primo homine peccarint, vel saltem propter priori hominia
peccatum cum ipso et rei sint, et peccato infecti, ut non possint
ampUus non peccare ; peccasse autem probat, quod peccatum in
mundo fueri^ usque ad, legem Mosis, quod probat ab effecto peccati,,
quippe morte ipsa, quae grassata est in omnes homines usque ad
Mosem et deinceps. Ergo peccatum fuisse oportuit, cujus causa
Omnes homines mortem subierunt promeriti ; verum sine lege pec-

448 COMMENTARIUS,
catum esse non potuit (apagria enim est avopla) multo minus
potuit imputari, h. e. iKkoy&rai. Oportuit ergo ante legem Mosis
aliquam legem fuisse, cujus violatio mortem accersiverit, et cum
non solum adulti, sed etiam infantes, qui per aetatem Adami more
novi peccaverint, cum nondum haberent ullum rationis usum ; se^
quitur illos in Adamo peccasse, aut saltem propter Adami peccatum
peccati et mortis reos fuisse, hoc est illud, quod vulgo originale
peccatum dicitur, cujus partes duae. Una quidem interdicti in esu
vetiti pomi violatio, quod primum fuit primi hominis peccatum,
cujus nos omnes in ipso rei sumus ; pars altera, corruptio naturalis
et peccandi proclivitas, quae cum Adamo omnes posteros peccato
mancipavit. Ab Adamo igitur injustitia et mors facta est humano
generi gentilitio jure haereditaria, adeo ut per naturam non possit
non peccare. Verum hie primus Adam posterioris Adami typus
fuit, quem promissum statim sub primi hominis lapsum usque ad
legem Patriarchae, ac post legem pii omnes sollicite expectarunt ;
ideo hie o psKkuv dicitur, i. e. qui venturus erat, et cujus adventus
differri longius videbatur ; adsignificat enim vox haec moram, et
cunctationem ; in evangelica historia o eg'/fipevog dicitur ut Mat. xi.
ffu si b sgyppsvog, et alibi, fortasse etiam apud Joan. i. hoc sensu
dicitur, rb pug r.b akrjdivbv sgyfopevov elg rov xbepov. Sic apud
Dan. cap. ix. v. 26, JOn T33 princeps venturus dicitur. Si Adam
Christi typus fuit, et injustitia et mors culpa Adami propagata in
omnes homines typi fuerunt justitiae et vitae per Christum cum
electis communicandae. Quare ut injustitia et mors per Adamum
ingressa et progressa in omnes homines electos, ut 18, et 19, fusius
explicatur similitude Igitur si Adam Christi typus fuit, certe in
peccato et morte per Adamum invecta in genus humanum evexit
Deus initio cum peccaret Adam salutare signum justitiae et vitae,'
per Christum participandae ; atque hoc est, quod dixerat supra
xii. 5, dia rovro ; respicit enim gloriationem in Deo per Christum
propter reconciliationem, cujus meminit proxime superiore, v. 11.
Illud dia rovro neglectum ab interpretibus diligenter expendendum
censeo ; neque enim otiosum est, Ucet absit a quibusdam exem-
plaribus. Fuerit ergo typicus Adam quasi sublatum contra mortem

cap. V. 15-19. 449
et inferos sub ipsa principia tropaeurii, ut indicat nomen rvTog,-
tantum mysterium cum simUitudine quasi ad unum verbum con-
trahens. Sequitur simUitudinis Ulustratio a dissimilitudine impa-
rium, tribus vers. 15, 16, 17, ac deinceps simUitudine duobus vers.
plenius explicatur, 18, 19. Ad dissimUitudinem intelligendam
opus est quarundam vocum animadversione, ut xdgiapa, cui
opponitur TagaTrupa. Adam. Christus.
Uagaxor). "YTaxorj.
TlagaTrupa. Xdgiapa.
'Apagria. Aixatoovvrj et %dgtg did dixaio-
avvrjv.
Kgtpa, judicium, i. e. reatus Augripa.
quia judicium occupatur in
reatu adjudicando sonti.
K.urdxgipa. Aixdiupa.
ULardxgiaig davdrov. Atxdiuaig ?,urjg.
Qdvarog. "Zur).
Uriyr) xa) pi£a, fons et radix mortis et vitae est Adami Tugaxor),
unde ejus rb TagaTrupa, unde ejus r) apagria, unde est rb
xglpa, quod secum affert xardxgipa, et hoc xardxgiaiv davd
rov, unde mors aeterna sequitur. E regione respondet Christi
r] vTaxorj, rb -fcdgiapa, r] dixaioevvrj, rb. dugripa, rb dixdiupa,
quae omnia quinque pro eodem sumi (quamquam diversa ra
tione) videntur; atque una et eadem Christi obedientia vocari
etiam r] "fadgig rov hov, xa) t) dugsa sv rr\ %dgtri rrj rov svbg av0guTot)
Irjaov Xgiaov, xa) r\ irsgiaaeia rrjg %dgirog xa) rrjg dugsag xa) rrjg
dixaioavvrjg. Praeterea ru Tagarrupart non solum rb ypigiepu
v. 15. sed etiam rb dixdiupa opponit Apostolus v. 18, et ru xgipari
non solum ro dugripa, sed etiam rb yjzgiapa opponit. Ex quibus
intelUgi potest, unam Christi justitiam, quae et obedientia dicitur
usque ad mortem crucis ad Phil, ii., istis omnibus appeUationibus
diversa ratione Insigniri ; ut sciamus exundantem Dei gratiarii, et
exuberantem gratuitae in Christo justitiae vim, nobis a Patre
2f

450 COMMENTARIUS>
gratis imputatam, et efficacia Spiritus nobis dati per fidem com-
municatam, nos non solum ab omni reatu liberos, sed etiam justos
eonstituere coram Deo, cum dicatur etiam dixdiupa, quod xura-
xgipari proprie opponitur ; quamvis 18 v. ei dixaiuaiv Zpirjg opponat,
quod ideo factum, ut inteUigamus efficaciorem Christi obedientiam
nobis servandis, ac proinde justificandis, ac justis constituendis,
quam Adami inobedientia sit nobis perdendis, ac proinde injustis
constituendis. Observa tam justos quam injustos constitui multos,
non tam sua, quae ipsis inhaereat, quam quae Adami et Christi sit
hujus obedientia, Ulius inobedientia, et cum Tegtaaeiu rrjg yjdgirog
xa) rrjg dugeag. rrjg dixaioavvr\g Christi obedientia dicatur v. 17,
inchoatae in hac vita sanctitati nostrae convenire nullo modo
potest. Aupfidvovreg, (v. 1 7,) i. e. prehendentes fidei manu ex gratia
Dei virtute Spiritus justitiam Christi, etc. Quod non videtur pro
prie dici posse de sanctorum operibus Sanctis, atque haud scio an
de ipsa in nobis inchoata sanctitate, quae suis paulatim gradibus
procedit in hac vita : observa participium praesentis temporis, ad
continuationem sanctificationis indicandam ; non enim dicit kafibv-
rsg, sed kapfidvovreg. An quia tardis incrementis progreditur
nostra sanctificatio, quae individuo nexu cum justificatione co-
haeret, et utrumque beneficium opponat, non tam reatui solum,
sed et corruptioni ab Adamo in nos derivata ; quae duo materiam
mortis subministrant, dum nos non xgipuri solum, sed etiam
xaraxgipari et xaruxgiast rov davdrov atque adeo ru (Savdru.
obnoxios reddunt. Num e contra justification! conjuncta sanctifi
catio tandem perfecte complenda ad vitam faciat necnedispiciendum.
Certe justificationis et electionis testimonium, atque adeo vitae
aeternae pignus certum in hac vita esse constat ; perfecta vero in
glorificatis futura, videtur dixaiupu vbpov atque adeo Tkr)gupti
dici cap. viii. 4. Sed et hie deliberandum et cogitandum amplius,
et quid dicatur, v. 19, dtxaioavvrj, quae sit vitae causa, hoc enim
videtur ?,ur) did dixaioavvrjv. Sed non ut est ingressum TagaTrupa,
i. e. voluntarius primi hominis lapsus et ruina, sic et ingressum est
yj&giapa, gratuitum Dei beneficium, sive quod Deus gratifieatur,
quod interpretatur postea gratiam Dei, metonymia causae, Probat

cap. v. 15-19. 451
hanc dissimilitudinem imparium collatione, plus posse gratiam ad
justitiam et vitam, quam naturam ad injustitiam et mortem. Ubi
TugUTrupart unius Adami opponit %agiapa duorum, quod gratiam
Dei, et donum, quod est per gratiam unius hominis lesu Christi
vocat, ubi Deum et Christum uni Adamo, gratiam et donum per
gratiam uni offensae opponit. Altera dissimUitudd 16 v. ubi xgipa
et dugripa opponuntur, reatus et donum ; non ut reatus, qui
ingressus est per unum, qui peccavit, quippe Adamum, sic dugripa
donum invectum est per unum, qui peccatum expiavit ; quod
illustrat imparium coUatione : xgipa reatus quidem ex una offensa
ad condemnationem ; yjkgiapu vero (videretur dicendum dugripa,
sed non sine causa sic loquitur Apostolus) introut ex multis offensis
ad justificationem ; hie uni offensae plures opponit, et xgipari
yjigiapa, et xaraxgi'part dixaiupa ; in quibus videre est, omnia,
quae gratiae et Christi sunt, efficaciora esse, quam quae Adami et
naturae ; atque hoc Ulustrat nova coUatione imparium 17 v. Si
una offensa mors regnavit per unum, quanto magis, etc. Ubi tria
tribus opponuntur, et gratiae supra naturam efficacia amplificatur.
Uni offensae opponitur exuberantiae gratiae Tegiaaeia, et-doni jus
titiae, quae est periphrasis %ugiapurog et dugrjparog, quae exposuit
in concreto ad majorem emphasin, oi Tegiaaeiav, etc. kapfiavovrsg,
ut significentur, justificati hoc dono justitiae ; Adamo Christus,
regnum mortis regno vitae. Atque hactenus contraria, dissimiha
atque imparia naturae et gratiae. Hinc infert explicatam simili-
tudinem, 18 v. Sicut igitur per unam offensam (sub. xgipa,) reatus
invasit omnes homines ad condemnationem ; sic per unum dixaiupa
justificamen subiit dugripa in omnes homines ad justificationem
vitae. Hie subaudienda sunt xgipa, et quod ei opponitur dugripa,
et TugaTrupun dixaiupa opponitur ad majorem efficaciam, non
dugripa aut %agiapa, ut supra, et xaraxgipari non dixaiupa, ut
supra, sed dixaiuatv Zprjg opponit ad majorem emphasim ; ubi ob
serva in apodosi notam universi generis ug Tavrag avdguTOvg
restringi , ad electos, contra quam asserunt universalis gratiae
patroni, 19 v., altera similitudo superiorem confirmans a causis ;
sicut enim per inobedientiam, etc. Ubi obedientia et inobedientia,
2 F 2

452' COMMENTARIUS,,
constitui justos, et constitui injustos opponuntur, sed comparantur in
simUitudine contrariorum effector um ; ut inobedientia unius Adami
constituit multos peccatores, sic etiam obedientia unius Christi justi
constituentur multi ; ubi multoa in protasi de omnibus dixit
hominibus. Constitui peccatores, et constitui justos dixit electos,
idque ex una unius obedientia et inobedientia, ut sciamus hie agi
non tam de inhaerente, quam de imputata justitia vel injustitia ;
cum tamen hanc et ilia consequatur, quippe imputatam inhaerens.
Ideo, 17 v. supra redundantiam gratiae et doni justitiae accipi
dixit, quae proprie de inhaerente nobis justitia (quae perquam
pusUla, vel in sanctissimis in hac vita) dici non potest, quam vis in
futura vita post glorificationem non admodum male diceretur ;
Verum haec redundantia sive exuberantia gratuiti doni justitiae
dicta est supra gratia Dei et donum per gratiam unius hominis
lesu Christi, ut nemini dubium amplius esse possit, nisi sponte
caecutienti earn uni Christo duntaxat inhaerere, nee alia ratione
vel esse, vel fieri nostram, quam gratuita imputatione. Comparavit
autem inter se imparium contentione, primo injustitiam sive TagaT
rupa Adami, cum justitia sive obedientia Christi, et docet vim et
meritum hujus Ulius vi et merito majus esse, et efficacius, v. 15 ;
aecundo comparat xgipa judicium sive reatum Adami cum justitia'
Christi, quatenus nobis imputata nos reddit insontes sub nomine
dugfiparog et %agiaparog promiscue, docetque plus in hoc esse
virium ad nos absolvendos, quam. in iUo reatu ad nos damnandos,:
quod reatus sit unius offensae, absolutio vero sit a multis multarum
offensarum reatibus, v. 16 ; ac tertio comparat mortem, cujus reg-
num grassatur ex condemnatione propter reatum ex unius offensa,
cum vita, cujus regnum est multo efficacius atque Ulustrius ex
justificatione propter meritum justitiae Christi gratis nobis impu-
tatae, ,17 v. Atque haec de dispari contentione. Similitudo
autem haec omnia conjungit, sicut ex Adami offensa contractus
featus omnes addicit morti, ita absolutio ab offensis omnibus
ex justitia Christi imputata justificat omnes credentes ad vitam.
aeternam obtinendam, v. 18. Cujus similitudinis quasi fundamen-
tom altera similitudine illustratur, nimirum : Sicut inobedientia

cap. v. 20-21. 453
Adami omnes constituit peccatores, sic obedientia Christi electos
omnes constituit justos ; ac proinde eo quod justi et injusti consti-
tuuntur homines per inobedientiam et obedientiam, hanc Christi,
Ulam Adami, est mors et vita omnium. Ex his autem coUigi po
test quo sensu Adamus dicatur Christi typus, 20 v. Lex autem
praeterea (raga rrjv svayyskiav, Pise, praeter promissionem gra
tiae) ingressa est, etc : Si Adami injustitia satis esset ad omnes ho
mines damnandos, quorsum opus fuerat lege ? Respondet, ut irri-
tata per legem naturae contumacia peccatum (Pise, cognitio
lapsus Adami) augeretur, et peccato ita aucto magis augeretur
gratia, quo plura et graviora gratis condonantur, eo uberior est
gratia amplitudo. Finis autem est usus exundantis gratiae, 22 v.
ut gratia regnet per justitiam in vitam aeternam ; quibus verbis
gratiam per justitiam vocare videtur, gratuitam Christi justitiam,
ut supra ; quod regnum justitiae iUustrat similitudine peccati, quod
regnavit in mortem ; ita enim videtur debere iUud lv ru davdru.
Causae igitur vitae et mortis ita comparantur inter se, ut omnes
in Christo ex gratia Dei mirum quantum efficaciores ad vitam sint,
quam in Adamo ex natura ad mortem sempiternam. Unde et in-
teUigi potest, et hanc alteram capitis partem ab 11 v. non minus
ad salutis certitudinem demonstrandam, quam partem illam et pri-
orem, ut initio dixi, pertinere : adeo ut totum hoc quintum caput
sit de salute per EvangeUum conferenda, ut superiora capita de jus
titia per EvangeUum patefacienda, ut 16 et 17 v. 1 cap. propositum
fuit.

SEXTUM CAPUT.
Ut morte Christi peccatum expiatur; ita etiam extinguitur impe-
trato Spiritu regenerante ; quare cum justificatione fidei cohaeret
sanctificationis beneficium, tantum abest, ut gratuitae justitiae doc
trina bonis moribus adversetur, quemadmodum adversarii obstre-
pere consueverunt. Potest non inepte duplex dici justitia, eaque
gratuita, cujus altera sit alterius parens, nisi quis malit utramque

454 COMMENTARIUS,
divinae in Christo gratiae gemellas appellare : unde et duplex jus
tificatio dici potest, et utraque gratuita, sed diversa ratione ; altera
prior naturae ordine, altera posterior : ilia simul et semel perfecta,
haec tantum inchoata, et suis progrediens paulatim incrementis in
hac vita. Altera vitae causa, altera tantum testimonium, sed tes
timonium et vitae, et prioris justificationis, atque adeo electionis
aeternae, ad cujus sensum, et persuasionem in nobis confirmandam
huic alteri justificationi studendum est ; Ilia per fidem, haec per
opera efficitur. Sed ne lateat error sub ambiguitate, justificandi
verbum aliter de hac atque iUa justificatione dicitur : quippe supe
rior justificatio de absolutione a peccatis per imputationem justitiae
Christi, posterior de declaratione hujus absolutionis per sanctifica
tionem, ejusque fructus dicitur. Sic Paulus fide Abrahamum justi-
ficari dixit, et asseruit secundum priorem ; Jacobus Abrahamum ex
operibus justificatum scripsit secundum posteriorem, adeo ut de
¦quovis fideli utraque justificatio diversa ratione dicatur. Occurrit
igitur Apostolus adversariorum calumniae, quam ex dicto de redun-
dantia gratiae, ubi abundavit peccatum, arrepturos praevidebat
v. 20 : Ubi abundavit peccatum, ibi exuberavit gratia : laxan-
dum ergo fraenum cupiditatibus, et sceleribus indulgendum.
Refutat a contrariis ver. 2. Vivere enim et mori contraria sunt, cui
quis mortuus est, in eo vivere non potest ; Fide justificati peccato
mortui sunt, non possunt ergo peccato vivere. Peccato mori, in
dat. casu, dicitur, in quo vis peccati caepit extingui, ut minus sit
efficax ad ciendos pravos motus cum Dei voluntate pugnantes.
Probat assumptio a fine et usu Baptismi, v. 3. Quotquot baptiz-
antur, in communionem mortis Christi baptizantur, i. e. ut cum
Christo mortui peccato commoriantur, quam peccati in nobis
mortem obsignat baptismi sacramentum : At quotquot justificati
sunt, baptizantur, ergo in communionem mortis Christi baptizan
tur. Si commortui Christo, ergo etiam consepulti peccato; Ut
peccati vis extincta paulatim sepeUatur, ut cum Christo resurgamus
ad justitiae studium, quam vocat vita novitatem, v. 4. Hujus au
tem mortis et sepulturae, qua peccato morimur, et sepelimur morte
et resurrectione Christi, et resurrectionis, qua cum Christo resur-

cap. vi. 1-6. 455
gimus ad juste sancteque vivendum, tessera est baptismus, quippe
symbolum nostrae regenerationis, cujus duae sunt partes, veteris
hominis mortificatio, quam hie mortem et sepulturam vocat, et
novi hominis resurrectio, quam Ulustrat simUitudine resurrectionis
Christi, quem dicit resurrexisse did rrjg db%rig rov Targog, ad verb.
per gloriam patris, i. e. per virtutem et potentiam patris, qui
suam gloriam mundo patefecit, Ephes. i. 19. T* ro vTSgftakkav
peysdog rrjg dvvdpeug avrov, i. e. et quae sit excellens ilia magni-
tudo potentiae ipsius in nobis qui credimus pro efficacitate roboris
ipsius, quam efficaciter exeruit in Christo excitato eO ex mortuis,
etc. ut intelUgamus eandem Dei virtutem excitare nos ad vitae
novae studium, quae Christum a mortuis excitavit. Haud scio an
hue spectet, quod Rom. viii. 11, Si Spiritus ejus, qui excitavit
Christum ex mortuis, habitat in vobis, is qui excitavit Christum ex
mortuis, vivificabit mortaUa vestra corpora per inhabitantem ipsius
Spiritum in vobis. Hie " vivificabit mortalia corpora" videtur
posuisse pro resurrectione novi hominis, sive studio justitiae in no
bis excitando, sed de hoc postea suo loco. Vide num dia db^g rov
Targog significet formam et modum resurrectionis Christi, qui, ante
in morte ignominiosus, resurrexit a morte glorificatus ea gloria, quam
a Patre accepit. Ambulare autem in vitae novitate est vitam sancte
justeque instituere et transigere. Sequitur probatio resurrectionis
nostrae ad novam vitam, v. 5, a communione mortis Christi ad
communionem resurrectionis hoc modo : Si participes facti sumus
mortis Christi ad moriendum peccato, ut obsignat baptismus :
certe participes facti sumus resurrectionis Christi ad vivendum
justitiae, cujus symbolum item est baptismus : Sed prius verum
est, ut docuit supra, v. 3 his verbis, In Christi mortem baptizati
sumus. Ergo et posteriua. ~%vppvroi yeybvupevJ] Si complan-
tati cum eo fuimus. Elegans translatio ab arboribus in eadem
fossa aut scrobe plantatis et coalescentibus, vel cum multi ex uniua
radicie surcuU insiti per emplastrationem, aut inoculationem suc-
cum vitalem trahunt. SimUitudinem mortis, et simUitudinem re
surrectionis Christi vocat communionem cum Christo in morte, et
resurrectione, qua vis a morte et resurrectione Christi in nos di-

456 COMMENTARIUS,
manat ad perimendam peccati vim, et vigorem vividum sanctimo-
uiae nobis instillandum, quo nos Christo capiti conformes in morte
et vita reddamur. Non particulam, ' Akka xa), Sane et, deinde
eUipsin, viz. ru bpoupari rrjg avaardasug, viz. avppvrot labpedu,
i. e. coalescemus conformatione resurrectionis. ExpUcat v. 6 et
7, mortificationem peccati, resurrectionem novi hominis, 8, 9, 10, 11,
veterem hominem vocans nos ut natura corrupti sumus, quae cor-
ruptio cum Christo crucifixa ad naturaUs vitiositatis radicem, quam
corpus peccati vocat, evertendam, ejusque vim et inefficacem et
otiosam reddendam ; hoc est xaragyr)drj, ne ampUus peccato ser-
viamus, i. e. ultro et sponte peccatis indulgeamus. Rationem ad
dit v. 7, a statu mortui hominis, qui ampUus peccare non potest.
Nos sumus mortui peccato, vel quod idem est, peccatum est in
nobis mortuum, vers, super. ; Ergo a Christo vim accepimus, qua
fit ne peccato serviamus amplius. Utitur verbo dsdixaiurai, jus
tificatus est, pro liberatus est, simUitudine sumpta a damnatoram
suppliciis ob maleficia, qui inter ventu mortis maleficiosubmoventur.*
In superiore disputatione justificare fuit absolvere a peccati reatu :
hie vero justificare est, ab ipso peccato et peccandi maleficio et
proclivitate liberare. Vivificationem deducit ab hac mortificatione
ex communione cum Christo argumento parium : Si mortui cum
Christo, vivemus cum Christo, v. 8, i. e. non amplius moriemus in
peccatis, quod probat per Christi resurrectionem in vitam sempi-
ternam, qui semel peccato mortuus, amplius non moritur, sed Deo
semper vivit, consimiUter hortatur nos peccato mortuos Deo vivere
ex membrorum et capitis coUatione et conformatione. Atque
hactenus fuit doctrina sanctificationis, quae manat a morte et re
surrectione Christi, non secus atque justificatio, et quia haec in-
staurat in nobis amissam sanctitatem et justitiam, cum Jacobo jus
tificationem vocavimus, et ut supra diximus in ult. v. cap. iv. jus
tificationem nostram a Paulo vocari, et beneficium hoc item gratui
tum Dei a Christi resurrectione praecipue deducit, ut alterum illud
justificationis fidei sive remissionis peccatorum a morte derivat.
Nunc'vero posita doctrina sanctificationis admovet adhortationum
* Vide Camerarium.

cap. vi. 6-12. 457
stimulos, quibus nos ad sanctificationis studium excitet, v. 12, et
deinceps dupUci usus similitudine, altera servitutis et libertatis hoc
cap., altera conjugii veteris et novi initio cap. vii. Peccatum com
parat durissimo domino, et importuno tyranno, cujus turpissima et
exitialis servitus: Justitiam vero clementissimo et benignissimo do
mino, cujus servitus non tam servitium, quam Ubertas appellanda,
estque tum honestissimus tum maxime salutaris. Nos autem homi
nes pro duplici statu proponit considerandos, ratione peccati et jus
titiae ; natura turpissimam peccati servitutem sponte et alacriter in
nostram perniciem servivimus, gratia nunc manumissi a peccato do
minum mutavimus, ut non peccato amplius sed justitiae serviamus.
Sub peccato et sub lege esse pro eodem accipit, quod lex corruptam
naturam ad peccandum extimulet ; contra sub gratia et item sub jus
titia pro eodem accipit, quod Dei gratia in Christo nos ad justitiae
studium propensos reddit. Atque hoc regeneratis convenit, illud
non regenitis. -Expellat ergo peccatum justitia, praesertim cum
nos, qui natura peccatores, et liberi a justitia sumus, nunc per gra
tiam liberi a peccato et servi justitiae simus. Mjj ovv fiaaikeveru.~\
Ne igitur regnet peccatum, etc. Acquisita quidem nobis est liber
tas, et in ejus possessionem missi sumus, sed nondum earn plene
possidemus : ideo regnandi verbo utitur, quo significatur impor-
tuna et violenta peccati tyrannis, qua nos rapit ad omne scelerum
genus patrandum. Mortale corpus vocat ipsum corpus, quod morti
obnoxium est, cujus cupiditates vocat inclinationes naturales ex in-
firmitate et corruptione ad peccandum : nisi mavis corpus mortale
dici, quod antea veterem hominem cum Christo crucifixum vocavit,
cujus intemperies nos ad peccandum soUicitat. Membra nostra
vocat, vel partes corporis et vires, vel etiam facultates et potentias
animi, quae appeUat arma, i. e. instrumenta bene vel male agendi ;
aumpta aimiUtudine a sateUitio armato, hortatur ergo ut vires om
nes et facultates tam animi quam corporis, quibus peccato antea
plus quam volentes servivimus, intendamus ad actiones sanctas et
honestas, quibus servitor justitiae et Deo ; uno verbo, nolite pec
cato sed justitiae servire. Ratio, peccatum vobis non doininabi-
tur, i. e. licet ex parte vos teneat captivos, ejus tamen jugum ex;-

458 COMMENTARIUS,
cussistis, ac tandem prorsus liberabimini, et in plenam Ubertatem
vendicabimini : A spe igitur hujus victoriae et triumphi hortatur
ad acriter praehandum, et resistendum peccato : rationem subdit,
non estis sub lege, sed sub gratia. Lex Evangelio, gratia irae op
ponitur. Idem ergo sub lege et ira esse, sub Evangelio et gratia
esse. Non estis ergo sub lege et ira propter peccatum, ut antea,
cum neque justificati, neque sanctificati essetis, cum peccati reatus
maneret et peccati vis incolumis vigeret, et ad peccandum valentis-
sima esset ; sed sub Evangelio et gratia in Christo, cujus non solum
merito justificati, sed etiam efficacia regenerati estis, ut ad peccatum
expugnandum, et justitiae graviter miUtandum idonei sitis propter
Christi spem vobis inhabitantem, v. 14. Sequitur hinc orta objec
tio. Sub gratia sumus ; Ergo abjecto omni metu poenae secure
genio indulgeamus. Aversatur hanc blasphemiam, et respondet
non consequi ex antecedente, quia servi est, parere domino cui sub-
est ; nos servi justitiae, non peccati sumus ; Ergo justitiae, non
peccato servi'endum est nobis. Prop, est v. 16, Ass. 17, 18, Conclu
sio inclusa his verbis M»j y'svoiro, absit. In proposito perpetua est
translatio, ut jam dixi, a servis, quo spectat illud Tagiaavsrs, sistitis
ad obediendum. Mortis et vitae meminit, tanquam praemii et
poenae, ut hujus metus, illius spes vehementius inflammet animos
studio sanctimoniae. Ass. 17 v. gratiarum actione Ulustrata, qua
Deum autorem partae libertatis celebrat, ubi sinceram obedientiam
EvangeUo ponit pro effecto et signo hujus libertatis ; Obedivistis
ex animo et formae doctrinae, i. e. Evangelio in quam traditi fuistis
quasi configurandi et conformandi. Metaphora a metallorum con-
flatoribus, qui typis metalla infundunt, ut inde configurentur vasa
pro sua cujusque forma. "E*pparixursgov est, traditi estis in typum
doctrinae, quam si diceretur, traditus est vobis typus doctrinae nee
solum dicit traditos in typum, sed etiam obedivisse, I. e. cessisse et
locum dedisse typo imprimendi formam suam, atque ita sibi eos
conformandi. Atque haec Evangelio efficacia ad fidem ingene-
randam, Rom. cap. i. v. 17, et fidei obedientiam, Rom. cap. i. v. 5,
quod ait v. 19. 'AvdguTivbv ksyu, sensus est, se humanitus loqui,
secundum morem inter homines usitatum, quoad loquendi formam

cap. vi. 13-23. 459
mutuatam a rebus humanis, cum interea de spirituali servitute et
libertate loquatur. Ideo did rrjv daWsvsiav rrjg sagxog propter infir-
mitatem carnis, ad mentis ignorantiam referri debet, propter mys-
teriorum caelestium imperitiam : non quod velit innuere se exigere
in studio sanctitatis, quod a carnis imbeciUitate proficisci potest,
aut in sanctitatis studio se nihU amplius requirere, quam praestet
caro, quantumvis imbecUla: nam non a natura, sed a gratia est
omnis sanctimonia, et a virtute Spiritus Sancti, cujus spe eos paulo
ante confirmaverat. SimUitudine Ulustrat, nisi mavis parium argu-
mento, quam exigat alacritatem studio justitiae : et certe aequum
est non minorem operam aut impendi studio justitiae et Deo, quam
antea diabolo et injustitiae impendimus : studium vero injustitiae
ex eo docet maximum fuisse, quod ita servierimus injustitiae, ut
essemus ab omni justitia prorsus alieni, v. 20. Atque hactenus de
ipsa servitute, nunc de praemio vel exitu, quem interrogatione
urget; peccati quidem fructum nullum, detrimentum maximum,
nimirum pudorem ex turpitudine, et metu mortis aeternae, v. 21,
contra autem justitiae fructum, sanctificationem ; praemium, vitam
aeternam, v. 22. Ubi observa antithesin praemii et poenae : ra
yag b-^uvia, v. 23, Stipendia, verbum militare, ut superiora, com-
pensationem ex debito significans, cui opponitur ro yjngiapa rov
dsov, gratuitum Dei beneficium, quo vita aeterna acquiritur. Sic
justitia Christi, qua justificamur dicta est v. cap. %dgtapa et dugripa,
et nunc vita aeterna "^dgiapa dsov dicitur, adeo ut nullus meritis
nostris locus reUnquatur.* Atque haec de prima adhortatione ad
studium sanctimoniae, Ulustrata similitudine domini et servi per
petua. Sequitur altera a similitudine conjugii veteris et novi vii.
capite.

SEPTIMUM CAPUT.
Lex conjugu haec est, ut durante vita duret vinculum conjugii,
altera autem parte mortua dirimi conjugium, et partem superstitem
* Vide etiam an sanctificatio Skjucms dicat.

460 solvi lege conjugii, nee ad officium conjugale praestandum amplius
teneri ; 3 primis versibus. Hinc infert, nos lege peccati aolutos, 4
ver., justitiae studio obUgari. Deest assumptio, alteram partem con
jugii superioris mortuam esse, adde etiam, nos marito novo copulatos
esse. Perstans in simUitudine conjugii, bona opera comparat liberis,
quos sanctae Uterae vocant fructus ventris, hinc iUa xagTopogrjaupsv,
ver. 4, xagTOpogrjaai, ver. 5. Veteris autem conjugii partes sunt,
Lex occasione peccati ad bonum inefficax, et ad peccandum cor-
ruptam nostram naturam irritans ; Uxor autem nos, ut sumus
natura corrupti. Alterius, quippe novi conjugii partes, EvangeUum
gratiae sive Spiritus regenerationis ; Uxor vero nos, secundum
vires omnes corporis et animi, quatenus a peccato Uberati sumus.
Liberi ex priore conjugio, mala opera, i.e., cogitata, dicta, facta in
justa et profana : Ex novo eonjugio liberi, bona opera, i.e., facta,
dicta, cogitata tam justa, quam sancta. Soluto igitur conjugio cum
lege et peccato, non est amplius danda opera liberis ex priore con
jugio, i.e. peccatis generandis ; et quia sumus alteri marito ex gratia
et EvangeUo secundis nuptiis conjuncti, danda opera est liberis
ex posteriori conjuge, i.e., bonis operibus progenerandis imo quia
prius conjugium nostra opera sobole numerosa eaque mortifera
valde faecundum fuit, ideo ex posteriori conjugio soboles curanda
et propaganda, ver. 5 et 6. Quod quidam putent rd Tudripara
. ruv dpagnuv in priori conjugio, mariti locum occupare, id durum
videtur, quod Tadrjpuru patiendi potius, quam agendi significa-
tionem habeant, et verbum svsgysiro consimiliter, nisi tanquam de-
ponena, aut medium verbum accipiatur, atque ita vertamus, vige-
bant, non exercebantur efficaciter, ut aUquando putavimus. . Mem
bra nostra pro uxore ponuntur in priore conjugio, his verbis, lv roig
pek'eaiv t]puv : ideo Tadripara ruv dpagnuv, quasi peccatorum
libidines mariti vices gerere videantur ; et illud orer)psv lv rtj aagx),
tempus et statum conjugii prioris exprimit, ut et Ulud xagropogrjaai
liberorum procreationem, et ru Oavaru eorum conditionem, vel effec
tum potius, atque haec 5° ver. ; 6° vero solutum prius conjugium,
quod cum lege contractum fuit, docet ; idque mortua lege, i.e., vi
legis irritante corruptionem nostram, quae nos sibi devinctos de-

cap. vii. 1-8. 461
tineris peccata in nobis' progignebat; Unde coUigit nos justitiae
non injustitiae serviredebere, aut quod idem est, EvangeUo non legi,
gratiae non naturae, novo homini non veteri, et, ut loquitur hoc
loco Apostolus, ut serviamus in novitate Spiritus et non in vetus-
tate Uterae. Literam vocat legem, quatenus est peccati admi-
nistra : Vetustatem addit, qua significat enervatam esse et obsole-
tam vim illam ac quasi antiquatam. Spiritus vero nomine, Spiritus
regenerationis efficaciam, cui novitatem tribuit, quod autor sit in-
stauratae sanctificationis.
¦ Dubium videri possit ex particula aTodavovrog maritine an uxoris
niors significetur, propter diversam lectionem : nam quidam Ubri
habent aTodavovrsg, et sic videtur uxorem respicere : aUi vero
aTodavovrog, quod marito convenit. Et rursus sin de lege tanquam
marito, an de peccato, eoque aut marito, aut conjugii vinculo.
Verum de hoc ampUus. Absoluta hac altera exhortatione et simi
litudine, occurrit objectioni obortae ex legis mentione, per quam
vitiosas cupiditates vigere dixerat. Si per legem peccata patrantur,
ergo lex peccatum, i.e., peccati causa efficiens et vitiosa. Advert
satur blasphemiam tanquam absurdam, et refutat a contrario effecto
legis : Lex arguit peccatum, et latentem prodit, eamque detegit.
Non est ergo peccati causa, quod docet exemplo suo tanquam ex-
perientia communi, ver. 7. Unde ergo peccata ? Respondet ver.
8., a naturali vitiositate, quae occasionem arripit magis ferociendi
ex interdicto legis, quae prohibit omne peccatum. Caeterum de
cupiditate aut concupiscentia quod affert ex 10mo mandato Decalogi,
ideo fit, quod hoc praecepto maU fons obturetur, hominibus magna
ex parte incognitos. Vetat enim radicem ipsam, aut saltem primos
emergentes fructus, quos ¦fyv%ixog dvdguTog aegre admodum dam-
naverit :* aitque per hoc mandatum omnem cupiditatem in se pro-
ductam esse, ubi cupiditatis nomine intelligaa oportet vitiosos motus
Verae virtuti contrarios ; hoc ideo factum narrat, quod sine legis
notitia aut cogitatione peccatum quasi sopitum, et sepultum jacet ;
atque haec securitas est omnium hominum non renatorum com
munis, quod suo quoque exemplo non regenerati hominis personam
* Vide Junium in Exod., xx. cap.

462 COMMENTARIUS,
sustinens docet, ver. 9. Verum contra simulatque serio de lege
cogltando, vitam ac mores nostros cum ea comparamus, mox pec
catum, quod antea mortuum facebat, vitam ac novas vires resumit
non secus atque calx viva, quae prius frigere visa est, aquae aspersu
fumare et inardescere, tetrumque odorem expirare cernitur, ut nos
aliquando in gravi argumento nee opinantes oppressi ex tempore
lusimus. Est lapis ardenti quondam fornace recoctus,
Cui nomen calx viva, etc.
Quam vim legis peccatum arguentis, damnantis, atque adeo puni-
entis in seipso expertus suo item exemplo docet, 9 et 10 ver. Verum
nulla legis culpa, sed peccati maleficio v. 11 et 12. Quo versu tri
buit legi per iUationem ex superioribus, sanctitatem, justitiam et
bonitatem, sicut 1 ad Timoth. cap. i. 8. Hinc oritur nova objectio,
ergo bonum causa mali, aut ex malo bonum. Adversatur et hanc
blasphemiam, omnem culpam (ut dictum est) in peccatum et naturam
peccatricem conferens, cujus malitia suo se prodit indicio, eoque ma
gis, quod occasione et abusu boni malum patrare contendat; ideoque
hanc omnis mali radicem, rrjv dpagriav xad' vTsgfiokrjv dpdgrukov,
i. e., insigniter et summe peccatricem, dia rrjg Ivrokrjg, dicit v. 13,
quod ex eo etiam patet, quod lex natura sua spiritualis sit, nee cor-
pori solum, sed etiam animo spirituales actiones imperet. Verum
nos natura nostra carnales, et peccato mancipati sumus, hoc enim
est venditum esse sub peccato, non secus atque, venalis servus, et
pretio emptus, seu coemptitius, qui turpissime sub jugum missus
servitutem servit vUissimam. Atque hoc etiam sub sua persona,
causam communem etiam regeneratorum sustinens, expUcat nimi
rum ob duplex in se quasi principium, alterum boni, alteram mali,
Spiritum et carnem, sive gratiam et naturam, unde est, ut Spiritus,
et novus homo condelectatur legi, et peccatum abhorreat ; Vetus
autem homo et caro repugnet legi, et peccato guadeat ; ex quo
legem elucet spiritualem esse, ut cui Spiritus gratiae in regenerato
homine consentiat; vitiositas vero naturae omnibus modis pro
genio, ingenioque suo reluctetur. Hinc ilia gravis lucta sanctissi-
morum, non dissidium rationis et cupiditatum, ut theologi non

cap. vii. 9-23. 463
pauci cum phUosophis tradunt; sed pugna rationia etiam cum
ratione, et cupiditatis cum cupiditate conflictus propter Spiritum
Christi aversum a malo, et boni omnis studiosum, qui mentem,
illustrat veri lumine, et voluntatem ad bona impellit expetenda.
Propterea maU culpam omnem, quod in se admittit, transfert in
peccatum, quod, quamquam in se, tamen ut a se alienum, nee rege
nerati hominis partem uUam imo, vero quasi esset aliquid extra se
describit. Non ego, inquit, facio, sed peccatum quod in me est, v.
20. Et mihi malum adjacet, v. 21. Ideo internum hominem ab
externo distingui innuit, v. 22, non negat tamen rebellem illam
peccati vim ad mala proclivem in membris suis esse ; ideoque vocat
legem membrorum legi mentis contrariam et rebeUem, et sub pec
cati jugo quasi captivum mittentem, ac redigentem se quamvis re-
generatum hominem, v. 23. Unde cogitur exclamare se miserum
atque aerumnosum hominem, et optare liberationem ab hoc cor-
pore non mortaU magis quam mortifero. Quo voto mihi videtur
non tam veUe eum, solvi animam mortis interventu hujus corporis
nexibus, quam a peccati pravitate et contumacia, quae cum Dei
offensa certam perniciem natura sua affert, Uberari. Alii de hac
communi morte hoc inteUigunt, quod non aliter admiserim, quam
si ita accipias, Ulum peccati pertaesum emori cupere, ne peccat
amplius et cum capite Christo conjunctionem in altera vita sine
peccato expetere, v. 24. Interea dextre inteUigenda verba yivuaxu,
6eku, TgdaBu, piau, toiu, ne quia putet iUum aut semper veUe et
approbare bonum, aut noUe et improbare malum; aut semper agere
aut facere, quod malum, bonum vero nunquam ; sed ut hominem
interiorem ab exteriore, sic facultates et actiones interioris hominis
distinguit ab actionibus et facultatibus exterioris hominis, et his
utitur tanquam peecati administris aut effectis, iUis vero ut boni
causis, atque effectibus. In summa mentem et voluntatem interi
oris hominis, i. e. novi et spiritualis, tanquam potentias et potesta-
tes usurpat; et sic cognoscere et veUe, quanquam sanctarum facul-
tatem sanctas motiones : Carnem, membra, et ni faUor etiam corpus
pro veteri homine adhibet, quasi externum hominem, i. e. ut hie
innuit, non regenitum designent; agere vero et facere, pro functioni-

464 bus et actionibus externi itidem hominis et non re'geniti utitur;
Est Igitur tropus, Spiritus Sancti spiritualis et peculiaris, quam in
his vocibus ignorat phUosophia, cum quibus toto coelo erravit olim
etiam Augustinus ; verum postea virum optimum errorem suum
retractare non puduit, quo detestabiUor est eorum amentia, qui
malint cum multis errare, quam cum Spirito Sancto veritatem pro-
fiteri. Verum haec hactenus. Tandem post hanc duram conflic-
tationem, tanquam e desperationis extremo discrimine vixtrix emer-
git fides, ac Deo gratias agit in Christo, et concludit se quasi du-
pUcem esse servum, et duobus quasi dominis obnoxium, Spiritui et
carni ; huic quod ad legem peccati et exteriorem hominem ; UU
quod legem mentis, et interiorem hominem. Quod dicat se servi-
ve legi peccati, non est ita accipiendum, quasi totum se peccato
mancipatum censeat, cum mente serviat legi Dei; neque se ita
vendicatum in libertatem ut non sentiat carnis motus rebelles, sed
se distractum ita a cupiditatibus agnoscit, ut tamen experiatur vim
Spiritus, peccato nunc resistentis, nunc damnantis peccatum.
Unde nascitur certa liberationis fiducia, quae in mediis jactationum
fluctibus affert tranquilUtatem. Hinc iUa, in quam de subito ir-
rumpit praegestiente laetitia, quasi ad novae lucis aspectum post
tristiores Ulas tenebras, gratiarum actio. Notanda emphasis in
duobus praenominibus avrog lyu, quibus se et hominem nunc re-
genitum, et ut reginitorum partes sustinentem, in commune exem
plum et solatium renatis omnibus proponit. Subit mentem quae-
rere, ecquid mens, voluntas, delectatio et delectationis affectio, de
quibus paulo ante egit, rudimenta imbeciUae sanctificationis adep-
ta, non possent membris et instrumentis corporis sanctificati animi
vim expromere, atque edere externis actionibus eadem sanctitate
perfusis; quasi agnoscerit inchoatam superiorum facultatum, et
quorundam effectuum instaurationem, verum adeo invalidam et
inefficacem, ut corpus ipsum regere et externam vitam non pos
sit. Ideo Apostolum dixisse, quod volo bonum, non facio ; quod odi
malum, hoc ago, et comperio hanc legem volenti mihi facere quod
honestum est, mihi malum adjacere ; et paulo supra, veUe equidem
adest mihi, sed ut perficiam, quod honestum est, non invenio, et

cap. viii. I. 465
quae sunt ejus generis de lege mentis, et de lege membrorum con-
traria inter se ipso respectu partium et virium diversarum. Deni-
que utrum corpus mortis, unde petit liberationem, v. 24, sit corpus
mortale, cujua prius meminit vi. 12, et utrumque massa et sub
stantia corporea cute, carne, venis, nervis, arteriis, sanguine con
stans, caduca haec et corruptibiUs, ita enim plerique homines
sentiunt, nobis vero non fit verisimile, ut supra exposuimus. Con-
cludit ex dissidio et lucta carnis et Spiritus sibi bene sperandi ar
gumentum suppetere, cum inde constet ex regeneratoram numero,
quorum personam gereret, esse, ac propterea Deo in Christo gra-
tias agere.

OCTAVUM CAPUT.
Ex his concludit initio octavi capitis nuUum damnationis peri-
culum manere sanctificatos, licet veteris hominis reUquiis subinde
inquietentur. Sanctificatos, vocat rovg lv Xgiaru Irjaov xara Tvsvpa
TSgiTarovvrag, eos qui in Christo secundum Spirito incedunt.
Ubi est articuli eUipsis ; duo enim significantur, eos et in Christo
esse, et secundum Spirito ambulare, quorum posteriori opponitur
ambulare secundum carnem. Veram quid est esse in Christo ?
Utrum justificati apprehenso per fidem Christo, an participata vi
mortis et resurrectionis Christi ex coaUtione cum Christo in morte
et vita sanctificari, de qua coaUtione cap. vi., v. 4. De posteriori
hie agi crediderim qua fit, ut, Christo avppvroi yeyovoreg, vitalem
et spiritu'alem succum ad vitae novitatem hauriamus ; communionis
hujus effectum erit, ambulare secundum Spiritum. Spirituales enim
nos prius esse necesse est, quam SpirituaUa sapiamus, ut est v. 5,
ut omnis fide justificatus sit Spiritualis, i. e. sanctificatos ; alia
tamen justificationis ratio, sunt enim distincta, Ucet conjuncta bene
ficia. Justificamur enim condonatione peccatorum, sanctificamur
vero peccati nece, et nostri regeneratione, cujus fructus est omnis
sancta actio, quam Apostolus hie vocat ambulationem secundum
Spiritum, sive Spiritualem incessum. Sanctificati igitur hie descri-
2 &

466 COMMENTARIUS,
buntur causae et effeeti argumentis. Causa enim sanctificationis
est nostra cum Christo unio, quam hie expressit verbis roUg sv Xgtarq
(sub. ouai,) qui sunt in Christo, quod complantati cum eo coaluerint
conformatione mortis et resurrectionis ipsius. Est igitur conclusio
Ulata ex proxima disputatione de sanctificatione et lucta spirituali,
nee tam alte repetita, ut alu volunt, a justificationis doctrina; quam-
quam et justificationem includat, et praesupponat sanctificationem,
cum haec sit ilUus effectum aut germana soror, et comes individua ;
nusquam enim sanctificatio sine justificatione. Sanctificati igitur,
quique ideo sancte vivunt, sunt extra omne condemnationis peri-
culum. Ratio sequitur, v. 2, quia per Christum Uberati sunt a
lege peccati et mortis. Liberati, i. e. caeperunt Uberari, et certis-
sime plenam Uberationem consequentur (hie enim usus linguae
sanctae, ut quod coeptum sit, dicatur factum, ad denotandam futurae
perfectionis certitudinem, quae expresse ponitur, v. 4.) a lege
peecati, a vi peccante et peccati in nobis effectrice, et lege mortis,
quae vis in se plane mortifica est et exitialis ; ideo supra vocavit
earn corpus mortis, a qua flebUiter ingemiscens optabat Uberationem,
Hujus Uberationis causa est lex Spiritus vitae in Christo lesu, i. e.
vis spirituaUs et vitaUs Christi a mortuis redivivi, quae nos vivi-
ficat, et spirituales reddit, ut novam vitam vivere, et secundum
Spiritum incedere valeamus ; quae vis non est repetenda a conceptu
Christi, sed a resurrectione, et haec videtur ilia, quam vocavit
sub finem cap. 4, dixaiuaiv rjpuv respectu futurae perfectionis.
Haud scio an haec sit ilia cap. v. quam vocat dixaiuaiv Z,urjg, quasi
justificationem vitalem atque vivificam, cujus efficacia non per im-
putationem, sed inhaesionem sancti, atque adeo justi efficimur.
Atque haud scio, an justos constitui eodem cap. v. hoc etiam sensu
dixerit, et duo Christi beneficia duobus Adami maleficiis contraria
conjunxerit, quorum prius justificatio, posterius sit haec sanctifi
catio ; haec corraptioni naturae, Ula condemnationi ex reato oppo-
sita, Verum haec ampUus disquirenda, nee incompertis temere
assentiendum, sed sobrie philosophandum. Nos vi Spiritus Christi
sanctificantis plene liberatum iri, ut jam caepimus Uberari a lege
peccati et mortis, i. e. vi peccatrice et mortifera, probat a causis,

cap. vni. 2-4. 467
v. 3, quippe Deo Patre, FUio, et Spiritu Sancto, quas et justifica
tionis causas proposuit, cap. iii. v. 24, 25, quas illustrat remotione
falsae et inefficacis causae, quippe legis per peccatum ad nos justi-
ficandos impotentis, et inefficacis. Ex eo enim quod inquit (hoc
est, lv w, i, e. eo quod) infirma esset per carnem legis impotentia,
i. e. lex impotens, et viribus destituta esset nos sanctificandi per
carnem, i. e. culpa vitiosae naturae, et peccati in ea olim regnantis,
nunc inhabitantis ; Deus misso FUio suo in carne simUlima nostrae
carni peccatrici, i. e. natura humana induto, idque TSgi apagnag
(sub. dvaiav) in vietimam pro peccato condemnavit, atque adeo cru-
cifixit (supra, cap. vi. v. 6,) et abolevit, rrjv dpagriav, ipsum pec-
cans peccatum, adeoque peccati scaturiginem in hac carne, in cor-
rupta natura nostra; ut ro dixaiupa rov vopov, ut justificamen
(si ita loqui liceat) legis, i. e. plena legis praestatio, quae legi omni
ex parte congruat, in nobis compleretur, non extra nos, per impu-
tationem, quae fit nostra, sed in nobis efficacia Spiritus Christi,
naturam nostram omnesque naturae facultates ad plenum justifi-
eantis in altera vita ; in nobis, inquam, qui in hac vita incipimus
carnis cupiditatibus valedicere, et Spiritus Sancti ductum sequi ;
quod est uno verbo, hie sanctificari, ut aUbi glorificemur. Neque
enim putandum est nos nee corpora nostra meliora resumpturos,
neque animos puriores in resurrectione justorum habituros, quam
habemus ex hac vita migrantes. Hie habes patrem, qui filium
misit pro peccato ad expiandum peccatum, et condemnavit pecca
tum, cum damnaret Filium ; et cum FUio lesu Christo crucifixit,
atque adeo cum eo interempto necavit, sepulto consepelivit ; habes
et Filium hominem factum, et vietimam pro peccato, i. e. saerificiuin
expiatorium, in cujus damnatione, crucifixione, morte, sepultura
eondemnaretur, concrucifigeretor, contrucidaretur, et consepelire-
tur vis ilia peccati vitiosa, atque peccatrix in carne nostra. Habes
et Spiritum Sanctum quamquam disertis verbis non expressum,
intelligendum tamen ex ejus effecto, quippe extinctione peccati in
nobis, et vivificatione justitiae, quod significatum fuit, v. 2, apertius.
Lex Spiritus vitae in Christo liberavit me a peccati lege et mortis,
et significatur, hia verbis, v. 4, 'iva rb dixaiupa rov vbpov Tkrigudrj-.
2G2

468 COMMENTARIUS,
sv nplv ; ut justitia legis, sive quicquid lex requirit, aut exigit a
nobis, id impleretur et praestaretur non naturae viribus, sed Spiri
tus gratia in nobis plene sanctificatis, et jam glorificatis. Hujus
rei certissimum documentum et testimonium, quod hie incipiamus
vivere vitam spiritualem Spiritu nos ducente. Unde constat nos
spirituales esse nunc saltem ex parte, quod Spiritus in nobis effr-
cacia tandem victrix contra peccati reliquias sit futura ; ideo spiri
tuales et dicimur, et sumus ; hoc est, quod subjicit, qui secundum
Spiritum sunt, (i. e. spirituales) spirituaha sapiunt, ac proinde
incedunt secundum Spiritum, quod iUustrat a contrario : Et non
secundum carnem. Prudentia autem Spiritus est vita et pax, i. e.
cum vita aeterna et pace cum Deo (sublatis non solum conscientiae
terroribus, sed etiam omni vitiositate, et vitiis omnibus terrorum
omnium causis) conjuncta. Vitam ergo et pacem opponit morti et
inimicitiae in Deum, tanquam contraria effecta de causis contrariis,
nimirum prudentia Spiritus et prudentia carnis. Atque ita ex
sanctificatione deducit vitam et pacem hoc loco, ut supra, cap. v.
ex justificatione pacem cum Deo, et spem gloriae Dei, i. e. vitae
aeternae. Quod vero, v. 3, erat lv ry aagx), haud scio an ad car
nem Christi referri debeat, quod in ipsius carne damnatum fuerit
peccatum non inhaerens ; expers enim erat omnis peccati, sed ex
imputatione iUi impositum, quod nostrum onus in se sustolit.
Expende locum dUigentius. "Iva rb dixaiupa^] Plene tandem
sanctificabimur, ergo liberabimur a lege peccati et mortis: ante-
cedens, v. 3, et 4, consequens, v, 2. InteUige vi et efficacia resur
rectionis Christi, quae consecuta est mortem ejus. Aibri ro pgb-
vrjpaJ] Docet cur sapientia carnis sit mors, quia est in inimicitia
adversus Deum. Et quare in inimicitia adversus Deum? quia
legi Dei non subjicitur. Et quare non subjicitur? quia natura
sua ita est refractaria et contumax, ut subjici Deo nuUo modo pos
sit ; pugnat enim cum natura Dei, qui est ipsa sanctitas. " Qui
vero in carne sunt." A contraras argumentatur. Qui in carne
sunt, Deo placere non possunt: Ergo qui in Spiritu sunt, Deo
placent ; In Spirito autem aunt, qui spiritualia sapiunt ; et qui
spiritualia sapiunt, incedunt secundum Spiritum; Et qui secun-

cap. viii. 4-11. 469
dum Spiritum incedunt, sunt secundum Spiritum vel sunt in
Spiritu, (quod idem est,) i.e. Spirituales et sanctificati, iUi Deo
placent. Sunt ergo extra omne periculum condemnationis. Voa
autem estis in Spiritu quia Spiritus Dei habitat in vobis, ut apparet
ex effectis, ergo vos placetis Deo. O't de sv aagx) ovreg.] Propriam
significationem particulae ds retineo, neque cum alUs verto, igitur ;
sed de hoc dispiciendum. Habere Spiritum Christi incolam docet
acontradicentibus; Qui non habet Christi Spiritum, non est Christi,
i.e., Christianus. Initio dixerat nos in Christo esae, nunc vero
dicit, Christum in nobis, quorum hujus Ulud causa videtur esse :
prius enim necesse est nos ilU uniri, ut in Ulo simus, quam ipse in
nobis sit, per suum Spiritum nos Spirituales efficiens ; quanquam
haec duo tempore conjuncta sunt, et ratione tantum, eaque forte
nimis subtUi, distinguantur. Ver. 9. Incipit doctrinam Romanis
accommodare, et ex eo quod Christus per ipsius Spiritum incolam
et vivificum in ipsis est, colUgit, ver. 10, animam jam Spiritualem
esse, quippe divino Spiritu vivificatam et sanctificatam ; corpus
vero mortale et moribundum, quasi jam mortuum esset ; verum
in resurrectione justorum et corpus ipsum denuo resuscitandum ;
et Christi Spiritu vivificandum, ut ipsum quoque incorruptibUe,
Spirituale et gloriosum evadat, ver. 11, et Cor. xv. cap. Causas
affert ; et cur mortuum corpus ? nimirum ob peccatum, quod non
nisi morte corporis extinguatur : et cur Spiritus, i.e., anima, quae
jam caepit Spirituahs esse, sit vita h.e. vivificata et vivida, adeo
ut nuUam in morte sensura sit dissolutionem, sed libera corporis
vinculis sit victura cum Deo ? quia jam praedita est justitia (quae
justitia paulatim augescit in hac vita, separatione corporis perfi-
cietur,) aeternum victura cum Deo : cur item corpus in vitam re-
surrecturum et Spirituale futurum ? quia Spiritu Dei Patris, qui
et FUU Spiritu, qui virtute sua corpus Christi capitis nostri excita
vit a mortuis, et corpora quoque nostra, qui Christi membra sumus,
est in vitam revocaturus, nimirum Pater in FiUo per eundem
Spiritum in nobis inhabitantem. Cur igitur vel mors reformidanda,
vel causa mortis reUqua vitiositas in corrupta natura regeneratorum
nos ad desperationem adigat ? cum morte corporis haec sit extin^

470 guenda omnino, aalva et incolumi anima jam SpirituaU : cui tein-»
pestive conjungetur corpus, non ut antea caducum et vitiosum, sed
spirituale et aeternum. Cum morte ergo corporis intelUge mortexri
peccati, et mortificationis nostrae implementum, justitia vero causa
ponitur vitae Spiritus, i.e., animae sanctificatae et SpirituaUs, qua
taUs est ; quae justitia videtur esse non Ula prior, de qua principio
Epistolae disputatum, sed haec posterior, quam sanctitatem appel
lavimus, quae et ipsa suo modo est vitae causa, siquidem ipsa anima
dupUciter per naturam mortua est, uno modo ob peccatorum reatum,
altero modo ob intestinum peccati virus, idque mortiferum. A
morte reatus Uberat animam per fidem justificatio, i.e., a peccati
reatu absolutio, qua fit ut Deo reconcUiati speremus vitam aeternam
cap. v. A letaU veneno peccati sanctificatio sensim repurgans ani
mam, donee interventu mortis corporeae penitus perpurgetur ; ideo-
que duplicem justitiam, et justificationem supra constituimus. Ex-
igua igitur regenerationis scintilla, quae est in Sanctis, est durante
hac vita, et justitia dicitur, et vitae semen est. Unde concludit
sanctitati studendum esse, 12 ver. ut supra vi. cap., ver. 12j horta-
tus est ad sancte vivendum ; argumentum ab officii necessitate de-
sumptum : obstricti et obaerati sumus spiritui et justitiae, cui vitam
debemus, ergo secundum Spiritum vivendum. Ulustrat a contrario :
non sumUs Carni obligati, (ut quae sit peccatorum et mortis causa,)
ut secundum earn vivamus. Ideoque alterum subjungit argumen
tum ab effectis contrariis contrariarum causarum, si secundum car
nem vixeritis, moriemini, sin vero secundum Spiritum, vitam vive-
tis sempiternam ; quod expressit his verbis, Tv'evpan rag Tgd&ig
davarovrs, Spiritu actiones corporis mortificaveritis ; hie actiones
tribuit corpori, ut supra cupiditates, vi. cap. 12 ver., utrasque nimi
rum corruptas et vitiosas, ac proinde ubique corpus corrtiptom in-
teUio-e et vitiosum ; Spiritui vero tribuit vim mortificandi actiones-
corporis, quod non est corpus inutile ad omnem actionem reddere^
aut corporis viribus et membris nuUam actionem edere, sed est a
vitiosis actionibus, cujusmodi vitiosae cupiditates efficiunt, corporis
membra coercere, et vi Spiritus motus animi rebelles, quibus et cor
pus ipsum motum cieri contingit, edOmare atque aubigere. Alterum

cap. viii. 12-17. 471
igitur argumentum, (sed videtur potius redire ad probandam salutis
certitudinem, ut in arg. Ep. supra habetur,) est a praemio vitae
aeternae, cujus spe ad sanctitatem incitamur, atque ita argumenta-
tur : Omnes filu Dei vitam aeternam consequentur, qui sanctitati
student, vel quod idem est, qui Spiritu Dei aguntur, sunt filii Dei ;
Ergo omnes qui sanctitati student, vitam adipiscentur aeternam.
Probat sanctificatos esse Dei fiUos :• Accepistis Spiritum adop-
tionis, per quem clamamus Abba Pater, ergo, etc. Cui opponitur
Spiritus servitutis rursus ad metom, qui legalis est, ut alter Evan-r
gelicus. Et in superiore disputatione, quoties legis facta mentky
intellige Evangelio opponi, ac nominatim ver. 3 hujus cap. Ubi
impotentia legis efficacia EvangeUi est inteUigenda. Spiritus adop-
tionis dicitur Spiritus Ule Dei, qui nobis datus est a Patre in Christo:
ad Dei adversum nos amorem cum paterno affectu testificandum,
nostramque adoptionem obsignandam in cordibus nostris, ut intre-
pide et cum fiducia Deum Patrem invocemus. Ttodeaia Graecum
nomen Latino adoptionis est longe significantius nomine. Est enim
quasi fiUi positio ; ponere autem Graece rtdsvai, et interdum Latine
est facere ; hinc dsog non a currendo, ut delirant phUosophi, sed a
faciendo et condendo mundo ; et ponere hominem vel Deum apud
Horat. est facere. Huic testi adoptionis nostrae adjungit alterum
testem, i.e., Spiritui Sancto Spiritum nostram, viz., animam Spiritu
divino sanctificatam, ut duobus testibus stabiUatar nostra adoptio,
et confirmetur nobis nos esse Dei Filios ; deo avppagrvgsi dixit, q. d.
Spiritus noster, i.e., anima fide praedita et sanctificata testator nos
Dei Filios esse, et cum Spiritu nostro Spiritus Dei sanctus idem
contestatur. " Quod si Filii, haeredes :" sententia proposita : Omnes
FUii Dei sunt haeredes Dei, et cohaeredes Christi, ac vitae pro
inde et gloriae aeternae haeredes, ut subjungit. Additur autem
conditio crucis, ad quam ferendam est patientia opus, atque ita
incipit praemunire animos contra acerbitatem crucis. Sic v. cap.;
spei vitae aeternae subjecit gloriationem in adversis, quae gene-
rant patientiam. Ideo hie inquit, eiTsg avpTaayppsv per indicandi
modum, non tam conditionem incerti eventus indicans, quam novum
argumentum, et quasi causam afferens nostrae in vita glorifica-

472 COMMENTARIUS,
tionis : Siquidem oporteat nos pati cum Christo et perpessionum
cum Christo participes esse : Unde et necessario sequitur, nos gloriae
Christi fore participes. Quos enim dignatur . Christus hoc honore
ut pro ipsius nomine patiantur, eosdem est remuneraturus fruitione
gloriae suae ; non quod perpessiones nostrae, vel patientia nostra
tantum praemium promereantur, verum quia ita sibi visum est, ut et
Patri coelesti, ex gratuito promisso dare et fidem et patientiam et
gloriam aeternam. Interim et magnum est hoc solatium in ad
versis, Christum habere nostrarum aerumnarum socium, et quic
quid nos ejus nomine patimur, id ducit omne suum, non secus acsi
ipse pateretur ; imo vero nobis quidvis adversi patientibus, et ipse
quoque patitur : et quid in dolorem sentiat caput, quotiescunque
membrum aUquod dolore afficitur. Verum progrediamur. Alte
rum argumentum et crucis aequanimiter ferendae, et certitudinis
gloriae futurae, per contentionem temporaUum perpessionum et
gloriae sempiternae, quod prae hac iUae sint et leves et momen-
taneae, ut ad 2. Cor. iv. cap., 17 ver., ro yag Tagavrixa skupgbv
rrjg ffktysug rjpuv xad' vTSpfiokrjv elg VTegfiokrjv diuviov fidgog db&g
xdregydZfrai rjpiv. Notetur verbum koytZppui hoc loco, ut supra
vi. cap., 11 ver. Et Ulud d\ia parem aestimationem et valorem
indicans in comparatione praesentis acerbitatis aut ignominiae, et
futurae gloriae atque laetitiae. Probat autem istius futurae vitae
ac gloriae certitudinem a communi testimonio, et intestino sensu
rerum creatarum, qui hanc ipsam solUcite expectant. Causam
hujus intentae expectationis assignat praesentem statum sub vani-
tate, cui subjectae sunt, sed non sine spe liberationis : ut enim
propter hominem conditae fuerunt, et propter hominis peccatum in
homine lapso et Ulae de statu suo integro collapsae sunt : ita cum
homine restituendo et illae restituentur in integrum, quo spectat
promissio coeli novi, et terrae novae apud prophetas. Tribuit
autem vel rebus sensu et anima carentibus aToxagadoxiav, quasi
exerto capite sollicitam atque intentam expectationem, item sus-
piria et dolores, quales solent esse parturientis, quos laetus con-
sequitur exitus. Jerem. xii. cap., 4 ver. Quae omnia mirifice
expressa pudorem nobis incutiant, qui in terram defixi praesentia

cap. viii. 18-28. 473
curamus, de futuro securi. Praesentem statum vanitatem appellat
et servitutem corruptionis, non solum quod Ula vanitati et corrup
tion! sint obnoxiae, verum etiam quod nobis vanissimis et corrup-
tissimis hominibus, cum Dei contemptu et earam abusu, inservire
cogantur. Testimonio creaturarum subnectitur aliud sanctorum
testimonium atque fideUum, qui dicuntur, hie primitias Spiritus
habere ; viodeaiav per appositionem vocat dxokvrguaiv rov auparog,
redemptionem corporis, innuens adoptionis fruitionem tum demum
futuram, cum corpus e somno expergefactum vestietur et ipsum glo
ria. Atque haec et est spes omnium piorum, quae dicitur nos ser-
vare, quod salutem, cujus certiores fide reddimur, patienterexpectet.
Neque enim est spes eorum, quae cernuntur, aut praesentium, sed
absentium et futurorum, atque ita cum salutis certitudine conjun-
git patientiae documentum, v. 26. 'Claavrug dsJ] Novum pati-
entiae argumentum, Spiritus Sancti in rebus adversis auxilium, qui
nostram infirmitatem sublevat, dictans arcano instinctu, quid pre-
candum, et quo modo, nimirum congruentur. Voluntati Dei, qui
Deus cum sit xagdioyvuarrjg, suggestas a divino Spiritu suo preces
et agnoscit, et exaudit. Magnum est igitur in precibus, imo in Spi
ritu Sancto, praesidium, quo autore preces Deo gratae et acceptae
suscipiuntur. Ubi nota verbum signatum avvavrikapfidvea^ai,
q. d., ad sublevandam oneris nostri gravitatem e regione concurrit
Spiritus Sanctus, ut quod non potest efficere nostra infirmitas, per
ficiat sua virtute. O'idapev de,~\ v. 28. Novum argumentum cum
mitigandae acerbitati afflictionum, turn salutis certitodini confir-
mandae : omnia Dei amantibus cooperantur in bonum, ut qui se
cundum propositum Dei vocati sint; et hoc axioma sibi et Aposto-
lis atque adeo piis omnibus notum, compertum persuasumque esse.
Ideo praeposuit oidapev, scimus, et experientia compertum habe
mus, et approbamus, sicut paulo supra, oidapev on Taaa xriaig.
Hie pios vocat amantes Deum synecdochice ab effecto sanctifica
tionis ; deinde utitur verbo avvegyeiv, una operam suam conferre, et
vim suam omnem in hoc opus faciendum exerere, ut bonum nos
trum et salutem nostram bona omnia promoveant. Sed quae sunt
iUa ? omnia citra ullam exceptionem ; Ergo et Deus Pater, et Deus

474 Filius, et Deus Spiritus Sanctus, et creaturae omnes tam visibiles,
quam invisibiles, et bonae et malae ; adeo ut reprobi, et ipsi Dia-
boli quamquam aliud ex suo sensu agentes vel inviti proruovere
cogantur. Sed quid de creaturis loquor ? imo mala ipsa, quae noci-
tUra nobis, et perpessu acerba videntur ; et, quod multo omnium
admirabUissimum est, peccata etiam nostra, quibus Dei judicia non-
nunquam graviora accersimus, hue etiam conducunt.
Sic Deo Opt. Max. visum subinde e tenebris lucem evocare,
Ideo adjicit rovg xaTa TgbSsaiv xkrirdig ovaiv, ut qui vocati sunt
secundum propositum ; participium enim includit causam, cur mala
omnia bono nostra eveniant; neque enim haec proprie causa est
quam primum posuit, nos (viz. Deum,) amare ; sed haec, vocati effi
caciter sumus, idque ex proposito Dei. Vocatio enim ea, quae
efficax, naturae ordine antegreditur amorem ilium, quo nos Deum
amamus ; vocationem, aeternum Dei propositum. Cohaerent enim
amor Dei noster, et vocatio nostri divina, et propositum Dei, a
quo pendet vocatio, ex qua noster in Deum amor. Probat v. 29,
Vocatis ex Dei proposito omnia cedere in bonum, quia quos pro-
posuit ab aeterno vocare, et ultro favore suo prosequi, et amplecti
amore ut iUum redamarent (hoc enim est Tgoa'syvu) tam cruci, quam
gloriae praedestinavit, nimirum conformes imagini FUU sui. Quae
cum sit duplex, una sub cruce ignominiosa, altera supra omnes
coelos gloriosa : Ad hanc alia est nulla, quam per Ulam via ; ideo-
que quos saluti et gloriae, eosdem et cruci ferendae, et exantlandis
cum ignominia laboribus praedestinavit. E«? ro avai avrov,] ut ipse
esset primogenitos inter multos fratres ; haec est Christi praeroga-
tiva, ut primogeniti Filiorum Dei, og 'ianv dgy/i Tgoruroxog lx ruv
vsxguv, ita y'evrjrat ev Taaiv avrbg Tgwr'evuv, Coloss. cap. i. " Quos
autem praedestinavit, eos et vocavit," &c. Climax sive gradatio,
hujusque scalae sunt gradus quinque ; Tgbyvuaig, praecognitio, seu
praescitum Dei; Tgougiapbg, praedestinatio Dei; xkrjaig, vocatio;
dixaiuaig, justificatio; et do%dapog, glorificatio. Hie sanctificationis
non est expressa mentio, vel quia sub justificatione facile compre
henditur vel sub glorificatione ; diximus enim justitiam nobis aliam
imputari, aliam inhaerere, et sanctificationis nostrae complementum

cap. viii. 28-39. 475
est glorificatio. Utitur verbo praeteriti temporis ldb\aae, ad certi
tudinem futurae gloriae significandam, ut v. 2, IksvhguSS. T/ ovv
igovpsv Tgbg ravra.] Hinc concludit magnificentissime, et cum
fiduciae summa gloriatione nobis nihil obesse posse, aut salutem
nostram impedire, nihil, quod nobis usui et saluti esse possit, de-
esse posse. Deus est nobiscum, quis ergo contra nos ? Deus dedit
Filium suum propter nos in mortem, qui fieri potest, ut aliquid nobis
sit negaturus ? Aut non omnia ultro gratificaturus et.largiturus$
cum ne FUium quidem nobis negaverit, sed eum nobis gratificatos
sit. Quis accusabit nos, aut criminabitur ? cum Deus non solum
nos in Christo elegerit, sed etiam justificarit. Quis condemnabit
nos; pro quibus absolvendis a peccato mortuus est Christus, et jus-
tificandis a morte excitatus est, et glorificandis ad Dei dexteram
sedet, et defendendis interpellat. Observa accusationi justifica
tionem, condemnationi defensionem et patroeinium oppoiii, q. d.,
quis audeat eum accusare, quem absolvit Deus ? Quia condemnare,
qui tantum habeat patronum, tam gratiosum et potentem, tam stu-
diosum et amantem sui? Quis nos separabitj inquit, ab amore
Christi, non solum quo nos prosequitur, sed etiam quo Ulum redan
mamus ? Respondet, nihil ; enumeratione septenaria rerum praeci-
pue adversarum, probatque exemplo veteris Ecclesiae, Ps. xliv., cujus
fides et patientia nuUis calamitatibus infringi potuit, aut labefac-
tari, ut Christum nondum in carne exhibitum desereret. Atque ea
est victoria sanctorum gloriosa, nimirum invicta fides, quae donum
est ejus, qui nos prior amavit, et nobis Spiritu suo indidit mutuum
sui amorem. Notandum est verbum VTegvixupev, plus quam victo-
res ; sumus et quod causam victoriae non amori in Christum nostro^
sed Christi in nos amori tribuit, qui nos prior, cum ilium odisse-
mus, amavit. Probat deinde, ver. 28, Deum in Christo nUnquam
nos deserturum aut dereUcturum, sed perpetuo et constanti nOs in
Christo amore prosecuturum. Et Ulustrat hanc fidei suae persua-
sionem enumeratione earam rerum, quae quanquam valentissimae
videantur, nihil tamen posse creaturas omnes contra Deum crea-
torem, et in Christo redemptorem suorem ad ejus immutandum1
contra suos animum, aut potentiam pro suis minuendam. Num

476 COMMENTARIUS,
metus mortis ? Num amor vitae ? Num angelorum sive bonorum
sive malorum aut gratia aut potentia? Num res presentes, aut
futurae, aut in coelo sublimes maxime, aut apud inferos profundis-
simae, aut ulla denique res creata ? Facessant igitur adulterini Ro-
manenses cum sua dubitatione et ignorantia, ecquid odio an amore
digni sint ? At ego certo scio illos odio dignos esse, qui Christo non
credunt, nee Spiritus oraculis fidem habent. At Paulus, inquiunt
de se est locutus, ut qui de salute sua certos esse potuerit ; quid hoc
ad nos, qui ApostoU non sumus ? Respondeo non suam hie priva
tam agit causam, sed personam sustinet omnium electorum, haud
aliter quam sub finem cap. vii., quod qui ignorat, nihU Christi in
salutem novit. Verum regerunt Apostolum uti verbo TSTeiapai,
quod nudam persuasionem significat, eamque interdum vel falsam,
adeo ut falli potuerit Apostolus. O os impurum ! an aUunde haec
persuasio, quam a verbo Dei et Spiritu Sancto qui nee faUere nee
falli potest ?
Hactenus de justitia et salute in EvangeUo patefacta, atque ex-
hibita ; de justitia quidem justificante primis capp, iv. Ex qua de-
duxit salutis certitudinem cap. v. De posteriore justitia sanctifi-
cante capp. vi. et vii., unde eandem salutis certitudinem cap. viii.,
confirm avit.
NONUM CAPUT.
Nunc tribus capp. sequentibua de objectis justitiae et salutis, i.e.,
personis quibus communicanda est justitia et salus, et quibus non.
Cujus tractationis duae sunt partes, quae fere promiscue tractantur.
Una est de Judaeorum rejectione, altera de vocatione gentium. Ac-
turus de rejectione Judaeorum gravissima obtestatione odii suspi-
cionem amolitur, et Judaeorum rejectionem eadem opera, quam-
quam obscurius, et insinuatione usus proponit. ConsimUiter initio
scriptionis suae cap. i., v. 9, studium et benevolentiam erga Ro
manos suam commendans, obtestatione est etiam usus. IUic prae-
dicavit Romanorum fidem, hie deplorat Judaeorum infidelitatem.
Propositio rejectionis Judaeorum est ad v. 6. Judaei sunt rejecti ;

cap. ix. 1-5. 477
vestit hanc propositionem adjuncto.dolore suo : — Doleo Judaeos re-
jectos esse. Dolorem hunc suum eonfirmat testimonio divino, sive
sanctitate jurisjurandi, et conscientiae testimonio. " Veritatem
dico in Christo," i.e. coram Christo teste et judiee, atque, adeo fal-
sitatis et perjurii vindice. " Non mentior." Repetitio ejusdem sen-
tentiae a contrario, ad majorem emphasim, attestante vel contestante
mihi conscientia mea. In testem ergo vocat et Deum et conscien-
tiam, nisi mavis et Christum et Spiritum Sanctum cum sua consci
entia, idque sincere et ex animo. Dolorem vero suum appellat
bdvvrjv xagdiag, quasi vehementissimum animi cruciatum, qualis par-
turientium : quem duplici epitheto amplificat, magnum sc. et nun
quam intermittentem. Atque haec de dolore, cujus causam ex-
primit, v. 3> figuratam voto aut optato, quo et amorem insinuat
suum erga Judaeos longe vehementissimum, quorum rejectionem,
unde tantum dolorem capit, vel suo, si fieri possit, exitio redimere
veUt, h. e. anathema esse, quasi devotum caput et execrabile : Et
addit a Christo (sub. separatum,) contra persuasionem in clausula
superioris cap. suam: pro Judaeis, quos multis ornat elogus, et
necessitudinibus sibi devinctos, primum fratres ; deinde cognates
vocans suos, (Quaere differentiam ;) tertio Israelitas, quod nomen
ab Israele ductum, et a Jacobi lucta cum Angelo divinitus Jacobo
impositum nomen honorificentissimum ; quarto viodsaia dictus a
Deo Filius suus primogenitus Israel ; quinto db%a, fortasse arcam
cum cherabinis gloriosis aspectabile divinae praesentiae signum in-
teUigit ; sexto diadrjxai, tabidae foederis in area duae : nam haud
scio an duo foedera, alterum gratiae, alterum operum significet,
cum postea mentionem faciat promissionum gratuiti foederis ; sep-
timo vopodsaia, Legislatio, lex fortasse judicialis ; octavo kargsia,
cultus, Lex ceremonialis ; ut sit Lex moralis, ceremonialis, judici
alis distincta ad amplificationem ; nono promissiones, promissio de
Christo saepe repetita, quae speciaUum omnium promissionum fuit
fundamentum, nisi maris et hanc generalem promissionem, cum
multis aliis particularibus indicari ; decimo, Quorum sunt Patres :
Majorum dignitas, et generis nobilitas ; ac denique ultimo, Quod
Christus ex Judaeis oriundus quo ad naturam humanam, qui respectu

478 COMMENTARIUS,
alterius naturae est Deus praedicandus in saecula. Manifeatissi-
mum divinitatis Christi testimonium, 6. v. Ot%' ohv de.] Occur-
rit tacitae objectioni, quae oritur ex ilia propositione de Judaeis
rejiciendis, quam insinuavit ingenti suo pro illis dolore. Si Deus
rejiceret Judaeos, sibi non constaret, et plurima Dei oracula falsa
essent, quod fieri nullo modo potest, ut ipse etiam respondet,
Quamvis Judaei rejiciantur. Causam reddit distinctione ambigui.
Distinguit enim Israelitas, et Abrahami fiUos secundum dici, et
secundum esse, ut loquitur, i.e.. qui nomine tantum sunt ejusmodi
et secundum naturalem propagationem : cum verius Israel et; verum
semen Abrahae sit ex promissione et gratia metiendum. Quod
probat verbis promissionis, quibus Sarae, non Agarae filius, Isaac
non Ismael, quamquam natura major, et ante Isaacum circumcisus,
pro germano Abrahae fifio censeatur : In Isaac vocabitur tibi se
men. Alterum exemplum illustrius adhuc, Non solum in eadem
familia, et ex eodem patre, sed etiam eadem matre simul oriundi
gemelli sortem plane diversam subierunt, qui Esau et Jacob, Isaaco
et Rebecca nati ; quorum natu minor Jacobus Esavo aetate gran-
diori, vel in ipso utero antequam,nati essent, oracuU praedictione
praelatus fuit, non ex meritis : nihil enim boni aut maU adhuc fe-
cerant, aut facere per aetatem potuerant ; sed ex divina vocatione,
atque adeo aeterno Dei consilio, quod Dei prppositum secundum
electionem vocat, unde pependit vocatio. In oraculo servitus ma-
joris fuit conjuncta cum odio Dei, et minoris dominatus ex divini
amoris in Jacobum ultronea promissione fuit, quod ostenditur Pro
phetae Malachiae verbis. Sequitur occupatio. Videretur Deus
injustus, si nuUa dignitatis aut indignitatis ratione, alium odio,
aUum amore prosequatur : posset enim et dignos odisse, et indigo
nos diligere. Respondet sequelam negando, et aversando tanquam
blasphemiam ; Et scripturae autoritate ex Mose eonfirmat Deum
nuUo operum praevisorum respectu ab aeterno pro beneplacito
voluntatis suae justissimae (cujus ratio utcunque nos lateat, patet
tamen Deo) aUos saluti, alios justo exitio destinare : Saluti quidem
ex misericordia, quam adhibet, suis gradibus praestanda ; hoc est,
quod ait Deus Mosi, Miserebor cujuscunque voluerim, commisera-

cap. ix. 6-23. 479
bor quemcunque commiseratus fuero. Quibus verbis significatur
Deum uti dementia, et misericordia in eorum salute promovenda,
quos ex mera gratia proposuit ab aeterno eligere : Et cum inter
aeternum Dei propositum et consilii executionem miseria hominum
ex ipaorum cidpa, et Dei misericordia justifieandis et sanctificandis
in Christo electis interveniat, antequam serventur: non potest
Deus videre injustus in iis servandis. Unde concludit prius mem-
brum de electione : — Non esse igitur volentis neque currentis, sed
miserentis Dei. Unde hominum non opera modo et actiones, sed
etiam conatus et studia excluduntur. Itidem ad alterum membrum
de reprobatione respondet Scripturae testimonio, atque adeo Dei
verbis, quibus se excitasse Pharaonem ait ad gloriam potentiae
et justitiae suae illustrandam. Atque inde concludit utrumque
membrum ; Electionem et reprobationem a Dei voluntate esse, sed
ita ut eligat ex misericordia, et in exequendo decreto reprobationis
induret, antequam perdat, idque ex justitia. Quos enim indurat
Deus in suis sordibus, nisi sua culpa conspurcatos ? Itaque indur
ratio hie praesupponit voluntariam corruptionem, et antegrediens
peccatum. Sequitur 19 v. altera objectio, sed pro reprobis tantum :
Si indurat Deus quos vult, et ejus voluntati nemo potest resistere,
aut impedire quod decrevit, Qui fieri potest, ut jure damnet aut
perdat, quos volens induravit ? ReBpondet quidem non fiegando
hanc esse Dei voluntatem, sed ipsam ad orandam, non perscrutan-
dam homuncioni tantum cujus modulus Dei immensitatem non ca
piat ; et homini Deum opponens, cujus voluntas est omnis justitiae
regula, os obstruit responsatori : Et prolata similitudine figuli,
Deum sic facere, et juste facere ostendit. Augetur similitudo com^
paratione imparium, Si penes figulum est vasa fingere ex eadem
luti massa arbitratu suo in hanc vel illam formam, alia quidem ad
honestiorem usum, alia minus honestum, quanto magis potestatem
habet Deus in humanum genus, quod ex uno eodemque luto finxit,
et ex hominibus alios gloriae alios ignominiae praedestinare : cum
ita justitiam et potentiam suam illi visum est illustrare praesertim
cum lenitate utatur in homines juste perdendos ; quos vocat vasa
irae ad interitum coaginentata : cum et hac etiam ratione illustret

480 < COMMENTARIUS,
suae erga electos misericordiae gloriam. Ubi observa illud xarrjg-
napeva a figulo sumpta translatione, nequis putet a seipsis vasa
irae coagmentata esse 22 v. Videtur ellipsis ad Tadog exprimen-
dum ex rei indignitate, negare Deo, quod homini permissum ab
omnibus. Conjunctio xa) ante 'iva abest ab uno exemplari, et
videtur redundare ; subaudiendum autem, quid absurdi, 'aut aliud
ejusmodi, cum homo tantum possit in lutum non suam sed Dei
creaturam? Postquam ita demonstravit justam esse Dei volun
tatem in hominibus eligendis et reprdbandis, descendit ab aeterno
Dei decreto, et occulta voluntate ad ejus patefactionem vocandis
per Evangelium hominibus tam gentibus quam Judaeis, imo pro-
pheticis testimoniis, duobus Hoseae vocationem Gentium, duobus
Esaiae rejectionem Judaeorum eonfirmat.
His positis causam infert v. 30, tam rejectionis Judaeorum, quam
vocationis Gentium : hanc vero solam Dei gratiam esse, quae
Gentes nihU tale cogitantes, vel contraria omnia promeritas, ve-
ramque justitiam aversantes fidei donatione praevenerit ad justi
tiam apprehendendam : Judaeos vero studio legalis justitiae veram
justitiam contempsisse : hanc vocat vbpov dtxaioavvrjg, legem justi
tiae, non tam justitiam ipsam, quam ejus communicandae viam et
rationem per EvangeUi doctrinam, ut supra legem fidei dixit 3tio
cap. sub finem. Quod etiam duobus Esaiae testimoniis eonfirmat,
quorum altero docet tanto ante praedictum, Judaeos in Christum,
tanquam in petram scandali et offensionis impacturos ; altero
Gentes in Ulum ad salutem speraturas. Quare et abusus legis et
contemptus EvangelU Judaeis causa rejectionis fuit ex justo Dei ju
dicio : vocationis Gentium, mera'Dei gratia per Evangelii praedica-
tionem, Spiritus Sancti virtote in ipsis efficacem. Est igitur haec
summa noni capitis, Judaeos magna ex parte rejectos esse,. neque
tamen Deum non praestare promissa Abrahae semini et Israelitas
facta : quod veram semen Abrahae, et verus Israel, ad quem spec-
tant promissiones, non a natura sed gratia censendus sit ; qua ab
aeterno Deus proposuit secum, et elegit in Christo pro beneplacito
voluntatis suae, quos servaret ad gloriam gratiae et misericordiae
suae ; necnon ab aeterno proposuit pro justissima voluntate sua re-

cap. ix. 30; x. 7. . 481
probafe et indurare in faecibus sordium suarum, quos juste perdi-
turus esset, cum ad potentiae et justitiae suae gloriam in ipsos
declarandam, tum ad illustrandam erga electos misericordiae suae
gloriam. Quod aeternum consilium suum patefecit in tempore,
vocato Abrahamo ex Semi progenie, et Abrahami filio Isaaco, Isaaci
vero Jacobo, ejusque posteris Israelitis, cum interea ceterae gentes
alienae a repubUca IsraeUs, et exclusae a visibili ecclesia, in suis
superstitionibus evanescerent ; nihUominus per prophetas praedixit
Deus tam Gentium vocationem, quam rejectionem Judaeorum, quod
hi Christum in EvangeUo offerendum contumaciter rejecturi essent ;
IUae vero eundem fide ex gratia amplexurae secundum oracula Pro
phetarum.

DECIMUM CAPUT.
Rursus igitur initio decimi cap., nova insimulatione usus, et de suo
erga Judaeos studio, et Judaeorum erga Deum zelo protestatus,
Judaeos ignorantiae legis convincit ex ipsa lege, et contumaciae
redarguit. Itaque duplicem justitiam explicans, legalem et Evan
geUcam, hanc fidei, illam operum ; alteram humanam, alteram divi
nam ; Judaeos suam justitiam ex legis operibus affectando, divi
nam fidei ex Evangelium justitiam contempsisse, idque, ut dixi,
legis ignorantia, nam legis finis Christus ad justitiam cuivis cre-
denti ; sic ad Gal., " Lex paedagogus ad Christum." Lex enim
lata non fuit, ut quisquam per legem justificaretur ; supra cap. iii.
ver. 19 ; veram ut homines suae injustitiae per legem convictos
ad quaerendam in Christo justitiam impelleret, non ex operibus, sed
fide obtinendam, v. 4. Id ita 6sse docet ex Mose, descripta tum
legali operum, tum Evangelica fidei justitia ; illam in legis praesta-
tione impossibili, hanc in Evangelium persuasione efficaci, et salu-
tari fide a Mose collocatam demonstrans. Caeterum prior locus ex
Levit. c. xviii., v. 5, quo legis justitia describitur posita in praestanda
lege, ut quivis vitam inde consequatur. Alterum testimonium ex
2h

482 COMMENTARIUS,
Deuter. cap. xxx. v. 12 ; describit justitiam fidei verbis Moais qui
dem, sed ad Christum applicatis ex sensu verborum, et vera inter-
pretatione. Fides, inquit, non quaerit aut dubitat de verae justitiae
vel autore vel indice, ut quae novit Christum patris apud homines
interpretem et sacerdotem nostrum, justitiam hanc veram et exhi-
buisse mundo, et promulgasse, ut neque occiUta nunc sit, neque lon-
ginqua, quippe in EvangeUum exposita, cujus summa est Iesum
dominum mortuum esse pro peccatis, et resurrexisse ad justitiam
nobis conferendam, et salutem. Cujus utriusque participes sunt,
quicunque hoc corde credunt et ore confitentur. Atqui Moses
dixit non esse quaerendam in coelo, acsi remota, aut extra mare,
quasi occulta esset. Prope enim esse verbum, i. e. EvangeUum
justitiam hanc patefaciens, idque in ore ut expromptum et in corde
ut propinquum. Hoc autem verbum interpretatur Apostolum ver
bum fidei, quod praedicamus, i. e. ut dixi, Evangelium, quod est
potentia Dei in salutem conferendo justitiam et fidem, ac primo
fidem. Ideo hie verbum fidei dicitur ; deinde justitiam per fidem,
ac tandem salutem propter justitiam. Qui ordo causarum hie ob-
servandus est, ut id, quod in cap. i. v. 16 et 17, supra dictum est,
intelligatur. Diserte hie Mosen docet concionatum esse de justitia
fidei, de salute in Christo, atque EvangeUo, ipsumque EvangeUum
esse Ulud Dei verbum, quod adimat omnem dubitationem de salute
et justitia, ad quam per legis opera mortalium nemo pertingat ;
Christum denique ilium esse, qui e coelo descenderit, ut moriendo
justitiam nobis et salutem acquireret, a mortuis vero resurrexisse,
ut acquisitam nobis efficaciter exhiberet ; deducit Apost. ex verbis
Mosis fideli interpretatione, Verbum in ore et corde; fidem in
Christum, et fidei confessionem ad justitiam et salutem Evan
gelio exhibitam; et ita quidem ut fide ingenerata praedicatione
Evangelii corde credamus Christum pro nobis mortuum esse et
resurrexisse ad nos justificandos, et ore profiteamur Iesum esse
Dominum, (est enim eUipsie verbi substantivi inter Iesum et Domi
num subaudiendi) et dictis et factis Christum exprimamus ad salu
tem consequendam. In summa justitiam legalem paucis, Evange
Ucam pluribus describit, et Evangelium illud instrumentum esse

cap. x. 8-17. 483
docet fidem fabricandi in nobis, fidem vero instrumentum justitiam
in Christo apprehendendi, Christum esse salutem et justitiam nos
tram, officium vero nostrum credere, et profiteri vita et moribus
Iesum esse Dominum, ut qui mortuus resurrexit ad regnum suum
ineundum. Atque haec est summa doctrinae Evangelicae paucu-
lis apud Mosen verbis comprehensa et Apostolica explicatione illus
trata. Haec fidei justitia EvangeUca est omnium credentium tam
Gentium quam Judaeorum ; ut repetito, ex fine sup. cap., Esaiae
testimonio, et altero Joelis nunc primum adducto eonfirmat, in-
terposita ratione sumpta ampUtudine potestatis, et munificentiae
Christi Domini in omnes, et effecto fidei, invocatione, quae totum
Dei cultum complectitur, v. 11, 12, 13. Ex quo inteUigas, fide
Uum ex Gentibus vocationem sic confirmari, ut Judaeorum rejec
tionis culpa omnis in ipsis resideat ex eorum infidelitate ; ad quam
convincendam infert Soriten, sive gradationem, ascendendo ab
effectis ad causam, hoc modo, ubi invocatio Dei, ibi est fides; ubi
est fides, ibi auditio Evangelii ; ubi auditor Evangelii ibi praedi-
cationem ejusdem esse necesse est ; ubi EvangelU praedicatur, ibi
esse oportet, qui divinitus missi hoc munus obeant, quod Esaiae
testimonio confirmator : " Quam speciosi pedes Evangelizantium,
etc.," cap. Ui., ubi gradus hi omnes enucleate explicantur. Ideo
Apost. his paucis verbis adductis digitum quasi ad fontem intendit,
unde haurias veUm, quae deinde sitim extinguant tuam. Facile
coUigas ex hac gradatione Gentium vocationem, quam tibi cogitan-
dam relinquit Apost. nee minus Judaeorum credentium salutem.
Verum quia potissimum hie stringit aciem styli in Judaeos, quivis
hinc videat vel prima fronte eorum, ut qui aspernentur Evangelium,
rejectionem ; quia licet praedicatum fuit ipsis per Christum et Apos-
tolos Evangelium, EvangeUo tamen non auscultarunt, quod tantp
ante praedictum per Esaiam, cap. liii., in persona Christi et Apos
tolorum de Judaeorum incredulitate et contumaeia, admirantium
brachium Dei, i. e., EvangeUum, tam paucis innotuisse. Unde
colligit, v. 17, fidem ex auditione, audition em ex praedicatione
Evangelii exoriri, ut constet verbum Ulud, de quo Moses dixit, pro-
pinquum Judaeis esse verbum fidei, quod praedicamus (ut inquit
2 h2

484 COMMENTARIUS,
Apostolus,) i. e. Evangelium, quod qui rejiciunt, fidem rejiciunt et
invocationem, atque ideo Iesum Dominum cum omnibus suis be
neficiis : cujusmodi frierunt Judaei. At excipiat aliquis, Judaeos
non audivisse. Respondet hoc fieri nullo modo posse, cum jam
EvangeUum per orbem terrarum Apostolorum praedicatione longe
lateque disseminatum sit ; earn ob rem initio scripserat, fidem
Romanorum in toto mundo celebrari. Verba sunt petita ex Ps.
xix. de documentis naturae in mundi opificio, quae traducit Apos
tolus ad documenta gratiae in Evangelium patefacta; ideoque
lineam (i. e. delineationem mundanae fabricae, quae longe lateque
conspecta, sine sono quasi vociferatur, et promulgat gloriam Dei)
yertit sonum propter EvangeUcam praedicationem, quae passim
audiebatur. Observa non citari hunc locum ut caetera propheta
rum, ad dicendum testimonium, sed prophetae verbis Apostolum
tanquam suis uti, ita tamen ut non obscure innuat non minus late
patere gratiae praeconium, quam naturae, idque ex sententia pro
phetae. Ex quo sequitur, non potuisse Judaeos non audire, quod
passim et in mundo praedicabatur. Altera objectio pro Judaeis :
Finge illos audivisse, at nondum intellexerunt tantum mysterium ;
quare nimiae severitatis fuerit ob nunc primum auditum, et non
dum intellectual nuntium, Dei populum damnare. Resp. primum
ex Mosae, deinde ex Esaia mysterium hoc de gentium vocatione,
et rejectione Judaeorum, et jam pridem innotuisse : nam Moses,
Deut. xxxii. in divino carmine Deum loquentem inducit, et inter-
minantem se Judaeos rebelles Gentium obedientia ad aemulationem
provocaturum. Esaias vero lxv., magna cum fiducia, tam de Ju
daeis, quam Gentibus Christum loquentem inducit, harum quidem
de improviso nee opinatam vocationem et repiscentiam, iUorum
vero deploratam contumaciam duobus ultimis versibus.

CAP. x. 18 ; xi. 6. 485

UNDECIMUM CAPUT.
Tertia objectio sequitur initio cap. xi. ; Sit ita, dicat Judaeus,
et nos audivisse, et jam pridem ex Mose, et Esaia nosse potuisse,
atque adeo cognovisse haec, an Deus propterea rejeeerit populum
suum ? Cui objectioni respondet, Miniriie ; ut qui foedus pactum
jam olim cum populo suo constanter servet, nee universitatem, aut
corpus populi sui abdicasse, quod probat Ivardasi* primum singula-
ris exempli sui, qui cum sit Israelita, ex Abrahamo e Binjaminica
tribu oriundus, gratia Dei factum est, ut sit Christianus et Aposto
lus : ergo non omnes rejecti, i. e. universi et singuli; tollitur nomen
universale data vel una singulari instantia. Deinde distinctione
populi, quod alius gratia, alius natura sit populus Dei ; alius specie
tenus, alius re ipsa. Verus autem Dei populus, et solus qui hoc
nomen meretur, quem ex gratia praecognovit ab aeterno et elegit
in Christo : ex hoc populo ne unum quidem rejicit, aut rejectua
est, v. 2. Postremo profert alteram svaraaiv, vel exemplum diebus
Eliae, v. 2 et 3, cum nullus verus Israelita ab oculatissimo propheta
conspici videretur, et propheta contra omnes tanquam apostatas
et sanguinarios prophetarum carnifices Deum imploraret. Tum
enim edoctus oraculo dedicit multa Israelitarum miUia septenario
numero indicata, se cultibus idolorum non polluisse, v. 4. Con
cludit hujus exempU simUitudine reUquias ex gratia secundum
electionem salvas esse, v. 5. Et instituta gratiae cum operibus
contentione, docet gratiam et opera simul stare non posse, quin
opera gratiam funditus evertant, et contra, ver. 6. Ne quis putet
pios Judaeorum majores operibus, non gratiae salutem acceptam
retuUsse, qui locus Semipelagianos Romanenses refritat divinitus,
hinc infert per occupationem frustra Israelitas quaesisse justitiam
in legis operibus ; interea exiguas reliquias etiam nunc ex gratuita.
electione vocari, ceteros sua culpa occaUescere ex justa Dei vin
dicta obtenebrantis eorum mentes, et animoa obfirmantia, Davide
* [h. e. Instantia, qua affertur opinio quaedam (Sag* ni) ad persuadendum apta. Cf.
Aristot. Rhet. ii., 25, 26.]

486 COMMENTARIUS,
et Esaia testibus, 7, 8, 9, 10. Atque hactenus docuit magnam
partem Judaeorum, salvis tamen ex gratia reUquiis, exhaeredatam
esse, nunc a v. 11 ad 17, finem assumit duplicem subordinatum
gloriae Dei, cur UU visum multitudinem Judaeorum maximam ab
Ecclesia separare, quorum alter Gentium, alter Judaeorum bono
inservit. Prior finis, ut occasione hac pateret locus vocandis in
ecclesiam Gentibus; posterior, ut aemulatione Gentium provocaren-
tur etiam Judaei, ad Deum amplexandum. Non ideo igitur impe-
gerunt, ut prorsus prolabantur, i. e. ita defecerunt, ut aut nuUi
usui sit eorum defectio, aut ut sit perpetuo duratura ex odio Dei
in populum suum, v. 11. Ulustrat hos duos fines, v. 12. Et ex
priore deducit posteriorem auctum novo argumento, quippe majore
Gentium et ecclesiae bono, quem finem posteriorem probat exemplo
suo, qui eo etiam diligentius fungitur Apostolatu suo inter Gentes^
ut gentium exemplo Judaei provocentur ad sanctam aemulationem,
ut si quo modo fieri possit, ut ex ipsis aliqui serventur. Ubi
Judaeos carnem suam, i. e. consanguineos vocat, 13, 14. Quod
Studium suum eonfirmat ab eventu, nisi mavis effecto utili. etiam
Gentibus ex aemulatione Judaeorum, amplificato minorum compa-
ratione, v. 15 et 16. Denique eandem vocationem Judaeorum pro
bat argumentis parium, duplici simUitudine illustratis, Abrahamum
primitiis et radici, Judaeos massae et ramis conferens ; ut massa
in primitiis sanctificatur, et rami in radici, ut quaUs radix, tales sint
rami : ita in Abrahamo posteri foederis ratione sunt sancti, quod
non de singulis inteUigendum, ut diximus supra ; vide 1 Cor. vU.
14 ; Levit. cap. xxiii. v. 14. Ex hac sanctificatione posteriorum
Abrahami, i. e. Judaeorum retenta simiUtudine radicis et ramorum,
admonet Gentes, ne ferociant, aut Judaeis insultent. Ubi em-
plastrationis sive inoculationis significationem observa in verbo
hsxevrg'a'hrjg, quod Cic. dixit infindi,* i. e. in fissum truncum inseri,
sic infindi in genus aut famiUam. Interea beneficium gratiae com-
memorat in Gentes coUatum, facta mentione prioris status, quem
comparat cum oleastro, qui nunc insitus nativae oleae radici, ejus
* [Sic in MS., sed aliquem errorem vel in auctore vel in exscriptore hoc Iooo valde
suspicor ; nusquam, ut opinor, apud Ciceronem occurrit hoc verbum.]

cap. xi. 7-25. 487
succum et pinguedinem trahit ; atque ob hunc mehorem statum
Gentes Judaeis propter Abrahamum, cui quasi insitae sunt, obli-
gantur. Ne ergo Gentes insultent Judaeis, qui sunt rami nativi,
cum Ulae aint oleaatri, nee aanctum genus sustentent, sed ab eo
sustententur, v. 17, 18. Occurrat Gentilis: — IUi sunt recisi meae
insitionis gratia, ut mihi jure liceat Ulos despicere. Resp. confes-
sione, et assumptione verae causae, quippe infideUtatis Judaeorum,
et gratiae Dei erga Gentes ; quod hae insitae, iUi excisi : non igitur
dignitate sua promeruerunt Gentes, ut in Judaeorum locum veni-
rent, ac proinde nihil sibi hoc nomine debent tribuere, nee contra
Judaeos insolenter gloriari ; sed cum timore, et cum tremore, ut
ait aUbi Apostolus, suam salutem conficere. Rationem subdit
hujus reverentiae et metus a justitia Dei severa in Judaeos, quibus
non pepercit, licet ramis naturalibus, quanto minus tibi oleastro,
a minorum coUatione. Ubi nota in his omnibus el particulam non
dubiam conditionem, sed certae veritatis significationem habere,
ver. 19, 20, 21. Inde proponit dvrideatv benignitatis et severitatis
divinae quarum hac contra Judaeos, Ula adversus Gentes est usus,
et potest vice versa in Gentes severitate, et erga Judaeos benigni-
tate uti, si vel Judaei resipuerint, vel ferociverint Gentes.' Posse
autem id Deum minorum probat comparatione, retenta superiori
simUitudine ramorum, et radicis ; Si in locum rami nativae oleae
excisi insevit oleastrum, quanto facilius potest nativae oleae ramum
suae radici infindere, i.e., Gentes, si infideles evaserint, ex sancta
Ecclesia ejicere : Judaeos, si ad fidem reversi frierint, in sanctorum
communionem recipere, ut cum Abrahamo, Isaaco et Jacobo (ut
loquitur Deus) accumbant, ver. 22, 23, 24. Quod dixit Deum posse
facere, ver. 25, affirmat plane facturum, quoad Judaeos, quorum
excisionem tantum ex parte esae, et ad tempus fore docet ; atque
hoc mysterium vocat, quod continendis in officio et modestia Gen
tibus revelat, confirmatque divino Esaiae testimonio duplici, ver.
26, 27, in unum oontracto. Apostolus totum Israelem salvum
fore docit, non quod singuli sint servandi, ut neque per Tkrjguuja
ruv Idvuv omnes et singulos ex Gentibus intelligit. Causam resti-
tutionis Judaeorum repetit a decreto electionis gratuito, et Dei in

488 COMMENTARIUS,
patres propter Christum benevolentia, et illustratam contraria causa
rejectionis probat sequenti, ver. 29, ab immutabihtate Dei, cujus
ut decretum, ita promissum est irrevocabUe, 28, 29, et rursus Ulus-
trat simili misericordia erga Gentes, et argumento imparium, ver.
30, 31. Atque hanc comparationem probat a fine divini consUU,
quo' per severitatem sibi munit viam, et gradum facit ad miseri-
cordiam. Ideo enim Deus omnes conclusit sub peccatum et rebels
lionem, ut omnium misereatur. Ubi observa rovg Tavrag, cum
articulo significare electos omnes et servandos, tam ex Judaeis,
quam ex Gentibus. Quare inscite, nequid gravius dicam hie locus
a quibusdam detorquetur, ad universaUs gratiae probandum de
lirium. Concludit totam hanc tractationem jam inde a cap. ix., de
electione et reprobatione, vocatione et rejectione tam Judaeorum,
quam Gentium, admiratione sapientiae divinae, justitiae et dvrag-
xetag, ne quis cum Deo expostulet de judiciorum severitate, aut
consUia ad exiguum suae rationis modulum exigat ; tantum abest,
ut cui qnicquam debeat, ut ei omnia et creationem, et sui debeant
conservationem ; proinde aequissimum, ut ad ejus gloriam omnia
referantur. ' Avs^egsvvrjra imperscrutabilia, et ave^,i%viaara, imper-
vestigabilia ; translatio prior ab aurifodinis, aut defosso auro : pos
terior a venatoribus, aut abigaeis, ad quorum vestigia persequenda
adhibentur odorisequi canes. Observa praepositiones lx et did
Deo tribui, qui est plus quam causa efficiens tam procreans, quam
conservans rerum omnium : quarum praepositionum prior ad effi-
cientiam Dei in procreando, altera ad efficientiam Dei in conser-
vando ; quemadmodum et tertia de fine dicitur, qui est rerum
omnium summus et ultimus, nimirum gloria Dei, quam si unus ipse
omnem in solidum promeretur^ sane in societatem gloriae admittat
neminem, ut apud Prophetam, gloriam meam alteri non dabo.
Quid ergo de materia et forma, causisque physicis in axgoaaei statu-
endum? sunt ne principia essentiae aut causae motus, aut quietis in
rebus naturalibus ! Sed de his alias.

cap. xi. 26 ; xn. 2. 489

DUODECIMUM CAPUT.
Hactenus de doctrina justitiae et salutis, deque earundem ob-
jectis, et causis omnibus, quae friit prior pars ejus, quam rov kbyov
et quasi corpus epistolae appeUavimus. Sequitur ejusdem pars
altera, quae ad disciplinam praecipue spectat, et in adhortationi-
bus ad sanctimonium, et vitam Christianam pertinentibus posita
est : Graeci Tagdtvsaiv vocant : usque ad cap. xv. ver. 15. Quae
quidem aut universales sunt, aut particulares, et hae rursum vel
Ethicae, vel PoUticae, vel Hieraticae. De Ethicis post universa-
lem adhortationem, cap. xU ; Politicis, xiii ; Hieraticis, xiv. et
parte xv. Primum igitur est universalis Tagaivsaig ad omnem sanc
timoniam spectans, 3f>rimis ver. Deinde accommodata muneribus
et functionibus Ecclesiasticis, ver. 9. Cujus summa est, Studete
verae sanctimoniae, quae est secundum sanam sanctamque pruden-
tiam; hujus sanctimoniae summa et uriica regula est sola Dei volun
tas, ver. 2, praescripta verbo Dei ver. 1. Modus utendi hac sanc-
titudine, prudentia Spiritualis secundum modulum gratiae et de-
mensum fidei cujusque, ver. 3. Subjectum corpora nostra, ver. 1,
animi, ver. 2, et utriusque vires et motus omnes. Partes sancti
moniae duae, veteris hominis mortificatio, et vivificatio novi ; haec
transformationis nomine, ver. 2, Ula verbis sistendi corporis in vie
timam significatur, ver. 1, translatione sumpta a victimis legaUbus,
ut veterem so. hominem, quem corpus vocat, cum omnibus suis
cupiditatibus cultro verbi divini quasi victimario jugulemus. Hujus
victimae tres adjunctae conditiones reguntur ut sit sancta in se a
Spiritu sanctificante ; sit accepta Deo a justificatione in Christi
sanguine, qua expiatis peccatis nostris Deo reconciliamur, et grati
acceptique sumus; denique sit logica kargsia, i.e., cxdtus praescrip-
tus verbo Dei, et spiritualis, hoc enim logicum hoc loco, ut 1 Peter
ii., koyixbv ddokov ydka, Taga rbv kbyov, unde et koyia rov deov
cap. Ui., et koyia Zpvra 7 act. et koyeiov apud LXX., quod rationale
videtur non bene versum Latine, sed oraculum seu oraculare ver-
tendum fuit ; ad quod oraculum, i.e., divinae voluntatis in verbo

490 COMMENTARIUS,
Dei scripto patefactionem exigenda est nostra omnis sanctificatio ;
non ad rationem naturalem, sed ad Spiritum Dei, ut noster cultus
non rationaUs sit, sed SpirituaUs. Atque haec sunt ex uno Christi
sacrificio proficiscentia, et relicta Christianis omnibus communia
eacrificia. In conditionibus sanctum profano, acceptum inviso,
spirituale carnaU, sive praescriptum verbi Dei humanis traditioni-
bus opponitur. Pene oblitus sum quartae conditionis, quae ordine
prima, in vietimam vivam ; opponi videtur victimis legaUbus mor
tuis, quod haec mactatio veteris hominis nos vivificet, vivosque
reddat vi vitae Christi redivivi. Huic mortificationi opponitur
avaayyipari^ae^ai ru uiuvt rovru, configurari saeculo huic, quasi
simiU habitu indui, et referre speciem mundanorum hominum, quo
rum opiniones pro exemplo vitae et morum vetat indui. Nihil igitur
magis, dedecet Christianum, aut aUenum ab ejus officio, quam mundi
hujus, og sv ru Tovrjgu xeirai, imitatio ; ita enim mundo versandum
nobis, ut in sententiis, et dictis, et factis, vita denique et moribus
dissimiUimi comperiamur. Huic mundano habitui et consuetudini
opponit psrapogpuaiv, externae figurae internam transformationem
facultatum superiorum mentis et voluntatis a Spiritu regenerante
profectum; ut ipsa etiam actionum regina voluntas, et ratio domina
suam quasi formam exuant, et induant novam Spiritualem formam,
verum quae non sit essentia animae, sed qualitas essentiam ves-
tiens et ornans, quae transformatio mentis et voluntatis est; utram-
que enim mentis nomine intelUgo, sed praecipue facultatem volun
tatis, cui inteUectua praeire debet veri lumine praelucena bono
voluntatis objecto, quo voluntas in id propendeat elg ro doxipd^eiv,
ut probetis quae sit Dei voluntas. Hujus transformationis finis
est conformatio cum Dei voluntate, ut postquam exploratum et
compertum habuerimus, quid voluerit Deus, id approbet et eUgat
voluntas nostra sibi nimirum nunc ut gratum et acceptum. Ita
que voluntas Dei hie ponitur pro eo quod Deus vult nos facere,
et quod nolens praesoripsit nobis faciendum hoc autem tribus ad-
junctia ornatur, bonitate, acceptatione, et perfectione, quae tria
pendent ab esaentiali voluntate Dei, quae est ipsa bonitas Deo ac-
ceptissima, in se perfectissima, atque adeo ipsa perfectio, haec igi-

cap. xii. 3. 491
tur Dei voluntas sit instar archetypi, in quem nos quasi immissi et
traditi, ut cap. vi. est locutus, ei conformemur, ut nostra voluntas
sit exrvTog, i. e. impressa et informata ab Ula, ut sit bona, accepta,
ac perfecta, et studio ducatur hujus perfectae bonitatis, ut Deo
grata sit. Quid enim Deo gratum esse potest, quod cum sua vo
luntate pugnat ? Et quae voluntas non grata Deo, quae divinae
voluntati conformis est ? Atque haec est Ula nostrae omnis sancti
ficationis et sanctimoniae, ut dixi, regula et norma ; quae cujus
modi sit, ne earn ignoremus, subjecta ratione docet, quam alte re
petit ab autoritate, et protestate Dei in Christo legislatoris, cujus
ipse interpres atque apostolus, gratia sibi concessa; ut edicat et pro-
mulget vitae nostrae regendae leges, et hunc universalem imprimis
omni homini Christiano communem; hoc enim est, Tavn ru ovrt lv
vplv. Observa hie autoritatem apostolicam divinitus imperiosam,
ex regis et domini nostri voluntate. Sequitur lex ipsa universalis
sive edictum apostoUcum his verbis, PgovSv slg ro eupgovSv, sapere
sive potius prudentem esse ad sanam prudentiam, i. e. modestiam
sanctam et spiritualem, ut nostra prudentia omnis aupgoavvrj tem-
peretur, et Christiana modestia; quod praeceptum illustrat primum
a contrario, M.r) vTegpgovSv Tag' b da pgovSv, ne sapiamus aut pru
dentiam affectemus supra vires, atque officium, praeter id quod
sapere debemus, aut praeterito eo (hoc enim est Tag' b) in quo
prudentes nos esse, et intra quod modum prudentiae nostrae con-
tinere nos convenit. Deinde efficiente causa Deo, et modulo
gratiae Dei, sive demenso fidei, cujus meta et quasi repaguUs nos
tram prudentiam omnem in ordinem cogit atque coercet, dum in-
quit, unicuique, ut Deus partitus est mensuram fidei (quidam co
dices habent %oigirog), cuique igitur sua spectanda fides h. e. cog-
nitio divinae voluntatis in Christo, et de ea certa animi persuasio in
omni re suacipienda et agenda. Quicquid enim (ut dicit postea)
sine fide sit, peccatum eat, quo fere spectat et gratiae nomen, si ita
legamus, nisi quod apertius fidem includere videatur, cum sapien
tiae sive prudentiae dono, pro muneris et functionis ratione. Nee
fides modo, sed etiam mensura fidei spectanda, i. e. demensum iUud
nobis tributum, nee tam spectandum quid aliis concessum, aut

492 COMMENTARIUS,
quam praeclara sit res suscipienda, quam quid nobis tributum, quis
nostrae prudentiae modulus, quod vitae genus, ad quod vocati
sumus. Neque enim immensum est demensum nostrum, neque
infinita vocatio, sed utrumque suis finibus et limitibus circum
scriptum, ultra quos qui progreditur, vtssg rd exappsva (ut ait
Graecum proverbium) Trjda, et vagatur extra oleas, non sine
vitio TokvTgaypoavvrig, et ambitionis crimine ; qua se et alios inu-
-tUiter fatigat, et disturbat sanctam societatem, quam corpori com
parat, ut postea dicemus. Atque haec est Ula generalis ad sancti-
tatem adhortatio : cujus adhortationis quasi stimuli sunt bixngpoi
rov &sov, commiserationes Dei, per quas gravissime obtestatur
apostolus ut sanctimoniae studeamus, et voluntatem Dei in verbo
patefactam, pro modo revelationis nostrae, cum vocatione nostra
ob oculos habeamus. Commiserationes Dei vocat beneficia Dei
in Christo omnia ex misericordia et affectu quasi paterno in nos
coUata quae alte repetivit in superiore doctrina a fonte aeterna
electionis, et divini propositi, ex quo dignatus est nos vocare per
verbum Evangelii ad participandum in Christo vi Spiritus sor-
tem sanctorum, i. e. gratuitam justitiam et salutem. Et sane non
possunt adhiberi faces ardentiores ad animos studio officii inflam-
mandos, quam tantorum beneficiorum commemoratio, quorum
ult. ver. superioris cap., Deum autorem, ac proinde ad ejus glo
riam referenda, praemisit. Hue spectat illativa particula ovv ex
superiori doctrina omni inferens hanc adhortationem ad omne vitae
Christianae officium, ver. 4 et 5. Tertia iUustratio per simUitudi
nem corporis et membrorum. Unius corporis multa sunt membra,
quae singula cum diversa sint, diversas habent actiones, et diversas
agendi facultates. Membrorum nomine partes corporis organicas
animi functionibus exponendis idoneas significat. Atque haec pro
tasis similitudinis ver. 4, apodosis ver. 5. Sic nos multi, tanquam
membra unius corporis, in capite Christo sumus : singulatim alii
inter se aliorum membra, i. e. membrorum inter se omnium ad in-
columitatem totius corporis, et singulorum membrorum summa
conspiratio est, atque conjunctio. Quam simUitudinem divinitus
explicatam vide 1 Cor. cap. xii. Ad hoc ut simus viva hujus cor-

cap. xn. 4-8. 493
poris membra, et functionibus obeundis idonea, data sunt nobis
%agiapara, i. e. officia et munere cum donis pro ofnciorum et mu-
nerum diversorum ratione diversis ; nisi mavis per %dgtv dodaauv
inteUigere officia et munera ; per xagiapura dona gratuita, quibus
idonei reddimur quisque suo faciundo officio, et muneri fungen
do. Rom. i., 11, 'iva ri peradu %dgiapa vplv Tvsvparixbv. Ubi
incipit iUustrare commune et universale prudentiae praeceptum
distributione munerum ecclesiasticorum, et ad eorum rationem
accommodatione ; quibus omnibus hoc commune est, ut secundum
fidei analogiam, quam pergov Tiarsug vocavit, v. 3, et gratiae de-
mensum obeantur ; ut sUicet quisque quocunque munere fungendo
intra vocationis et revelationis suae modum se contineat. Ac for
tasse etiam, imo procul omni dubio, non solum ad mensuram, et
proportionem fidei suadet exigere frinctiones ecclesiasticas ; verum
etiam secundum eandem fungi omnibus omnium Christianarum vir-
tutum sequentium tam moralium, quam poUticarum officiis ; nam
(ut dixi) universale praeceptum Christianae prudentiae ad haec
omnia pertinet. Sit zeugma a priore, quo Ulud xara avakoyiav
Tiarsug repetatur in omnibus membris, et sententiis exhortationriin
sequentibua ; et ekket-^/ig verbi vel proximi 'iyjapev, vel potius re-
motioris pgovupev xara avakoyiav Tiarsug, membratim dnb rov
xoivov repetendi. Distinguit munera ecclesiaatica cum suis donis
in prophetiam cum donis propheticis, et diaxoviav cum donis ejus
dem : prophetiam rursus in docendi et exhortandi munus, cum
donis cognitionis et sapientiae, quorum hoc pastoris, Ulud doctoris,
1 Cor. xii. Quod subditur b peradtdovg quamquam ad diaxoviav
alU referant, moveor tamen in praesenti ut dubitem, an ad prophe
tiam referri possit, cujusmodi tractator toto xiv. [prioris] ad Cor.
qua duo vel tres, et modo ordine fiat, omnes prophetae loqui per
mittuntur ; hoc enim videtur esse peradidbvat, quasi impertiri, et
pro virili parte conferre pro se quisque, quasi egavov, et symbolum.
Jac. cap. i. v. 5. didovrog Taaiv aTkug, de Dei benignitate magnifi-
centissima dicitur, fortasse et hoc loco de liberaU in pauperes bene-
ficentia. Sed nihil affirmo, et hoc quoque amplius deliberandum.
Simplicitas dupUcitati opponitur : Oculus simplex Matt. vi. Tovrigu

494 COMMENTARIUS,
opponitur, i. e. integer vitatio aut corrupto : hoc sensu tam pro-
phetiae, quam diaxovia proprie dictae conveniat. Litegritas enim
sincera non minus lv ru bgdoropSv rbv kbyov rrjg dkrjdeiag, quam
in eleemosynarum distributione requiritur : Sed esto (quod apud
aUos obtinuit, et in hanc usque diem mihi persuasum fuit) hoc de
Diaconis dicatur et inteUigatur, nam et Macedoniorum expromp
tum in sublevandis pauperibus beneficentiam UTkbrrira vocat
Apost. 2 Cor. viii. et Deus dicitur dare aTkug, Jac. i. Ataxovia
ergo in genere in tres partea tribuitur, in diaxoviav proprie dictam,
officium eorum, qui bonorum Ecclesiasticorum (quae tributa pau-
perum vocantur a veteribus) quasi promicondi et dispensatores
sunt : in censuram morum, quam praefecturam seu praesidentiam
vocat, Tgoaraaiav Graece (vide num hoc quoque ad praefectos in
quoque ordine Ecclesiastico referatur, ut qui apud Israelitas prae-
fecti diversis Levitarum ordinibus, oigyjavreg ohm dicti) in quo
rum praefectura administranda requiritur diligentia ; tertia species
diaxoviag, miserendi verbo exprimitur, casibus, et aegrotis suble
vandis, et propius curandis occupetur : cujusmpdi munus fuisse
videtur iUius viduarum collegii, cujus meminit 1 Timot. v. in quo
ministerio fungendo requirit hUaritatem, ut alacritatem praestent
in munere suo, deponentes molestias, quas haec habet curatio ; ut
tanto magis morbidi, qui plerumque morosi esse aolent, exhUar-
entur. Non nemo hoc ad totam Ecclesiam refert, saltem ad eos
omnes, qui de suo erogant aliquid in usum fenuiorum, et sane
Apost. 2 Cor. cap. ix. ver. 7, ikagov dbrrjv ayaTa 6 Qsbg. Atque
haec sunt munera, quae ut apparet ex hoc loco in Ecclesia Romana
tum frierunt constituta, et in omni Christiana Ecclesia ordinarie
eonstituenda : quorum si quod vel unum deest, hoc ipso mancam
Ulam et mutilam singularem, Ecclesiam esse Spiritus Sanctus arguit:
nee plura his in Ecclesia bene constituta munera locum habent,
cum hie institnerit Apost. Eeclesiasticorum munerum ordinariorum
perfectam distributionem : alioqui Spiritum Sanctum aut oblivio-
nis insimulemus, aut incurantiae ; Sed absit verbo contumeUa.
Sequuntur praecepta Ethicae Christianae Christianis omnibus
item communia : in quibus praeceptia exercendis secundum fidei

cap. xii. 8-12. 495
analogiam versandum ; ut scUicet pro vocationis et gratiae modulo
Christianas virtutes omnes excolamus. Praeeepta haec non sunt
ita temere confusa, ut vulgus existimat, aut ut fieri solet a profanis
hominibus in sententiis de vita et moribus congerendis. Nam de
amore sive charitate primum agit, quam simulatione et frico va-
eare, et sinceram esse vult, studiumque omne nostrum, et cupidi-
tatem abhorrere ab eo, quod alteri molestum aut damnosum sit,
adhaerere vero velut conglutinatum ei, quod proximo sit profutu-
rum v. 9. Ubi in singulis Ellipsis est verbi substantivi. Hue spec
tat fraternus amor, pikadskpia, et quasi parent um in Uberos piko-
ffrogyiu ; quibus duobus vocabuUs commendat Christianis non vul-
garem benevolentiam, sed summum amorem, cujusmodi debet esse
fraternus, et parentum in Uberos affectus, isque mutuus ut inter se
ament alU vicissim ahos, singuU universos, et universi singulos :
hoc enim eat sig uKk/jkovg. Hinc pensio et promptitudo aliorum
ad aUos honore prosequendos, et omnes in pari dignitatis gradu
sibi praeferendos. Atque hoc quasi primum caput, v. 10. Secun
dum est sedulitatis et dUigentiae. Studium ergo requirit, excusso
veterno, serium et assiduum in bono, ut nuUus neque socordiae,
neque segnitiae detor locus, neque id tantum conatu naturae, et
virium naturaU incitatione, sed ardore Spiritus Sanctus et pio
zelo, quo inflammatus animus ad omne sanctum officium quasi ra-
piatur : atque ita Domino non mundo serviamus ad gloriam Dei,
vel ut aUi habent libri ru xaigu, i. e. occasioni serviamus, nuUam
oportonitatem bene agendi negUgentea : aed tempus quantum in
nobis est (ut loquitur Apost.) redimentes, ut quasi in procinctu in
omnem occasionem intenti, tanquam signo dato tempestive et ma
ture ad nutum Imperatoris nostri gradum conferre, et sacram mUi-
tiam exercere parati simus, v. 11. Tertius locus in adversis spei
solatio et gaudio patientiae invicta virtute et precum assiduitate
animos sustentemus, ne ulU fortunae aut homini succumbamus, v.
12. Quartum caput est benefieientiae, cum in sanctos omnes, tum
maxime in peregrinos et hospites ; nee id solum, aed etiam bene
veUe et precari infensissimis nobis, et infestissimis hostibus ; Chria-
tianam avprddsiav tam in tristibus, quam in laetis rebus, secundas

496 COMMENTARIUS,
res ornando, adversas mitigando studiose, et summa humanitate
colamus, v. 13, 14, 15. Quintum, ut aententiarum et opinionum
non minus quam animorum et voluntatum summa consensio sit,^
neque supra captum aut vocationem nostram, quae sunt subhmia
ambitiose affectemur, ingenii praefidentia, sed ad ima quaeque
atque adeo infima, quoties res et tempus postulant, submissione
animi, et modestia vere Christiana nos demittamus; nee nobis
nimirum, nostra freti prudentia, aut tribuamus, aut placeamus v. 16.
Sextum de injuriis non vindicandis, sed honeste coram omnibus
vivendo, et pacem quantum penes nos est, et per officium Ucet,
cum omnibus procurarido, etiam de hostibus bene mereamur, vin-
dictam Deo relinquentes, et malum bono superantes v. 20. " Car-
bones ignis, etc." ProverbiaUs locutio Prov. cap. xxv. v. 22, i. e.
benefaciendo, et tois in male meritum de te beneficus hostem in
se accendes, ut sibi iratus injuriam tibi factam in se ipse ulcisea-
tur. Atque haec de universaU praecepto sanctitatis Ecclesiasticis
muneribus, et Ethicis virtutibus accommodate. Sequitur ut poli-
ticis et hieraticis accommodetur officiis. Tlagayyekpara Tegi
rjdixuv ageruv 'iari, Tsg) rrjg sig akkrjkovg bpuvoiag xai Tsgi rrjg Tgog
®sbv karg'eiag, xa) Tsg) rrjg Tgbg avnxeipevovg ave^ixaxiag.

DECIMUM TERTIUM CAPUT.
ITegi rrjg Tgbg agyjavrag vTorayrjg,
xa) Tsg) aupgoavvrig, xa) Tgabrrjrog.
De obedientia ergo Magistratus, in quo omne civile officium
continetor ex mutua relatione subjectorum erga Magistratum et
Magistratus erga subditos, praeceptum hoc politicum initio v. 1.
universale, Haaa -4>o%^, neminem hominem cujuscunque ordinis
excipiens. Praecipitur VTorayr), subjectio potestatibus VTege-
yjbvaaig, supereminentibus ; in qua voce latet argumentum subjec-
tionis, quod praepositionum VTSg et uwo antithesi arguitur. Si

cap. xiii. 1-5. 497
in superiori gradu constituti sunt, debetur illis ab inferioribus sub-
jectio. Secundum argumentum : A Deo est Magistratus legiti-
mus, quem potestatem vocat e^ovaiav, legitimam, non exlegem, aut
effrenem licentiam. P. Melancthon : Potestas a personis discernen-
da ; amabat enim Paulus politiam et potestatem ; sed Caligulam et
Neronem execrabatur, tanquam monstra naturae, organa Diaboli, et
pestes humani generis. Tertium argumentum ab ordine divinitus
constituto, sub Deo, ad Dei gloriam ; ita enim interpretor uwo rou
dsov reraypsvui, non tam a Deo, quod'jam dictum fuit, quam sub
Deo ordinatas potestates (uwo yrjg, deoxg. [qu. Theocr.J two %0ovo?,
Hesiod. uto pdkrig, sub ala, ar'egvoto, pectore, Hom. AiyvTrog de
Takiv eyevero uxo (Zaaiksug, sub rege Persarum. Thucyd.) Quas, cum
articulo, Tag ovaag e%ovaiag vocat, quasi dicat, rag ovrug l%ovaiug,
quae reapse potestates sunt, et hoc nomen merentur. Unde im-
piam et injustam tyrannidem, quae nee a Deo est, quatenus talis,
nedum secundum divinum ordinem, excludat ut iUegitimam ab hac
legitima obedientia, nisi siquando visum Deo, vel suis etiam tyran-
num imponere tanquam ferulam paternam ad castigationem, turn
profecto et his parendum, siquid neque impium in Deum neque in-
justum in alios imperant, alioqui defugienda autotitas. Concludit
ver. 2, ex secundo et tertio argumento, Deo et divinae ordinationi
resistere, qui divinae potestati resistunt, ac proinde ipsos sibi judi
cium, i.e., condemnationem et exitium accersere. Quod est quar-
tum argumentum ab effecto inutili, et pernicioso inobedientiae. Ver.
3, rationem reddit, cur et a Deo sint, et ordinatae a Deo potestates,
quibus non fesistendum, cum quinto obedientiae argumento: Magis
tratus non sunt timori bonis, sed malis operibus, ergo a Deo et
sunt et ordinatae sunt, et iUis parendum : Magistratus enim de
quibus loquimur, non sunt tyranni importuni, sed benefici et ju8ti
prmcipes, apud quos ut malis supplicia, ita bonis praemia sunt con
stituta ; quod probat, ver. 4, quia Dei adminiater est bono Eccle-
siae et bonorum, nee minus vindictae in sceleratos exequendae sum-
\ endo suppUcio de improbis. Hinc concludit, ver. 5, subjeetionia et
obedientiae necessitatem duplici de causa, viz., vindictae vitandae,
) et bonae conscientiae servandae causa, magisque propter conscien-
2 i

498 commentarius,
tiam, quam metu poenae ; sub qua et praemium obedienfti includi-
tur, ut inteUigamus non tam praemium et poenam, quae duo solum
urgent Politici, sed multo magis conscientiam, quae Deum sibi
testem et vindicem semper habet ob oculos, ad obediendum impel-
lere ; imo vero si nulla maneret ultio, tamen quia divinae est ordi-
nationis nostra obedientia, ideo ne tam benignum Patrem offenda-
mus, obstet conscientia oportet. O surdi ! O caeci ! et plusquam
miseri, qui hoc non satis animadvertunt. • Parendum ob conscien
tiam probat a iributis pendendis, quod sextum argumentum est
obedientiae a recepta consuetudine, consensu omnium, et jure gen
tium communi ; hujus consuetudinis causam affert longe justissimam
quod sint ksirovgyoi Qsov, officiales et administri Dei, pubUco munere
fringentes, non perfunctorie, sed serio et sedulo assiduam operam
constanter et patienter navantes bono pubUco. Observa obiter
kstrovgyov dici hie civilem magistratum, tantum abest ut Missa
Pontificia semper ketrovgyeiag nomine, aut ksirovgyovvruv functione
sit intelligenda. Magna emphasis in participio Tgoaxagregovvrsg,
quo non tantum aucupio etvenatui, Esavi aut Nemrodi instar, quam
reipublicae dent operam : Ideo boni principes et legitimi magistra!-
tus sunt, de quibus hie agitur et quos depingit graphice Apostolus,
et quibus debetur omnis legitima obedientia. Unde concludit, ver.
7, Omnia omnibus debita esse praestanda, nee cui quicquam de-
bendum, nisi amorem mutuum et charitatem, vv. 8 et 9, quae est
omnium virtutum Christianarum quasi epitome, atque adeo divi
nae legis, si plena fuerit et perfecta, complementum, ut quae sit
nostri in Deum amoris et amoris sancti aToppu%, rivulus. His
positis de omni PoUtico a Christianis inter se faciendo officio, sub-
jungit abhortationem ver. 10, et stimulos admovet argumento a
temporis circumstantia ad omne christianum officium strenue
praestandum : imprimis vero ad temperantiam et mansuetudmem
colendam. Circumstantia temporis est, instantis dies quasi sub dUu-
culo jam nocte pene transacta, unde opportunitas propinquae lucis
praemonet habitum qui luci conveniat assumendum esse, h. e. puri-
tatem et innocentiam. IUustrat hoc temporis argumentum a com-
paratis ;, propinquior nunc est salus, quam quando credimus, i.e.,

cap. xiii. 6-13. 499
credere incepimua. Diei nomini videtur significare mane illud,
cujus mentio, Psalm xUx., cum pii resurgentes dominabuntur im-
piis in justorum resurrectione ; noctis autem nomine significatur
haec vita, quam dum incolimua, multia ignorantiae et calamitatia
tenebris circumfusi peregrinamur a Domino ; salutis nomine cor-
porum in Ulustri adventu Christi glorificatio et fruitio gloriae
coelestis. Quod si diei hujus propinquitas, progressa multum nocte,
ApostoU aetate expergefacere debuit, ad cultum luci congruentem
induendum, Uliusaetatishomines, quanto magis, decurso nunc exinde
plus quam mule et quingentorum annorum curriculo, nos somno
excuti nunc et ad occurrendum sponso praeparari oporteat, ne cum
fatuis virginibus oleo spirituali cassis culpa nostra excludamur.
Opera tenebrarum vocat omne genus scelerum et flagitiorum, quo
rum designandorum praecidendae sunt omnes occasiones. Ideo
dicit abjicienda. Induendi verbo perstat in simiUtodine, quo spec
tat etiam quod sequitur " Anna lucis," i.e., instrumenta luci con-
gruentia, quibus non solum honeste vestiamur, et ornemur splendide,
verum etiam ea praestemus et perficiamus, quae nostri sunt officu.
Ideo anna operibus, et lucem tenebris opposuit, ut nos quippe
Christiani mUites ad conspectum imperatoris non solum in armis
conspecti, sed etiam rebus praeclare gestis conspicui appareamus ad
gloriae triumphum. Quod dicit tanquam in die, significat nondum
exortam esse lucem, aut diem advenisse, ideo addit ug, tanquam>
ut praeculti praeparemur, quasi antelucanis horis, dum Lucifer
exoritur in cordibus nostris prophetico sermone attendendis, ut
loquitur Petras, 2 Ep., cap. i. YLoyfipbvug decenter, et decenti
habitu, indidem sumpta translatione. Intemperantiae duo genera
praecavenda monet, quippe gulae et veneris intemperiem. Gulae
duas partes notat, commessationem et ebrietatem, sive crapulam et
temulentiam. Libidinea vero cubiUum et proterviarum nomine
designat, omne genus obscaenarum voluptatum complexus. Eurip.
in priore Autolyco,
yvudov re dovkog, vrjdvbg S' t)a«ripbog.
Abdominis minister, et servus gulae.
2i2

500 COMMENTARIUS,
Ath. 10. De Athletis farciendo solum ventri natis.
Oi Tgura psv Zrjv, ovrs pavddvovaiv
Eu, bvr dv dvvaivro, Tug yag
(J'arig eg' dvrjg, yvadov re dovkog,
N^Suo? &' rjaaripevog, xrrjaair dv
O'kfiov eig vTexrgoprjv Targag. *
Imprimis hi didicere numquam vivere
Recte, nee unquam illud queant ; nam qui potest
Servusque buccae, et impotens abdominis
Spes parare alendo patrio solo.
Quae vitia prohibendo contrarias virtutes imperat ; quippe sob-
rietatem et pudicitiam. Sic vetando contentionem et aemulationem,
commendat mansuetudinem atque clementiam, ver. 15. Sed et
multo apertius perstans in simUitudine et instituta allegoria, dum
jubet Dominum Iesum Christum induere ; quod notandum, hie de
sanctificatione dici ad ornatum sanctimoniae omnis, qua tegatur
nostra pudenda nuditas ; et multo apertissime, dum vetat carnis
providentiam, i.e., curam gerere ad explendas cupiditates, quibus
prohibet et gulae et veneris, tum irae tum invidiae omnem intem-
periem ; ver. 11, xa) rovro, pendet a verbis uTodore, ver. 7, bpeikere,
ver 8. Et est idem quod : Idque, respectu oportunitatis et tem
poris, etc. .
CAPUT DECIMUM QUARTUM.
Caput xiv., cum primis 10 et 4 versibus cap. xv., accommodat
praeceptum universale de Analogia fidei Hieraticis et Ceremoni-
alibus, praesertim us, quae, cum lege Mosis constituta essent, Christi
beneficio sunt abrogata, et nunc evadunt ddidpoga, quod in se nunc,
et natura sua, peecato iis utentem vel abstinentem non implicent ;
* [Hos versus, apud Athenaei Deipnos. x., p. 413, servatos, sic legi atque disponi
jubet cl. Matthiae: 01 fl*J»T« f/Xv £S)K oUri [/.ClvHtXVOl/O-IV iU
our av iuvaivro' vfats y&e., oittis KflV avijf
ymiou te oouXoi vrib'vos f iio-o-aft,ivos,
%rvio-&y av oXf&ov us writfLotiiv vrargos i]

cap. xiii. 14; xiv. 4. 501
proinde pro mensura fidei in istis indifferentibus ex charitate ver-
sandum. Duo genera selegit pro exemplo, defectum sc. ciborum
et dierum. Abstinendum erat ex lege olim cibis quibusdam veti-
tis, et dies quidam ritu religioso observandi ; quod discrimen tam
dierum, quam ciborum Lege quidem praeceptum, est antiquatum
EvangeUo. Proinde cum in Ecclesia Romana fuerint alii firmi,
quibus cognitum Ubertatis Christianae beneficium ; alu minus firmi,
quibus nondum innotuit ceremoniarum abrogatio, ut quae divinitus
olim constitutae et sancitae essent ; hi rudiores ex Judaeis, iUi firmi-
ores ex Gentibus fideles videntur friisse. Adhortatur ergo firmiores
ex Gentibus ne contemnant ex Judaeis infirmos ; et rursus Judaeos
infirmos hortatur firmos ex Gentibus ne condemnent. Ugoakapfid-
veaSai est assumere in societatem et communionem vitae, et uti fami-
liariter. Aiaxgiasig non tam certamina, quam dijudicationes, et dis-
ceptationes significat, quibus scrupulos conscientiis ex ambiguitate et
dubitatione injicitur, veluticum disputando aut altercandoquis incer-
tior evadit. Ver. 2, distributio firmorum et infirmorum in fide circa
delectum ciborum; 3 vero, quomodo uterque se gerere alter erga alte
rum debeat praecipitur, ne firmus infirmum contemnat, neve firmum
inflrmus condemnet. Probat prius membrum : Deus eum assumpsit,
Ergo a te quoque assumendus est infirmus, nee contemnendus,.
quasi res nihUi, quod significat verbum l^ovdsveiru, quo factum per-
stringit eorum, qui fratres infirmiores prae se contemnebant. Ver
bum Tgoaskdfisro facit hie et ver. 1, ut ad prius membrum referam,
ut et participium xgfvuv, ver. 4, quem interpretor de posteriore
membro ut sit ratio, cur non-edens, sive infirmus edentem seu fir
mum condemnet ; hoc enim est b xgfvuv repetitum ex posteriore
membro. Damnare hie ergo est tanquam profanum judicare eum,
qui ceremonialem legem transgreditur, de sententia infirmi Judaei.
Nemo potestatem habet in servum alienum, ut eum damnet ; Chris-
tianus ex Gentibus est servus aUenus, quippe Christi, ergo a te
Judaeo non damnandus. Sed quae sequitur ratio, videtur de
infirmo dici, propter disjunctionem standi aut cadendi ; et correc-
tionem, Stabilietur autem; et rationem correctioni subjectam,
Potest, enim, Deus stabiUre, viz. eum qui nondum est satis firmus

502 COMMENTARIUS,
in fide. Ex hac ambiguitate fit ut distrahatur hie locus ab interpret
tibus in diversas sententias, dum alu ad prius membrum, alu ad
posterius referunt. Ego interea eTsyja et ampUus pronuntio, ver.
5, alterum exemplum legaUs discriminis, quippe delectus dierum.
Infirmus Judaeus observat certos dies praescriptoa lege; firmus
vero ex Gentibus non observat, ut qui nullum atatuat in diebus
discrimen. Observare est reUgiosum ducere. Subjungit praecep
tum officii ad utrumque spectans ; ut quisque sit plene de sua sen
tentia persuasus, i.e. ut firmus ex Evangelio notitiam Christianae
libertatis qua sublatum novit dierum discrimen, certa fide appre-
hendat, ne vacUlet ejus conscientia. Sed quomodo tribui potest
Tkrigopogia ignoranti Ubertatem Christianam. Resp., Si ad infir-
mum quoque hoe spectat, jubetur legaU praecepto inniti, quod novit
Dei verbum esse, neque quicquam contra hoc praeceptum Dei du-
bitante conscientia aggredi, tantisper dum erit plene persuasus de
ceremoniarum antiquatione. Sed regeri potest, praeceptum abro-
gatum nuUam amplius vim habet obligandi, nee pro Dei mandate
habendum. Respond., Si speotetur in se praeceptum, verum est,
neminem eo teneri, verum si spectetur infirmi conscientia, quae
neque maUtia neque superstitione implicatur, sed praecepti legaUs
conscientia ducitur, tantisper dum se ignorat hac legi solutum, ad
ejus observantiam tenetur : aUoqui peccat contra conscientiam.
Sequitur argumentum a fine, quem uterque proponit sibi infirmus
in observando diem, firmus in negligendo : nimirum gloria Dei; hie
utendo Ubertate per Christum parta ex fidei scientia; Ule ritom
legalem observando, ex divini praecepti conscientia, non sine fide
Deum glorificans. Hunc finem iUustrat remotione contrarU finis,
sed in genere ; ut et assumptione veri finis, tam vitae, quam mortis
nostrae. Is autem est, gloria Dei in Christo, cujus nos servi sumus
beneficio mortis, et resurrectionis ipsius, ut Ule noster Dominus,
cui serviendum est nobis. Argumentum autem a genere sumptum
est, Nos ubique et semper Chriati servi sumus, et ejus gloriam
speetare debemus; ergo sive diem observemus, sive negUgamus,
Dei gloriam in Christo speetare debemus. Notandus hie locus
contra profanam phUosophiam AristoteUs de feUcitate, et ultimo

cap. xiv. 4-15. 503
fine hominis. MeUus Stoici; Non nobis solum nati sumus, &c.
Et omnia hominis causa generata; hominem vero Dei colendi causa.
Nee solum jure creationis, sed multo magis jure redemptionis, quanti
quanti sumus mancupio et nexu Dei in Christo obligamur. Ad hunc
ergo finem in omni vita, atque adeo in morte collineandum est nobis.
Sic erit nobis Christus turn in vita, tum in morte lucrum, ver. 7, 8,
9. Cui vivlmus, et morimur, is nobis est Dominus, et ei nos servi
sumus; ergo, &c. Deest propositio, sed assumptio cum conclu-
sione plena habetur, v. 8; rationem hujus domini a Christo, ver. 9,
ponit. Repetit ver 10^ adhortationem bimembrem objurgationis
forma ; ubi retinet praecepti bimembris verba supra, v. 3. Ne in
firmus firmum condemnet, aut firmus infirmum contemnat. Unde
adducor ut credam, nos recte v. 4, iUud o xgivuv ad infirmum retu-
lisse. Ratio utrique membro inserta sub fratris nomine, quod pug
nat cum contemptu, aut condemnatione fratres propter mutuam
germanitatem, et arctiorem in Christo conjunctionem. Haec ratio
fraternitatis adducta est ex ratione parti a Christo in nos dominii,
quod nimirum pari opera, et nos sibi in servos, et nos inter nos ut
fratres effecit ; Si fratres, Ergo non judices ad contemnendum, aut
condemnandum ; cum judicandi de nobis omnibus potestas omnis
sit Christi, quod faciet suo tempore, ut apud Esai, cap. xliv., eon
firmat ipse jurejurando omnes ad suum tribunal sistendos esse.
Unde concludit ver. 12, non fratrem a fratre, sed unumquemque
nostrum a Deo judicatum iri. Unde repetit adhortationem, utrum
que membrum uno judicandi nomine comprehendens synecdochice,
et per avravaxkdatv idem- verbum mutata significatione repetit, ut
sc. dispiciamus, ne fratrem offendamus; agit autem de scandalo
dato, non accepto, ut vulgo dicitur. Vide differentiam inter Tgoa-
xbppu et axdvdakov, quod hie vetatur firmus ponere infirmo, v. 13.
Sequitur occupatio: Dicat qui firmus est, Nullus cibus est natura
sua immundus, cum sit bona Dei creatura, et usui nostro sanctifi-
cetur verbo et precibus in Christo. Fateor (inquit Apost.) per se
verum esse, sed per accidens propter infirmi fratris conscientiam
tibi non Ucere cum fratribus offensa, cui cibus ille videtur impurus
eo cibo uti ; hoc enim esset non tam uti, quam abuti, fraternam

504 , COMMENTARIUS,
charitatem violando, v. 14, 15. Repetit v. 15, conclusionem illus-
tratam novo argumento, eoque efficacissimo, verbis valde signatis,
dum hoc vocat perdere fratrem; quem circumscribit periphrasi,
vocans eum ilium pro quo Christo mortuus est, commissis per con-
tentionem inter se cibo tanquam re vUissima et morte Christi, qua
frater redemptus est pretio longe maximo. Ubi et Christi exem
plum profertur in contemptores fratrum infirmiorum, pro quibus
mortem oppetere non est dedignatus. Indignum facinus' pluris
aestimare buccellam carnis, quam carnem filii Dei pro nobis cruci-
fixam, et membrum Christi. Rursus infert conclusionem amplifi-
catam altero argumento ab adjunctis, ne male audiat Evangelium,
propter abusum Christianae libertatis, v. 16. Ratio subjiciter, v.
17, ab objecto libertatis, et objecti distributione, cum remotione
falsi objecti : Libertas nostra Christiana, qua in regno Dei fruimur,
non est in cibo et potu, sed in justitia tam justificante nos, quam
sanctificante, et in pace cum Deo, et inter nos, qua diremtis inimi-
citiis, et pacificatione per Christum facta, cum Deo et fratribus in
gratiam redivimus, ac denique in guadio, cujus autor in nobis est
Spiritus Sanctus, qui certa persuasione divini erga nos amoris, et
favoris perpetui facit ut gloriemur sub spe gloriae Dei, atque adeo
sub crucis acerbitate, et mediis rerum adversarum fluctibus. De
nique in justitiae et pacis studio, et Spiritus consolatione, non in
his rebus externis positum est regnum Dei. Potentissimum hoc
argumentum et caeterorum omnium fundamentum; quod probat
relatorum mutua affectione, et adjunctis. Ubi observa regnum
Deiet nostram servitutem, qua Christo servimus, ita affici inter se
mutuo, ut nostra Christiana libertas sit Christo servire, et hac ser
vitute nos regni Dei participes esse. In quibus ergo servimus
Christo, in iis utimur nostra libertate, vel potius libertas nostra in
his posita est, et eorum fruitione, quae nobis acquisivit Christus,
quaequae sunt regni Christi privilegia, pro quibus tanquam rebus
necessariis est serio contendendum, ut grati deo et accepti, nee
invisi hominibus, sed probati simus. De aliis vero rebus ut mini-
me necessariis, nulla contentione est opus. Pacem igitur et con-
scientiarum tranquillitatem cum mutua fratrum aedificatione secte-

cap. xiv. 15-23. 505
mur, quaeque et hanc et Ulam promovent, studiose confectemur
ver. 19. Novum argumentum cum oceupatione ver. 20. Edere
cum fratris offendiculo est ejus conscientiam laedere et illi occa-
sionem praebere resiUendi a fide, quae est opus Dei, atque ita fidem
cum ipso perdendi. Occupatio est omnia sunt pura. Verum
quod per se licitum et purum est, si cum fratris offendiculo fiat,
iUicitum et impurum evadit ver. 20. Igitur ab eo abstinendum,
ver. 21. Prolepsis sive occupatio alia: Tametsi fidem habes, et
libertatem Christianam plane cognitam, tamen non est ejusmodi re
bus mediis palam cum fratrum offensione utendum ; sed potius hie
thesaurus apud se recondendus, et clam eo fruendum coram Deo.
Atque haec cautio spectat ad firmiores ; infirmos vero altera, Ne
ambigente conscientia quicquam faciant. Syllogismus integer est
inverso partium ordine : — Quicquid fit non ex fide, peccatum est ;
Esus carnis ambigente conscientia fit non ex fide ; Ergo esus carnis
ambigente conscientia peccatum est ; Et qui sic edit, peccat con
tra conscientiam, et sic seipsum condemnat. Conclusio ver. 22r
primo loco, assumptio secundo, propositio ultimo loco, utraque
ver. 23. IUud doxipd^si in conclusione non significat firmam ex
fide et certa notitia approbationem ; sed psrovvpixug, effectum
ejus potius, ut probare hie sit amplecti, et facere non secus ac si
firma fide approbaret, cum tamen dubitante conscientia id faciat ;
atque ita damnat seipsum. Quod si beatus est, qui non dubi
tante conscientia facit id quod facit ; certe miser est, qui quicquam
dubitans facit, et hoc ipso se damnat. Et observa significationem
participii diaxgtvbpsvog hoc loco, ut cap. iv. supra de Abrahamo,
ov diexgidrj rrj aTiaria, ad confirmandam nostram inter pretatio-
nem in v. 1 hujus cap. elg diaxgfasig ruv diakoytapuv. Significat
enim verbum hoc, si vim vocis spectes, judicare, et inter judican-
dum alternare sententiam, et quasi in diversas sententias judicium
distrahere, quod est dubitare et ambigere, ut in locis omnibus.
Elegans verborum Taguvopaaia, sed efficacior in rebus emphasis,
iiaxgivopsvbg icaraxexgirai, q. d. qui judicans dubitat, aut dubitans
judicat, is procul omni dubio certissime se judicando condemnat.

506 COMMENTARIUS,

DECIMUM QUINTUM CAPUT.
Prosequitur exhortationem de tolerandis infirmis, quae videtur
eadem reipsa cum ea quae habetur cap. xiv. v. 1, nisi quod iUio
infirmum fide assumendum, hie infirmorum infirmitates portandas
moneat, idque in genere. Quod ita inteUigendum, ne putemua ad
fratrum vitia connivendum esse, aut fidem charitati posthabendam,
sed quod Ucet per pietatem humanitatis habenda ratio. Removet
impedimentum, et fontem aperit morosi et difficUis animi in fratrum
infirmitatibus non tolerandis, nimirum pikavriav, et amorem nostri,
quo fit ut nimium nobia ipsis cum fastidio et contemptu fratrum
indulgeamus : hoc enim est sibi ipsis placere. Utitur verbo fiaard-
Zfiv, «portare humeris et bajulare, q. d. Ideo nos robustiores et fide
firmiores fecit Dominus, ut apti essemus sublevandis fratrum in
firmitatibus : ut quemadmodum legaUs pontifex gestabat humeris
nomina duodecim tribuum IsraeUs, Christum pontificem nostrum
adumbrans, qui nostras infirmitates in se suscepit bajulans, ita
nostrum est officium (quod sine scelere praetermitti non potest)
inbeciUium fratrum infirmitates gestare. Cujus nostrae tolerantiae
finem et fructum definit aedificationem, ne, nimia indulgentia ad-
blandiendo fratribus, eos perdamus ; et urget rursus Christi exem
plum, qui non solum pro infirmis fratribus, sed etiam hostibus cru-
dehssimis extrema quaeque perpessus est, quod probat Davidis tes
timonio, qui typum gerens Christi in sua persona Christi perpes
siones descripsit, Psal. lxix. Et ne quis objiciat haec de Davide,
non de Christo scripta esse, subjungit 4 ver. generalem sententiam
de toto veteri Testamento, et omnibus omnium Patrum exempUs;
haec ad nos omnia pertinere, ut quae magnum usum praestent
augendae spei nostrae et confirmandae, praescriptis patientiae et
consolationis documentis. Notetur usus veteris Scripturae, quam
late pateat, et quam sit piorum singuUs plus quam necessarius ad
doctrinam, ad patientiam, ad consolationem, ut in spe salutis
adaucti indies magis confirmemur. Adhortationi preces adjungit,
ver. 5. pro consensu mutuo, ut tam firmi, quam infirmi in omnibus

cap. xv. 1-14. 507
idem sentientes in Christo, aUi sint alUs ad omnia pietatis humani-
tatisque officia et incitamento et adjumento, idque Christi exemplo,
ver. 6, 7, 8, qui non est dedlgnatus honore Judaeos, quamvis in-
digniss. minister ipse factus ad praestandam veritatem foederis
pacti cum majoribus ; aut misericordia Gentes natura a foedere
aUenas, quarum vocationem quatuor probat ex veteri Scriptura
testimonus. Atque haec ideo, ne Judaei Gentes tanquam pro-
fanas, aut Gentea Judaeos tanquam indignos rejiciant aut asper-
nentur, 9, 10, 11, 12. Denique, ver. 13, obsignat precibus supe-
riorem omnem Tugdiveaiv, quibus contendit a Deo, ut ipse Ro
manos gaudio et pace cumulate adaugeat, adauctis earum causis
Fide et Spe, idque autore Spiritu Sancto. Et sic concludit om
nem tractationem Ulam superiorem tam doctrinae, quam disci-
plinae. Ac deinde transit ad ultimam partem hujus Epistolam,
EpUogum, sive perorationem, in qua et amor Pauli erga Romanos
omni ex parte se effrindit abundantius, et ApostoUca autoritas se
magnificentissime effort. Nam ut prooemium erat rjdixursgov in
tractandia affectibus, ita STikoybg Ian Tadrjrtxuregog, et aUquanto
vehementior. In prooemio insinuatione, quasi actis cuniculis, et
clandestina arte est usus : in STikoyu palam se produnt affectus,
quasi aperto Marte ageret ; verum utrobique sancto et divino arti-
ficio sancte et divinitus utitur. Pro Romanorum bono affectu se
duplex hie exerit, alter alteri oppositus, quippe amoris unus, et alter
odii : hie in adversarios, Ule adversum Romanos et Romanorum stu-
diosos : hos amandos, Ulos decUnandos monet. Amorem erga Ro
manos suum partim excusatione, partim salutatione commendat.
Excusatio duplex, altera scriptionis Uberioris, altera dUati adventus.
Salutatio item duplex, altera quasi religiosior per faustam impf eca-
tionem, altera quasi humanior, sed religioni perfusa, tum a se tum ab
aUis. Redeamus ad excusationem, et primum scriptionis, quam
affert diversorum argumento, et figurat prolepsi sive oceupatione:
Quamvis abundetis omnibus bonis spirituaUbus, «tamen ad vos
scripsi Uberius. Rationem Ubertatis reddit Apostolici sibi impositi
muneris necessitatem, cujus efficaciam praedicat ab effectis mag
nificentissime. Commendatio Romanorum tribus partibus constat,

508 COMMENTARIUS,
bonitate, cognitione, et commonefaciendi facxdtate, quae tres quasi
laudum partes mirifico amplificantur ab adjuncta copia seu pleni-
tudine, et Apostoli ipsius certa persuasione. Ayaduavvrj sive bo-
nitatis abundantia videtur respicere mansuetudinem, et tolerantiam
in ferendis fratrum infirmitatibus quod argumentum proxime trac-
tavit ; yvuasug plenitudo sive opxUentia doctrinam justificationis
et salutis atque adeo praedestinationis ad 12. usque caput dispu-
tatam ; vovdsaia, i. e. commonefactio, vel utramque vel saltem
Tagaiv'sasig ad omnem Christianam virtutem. [Expende hoc dili-
gentius.] Ergo quamquam nihil vobis desit, tamen sum audaculus
in scribendo, etc.
Primum dicit rokprigorsgov, quasi paulo audacior ; deinde ex-
tenuat audaciam aTo p'egovg ; neque enim debet hoc conjungl cum
verbo eygatya, ut faciunt Pseudo-romanenses ad minuendam Scrip
turae plenitudinem. Tertio addit ut commonefaciens, non docendi
vos, sed refricandae memoriae vestrae causa : Quarto, gratiam di- '
vinitus sibi datam cum autoritate ApostoUca adducit, cujus auto-
rem Deum in Christo per Spiritum Sanctum agnoscit, idque bono et
saluti Gentium, ac proinde sanctificationi Romanorum, quorum se
Apostolus est professus initio Epistolae ; isgovgyovvra, sancte prae-
dicantem. Perpetua translatio a legalibus sacerdotiis ; isgovgySv
est sacris operari, rem divinam facere, rem sanctam sancte admi-
nistrare, ut hoc loco tribuitur Apostolo sacrosanctum Evangelium
sancte administranti ad Gentes sanctificandas in sanctam oblatio-
nem et acceptam Deo per Spiritum Sanctum. Ideo et se keirovg-
yov vocavit publicum sacrorum administrum ; cujusmodi haud scio
an veteres Romani CamiUum, aut CasmiUum, aut quo aUo nomine
appeUarint ; Vide Festum, Varronem, Isiodorum, Glossarium vetus,
alios. Hinc infert ver. 17. se amplam habere materiam gloriandi
sibi divinitus in Christo praeditam de effectis Apostolatus sui, unde
coUigant Romani et hanc Epistolam apud illos efficacem fore, suum
vero adventum, cum Deus voluerit, longe efficacissimum. Efficaci
am ergo Apostolatus sui amplificat mirifice ab effectis omnium gene-
rum admirandis, quorum gloriam tribuit Deo, illorum omnium per
Spiritum Sanctum autori et effectori, tam verborum quam factorum

cap. xv. 14-25. 509
administratione : ampUficat et a locis subjectis, et regionum ampli-
tudine, quas repleverit Evangelii praedicatione, quod in iis ante
fuit inauditum, secundum Esaiae praedictionem. Notanda et haec
quoque nota Apostolatus, positio fundamenti, ut de seipso loquitur,
1 Cor. cap. iU. " Peritus architectus fundamentum posui." Et coe-
lestis Hierosolymae duodeeim fundamentis nomina xii. Apostolorum
agni inscripta ; Apoc. xxi. Notetur et verbum pikortpovpsvov, cui
subest ambitionis notio, q. d. se ambitiose studiosum fuisse ad sanc
tam suam cupiditatem explendam. Atque hanc causam impedi-
mento fuisse docet saepenumero, quo minus eos inviseritj vide su
pra, cap. i. v. 13. "ExukOdq, etc. Nee dubium quin Spiritu
Sancto autore detentus, et occupatus in his tractibus praedicatione
EvangeUi ad frindandas primum Ecclesias, vide Act xvi., ver. 19.
Sic transit ad alteram excusationem dilati adventus sui (vel potius
infert ex superiori,) cujus ipse multis jam annis flagravit desiderio,
et nunc brevi friturum poUicetur, sublato illo, (cujus meminit,) im-
pedimento. CUmata nominat numero multitudinis verbo geogra-
phico usus, ut quam longe lateque per orbem terrarum Evangelium
di8seminarit intelligator, et converso ad Christum oriente sibi in
animo et occidentem invisere, imprimis utramque.Hesperiam, i. e.,
Itaham et Hispaniam, quam H,Tuviav, sicuti et Gellius, lib. ix. cap.
xiii., Gladium Spanicum, dixit; verum nunc non posse profec-
tionem ad Ulos adornare propter Eleemosynam a Macedonicis et
Achaicis Ecclesus coUatam, et pauperibus Hierosolymitanis sua
opera nunc conferendam. Causam affert hujus erogationis, sive rrjg
koyiag rrjg elg rovg dyiovg, (ut 1 Cor. cap. xvi. ver. 1, loquitur,)
expromptam et voluntariam conferentium oblationem, et debitum
fratribus Judaeis officium, imparium argumento illustratum ; ut
Romanos iUorum exemplo provocet ad sanctam et piam aemula-
tionem. Hoc igitur perfecte xa) apgayisdpsvog, i.e., fideliter et
quasi annulo obsignatum deposuero fructum hunc charitatis Gen
tium erga Judaicaa Ecclesias, abibo per vos in Hispaniam. In
Hispaniam venisse non legimus, neque est verisimile ex historia
Actoram ; sed Romam venit interposita ad Caesarem provocatione,
adeo ut distinguenda sint ea, quae de humano affectu ex sinceritate

510 COMMENTARIUS,
animi scripserunt ApostoU, ab Us quae ex Dei consUio de divinis
mysteriis, autore Spiritu Sancto, Uteris prodiderunt. Vide Jumi
Theologiam sub finem. Sed neque Apostolus hoc loco pro certo
affirmat se venturum, cum iUud Jacobi, lav o dsog hkrjari, sancto
ApostoU animo semper insederit, nee citra hanc conditionem quic
quam in hoc genere poUicitas sit. Quod vero dicit olda, certe seio
ver. 29, non ad certitudinem suae in Hispaniam profectionis, aut ad
ventus, verum ad donorum et benedictionum SpirituaUum abun-
dantiam et fructum, quem, cum Romam venerit, secum sit appro-
baturus : Tum enim fore certo sibi persuadet, ut Deus ipsi cumu-
latissime impertiat Evangelicorum mysteriorum cognitionem cum
Mis communicandam. Quid si lv Tkrigupan svkoyiag pro lia Tkrj-
gupa, i.e., in eum locum, ubi plene abundat EvangeUi gratia, q.d.
Apostolus, se non dubitare quin apud eos copiosissimum EvangeUi
fructum sit inventorus. Nota item ksirovgyrjaai verbum, ver. 27,
de erogandis in usum pauperum facultatibus et conferendis Eleemo-
synis dici, ne ex hoc charitatis officio Romanenses missae fabricent
sacrificium. In hunc etiam finem postulat eorum preces, quibus
adjutus possit omnes difficultates superare, ne in itinere ad Eomanos
suscipiendo retardetur, vv. 30, 31, 32. Ubi gravi obtestatione
utitur per Dominum Iesum Christum, per amorem Spiritus, i.e., mu-
tuam Ulam animorum conjunctionem, cujus autor est Spiritus Sanc
tus. Notandum etiam verbum avvayuviX^a%ai, quod est certatim
et summa contentione comprecari, ut sciamus neque trepidas, neque
perfunctorias preces esse debere. Tandem concludit hanc alteram
excusationem precibus. Ubi nota ver. 5 supra, Deum patientiae
et consolationis, 13, Deum Spei, nunc vero 33, hoc ver. Deum
pacis sub. autorem et largitorem appeUari, et in his omnibua locia
accommodari diveraam appeUationem Dei ad ipsarum precum, pro
earam diversitate, argumentum, ut non temere uUo in loco vel
nominetur Deua, vel diversimode appeUetur: Sapientisaime enim
et appositissime ad argumenti naturam quod tractator divinitus
nomina divina accommodantur.

cap. xv. 25; xvi. 12. 511

DECIMUM SEXTUM CAPUT.
Ventum ad alteram partem perorationis, quae in salutationibus
posita est, quam incipit a commendatione Phaebes cujusdam, [quae
erat] Cenchraeensis Ecclesiae ministra, seu diaconissa (ut loquuntur
veteres canones,) una ex viduis sexagenariis, quae ministrabant pau-
peribus, aegris, exulibus, peregrinis, de quarum coUegio 1 Timoth. v.
Ugbarariv, q.d. Tgo'iarapevrjv ruv \svuv, quod praeesset, et curam ge-
reret hospitum et peregrinorum, quos in domum suam atque adeo
fidem receperit, quod ejus domus, velut publicae sanctorum hospi-
tis, fratribus peregrinis patuerit, et ut loquitur Apost: 1 Tim. v.,
fuit hospitaUs, sanctorum pedes lavit, subvenit afflictis, etc. Obser
va composita ejusdem verbi in paronomasia, ^vviarfjpt, Tagaarrjrs,
vgbararig. Sed multo magis Ulud lv xvgiu d\iug ruv dyiuv, i.e.,
Christi nomine, in gratiam Christi, aut propter Christum : hoc
enim proprium est Christianae charitatis, quum alioqui profani
homines humanitatis interdum et hospitalitatis funguntur in speciem
officiis. Quod sequitur ad verbum " digne Sanctis," ambiguum acti-
vene (ut loquuntur) an passive, ut convenit Romanis quippe Sanctis
excipere sanctos, an ut convenit Sanctis excipi hospitio et tractari
ut dignum est Phaeba, quae sancta est soror, an ut dignum est vobis
Sanctis fratribus. Quid si utrumque ? Priscillam et AquUam tri-
bus argumentis commendat, quod avvsgyoi lv ygiaru, quod pro vita
PauU corpora sua abjecerint, quod hoc nomine de omnibus Ecclesiis
Gentium bene promeriti sint. Observa Ulorum domum Ecclesiam
appeUari. Tertia salutatio Epaeneti, quod sibi charus, quod pri-
mitiae Achaiae, vel potius Asiae, ut habent exemplaria, quod pri
mus ex Achaeis se Cliristo consecrasset Evangelium amplexus :
Metaphora a legaUbus ceremoniis. Andronicum et Juniam vocat
insignes inter Apostolos, non quia ApostoU fuisse videantur, nisi
valde universaU significatione, sed quod nomen eorum apud ipsos
etiam Apostolos celebre esset. Dicuntur fuisse in Christo, i.e.
Christo insiti, et vere Christiani. Si Junia mulieris nomen, Apos
tolus dici non potuit. , Quas mulieres nominat, Mariam, Tryphae-

512 COMMENTARIUS,
nam, Tryphosan, Persida, etc., quibus tribuit multum laborem in
Domino, intellige de ministerio et hospitalitate erga sanctos, ut
dictum est de Phaebe, ver. 1. Herman autorem libri Apocryphi
Pastoris nomine tradunt veteres, quem librum lege, sed cum judicio;
est enim suspectae fidei. <Pksyovra, fortasse cujus meminit Eusebius
inter Chronologos. Ver. 16, Sanctum osculum vocat amoris sancti
indicem, qui ex animo sanctae charitatis pleno proficiscitur, ex
more illorum temporum et regionum, ut testantur tam sanctae quam
profanae literae. Salutant vos ecclesiae Christi : Videntur haec
verba 21 versum inchoare debere, ut habet Claromontanus codex,
et ut subjectae aliorum salutationes innuunt. Mirum nuUam hie
fieri Petri mentionem, si Romae fuerit hoc tempore, ut veteres ple-
rique tradiderunt, et Romani pro articulo fidei tenent, et ferro
flammisque defendunt. Inserta est cautio de vitandis srsgodidaaxd-
koig, quos dissidiorum et scandalorum autores vocat, q. d. uti vobis
hactenus bonos commendavi, ita hortor ut soUicite et attente ob-
servetis, quasi e specula caUidos impostores; hoc enim est GxotSv,
unde scopulus ; Tugd rrjv dida-x/jv, praeterita doctrina, potius quam
contra doctrinam, qui sc. aliud docebant, aut aliter quam dedieis-
sent Romani, aut docerent ApostoU. '¥.xxkivare mt avruv, notanda
vis praepositionum, 'ex ei drb, ut significetur separatio ab iis, et
eorum excommunicatio, ut prioris ad Tim. cap. vi. v. 5, dp'.araao,
secede. Ita Paulus Act. xix., secessit a Judaeis contumacibus, et
separavit discipulos. Descriptio eorum sumpta est ab effectis et
adjunctis admodum accurata, adeo ut quamvis eos non nominet, .
tamen ita graphice depingat, ut ab omnibus agnosci possint. Ne-
gat Christo servire, sed ventri, quod hujus vitae commodis et hono-
ribus inhient. ~E%aTaruat, seducunt, signatum verbum, quo im-
posturae efficacis effectus exprimitur ; est enim extra rectam viam
abducere, ab s| et aTarrj, seductio, ab a privandi particula, et
Tarog, vestigium, aut via trita, Tarov avdguTov dkeeivsi. Duas tri
buit Ulis quasi machinas, quibus incautos et minime malos in frau-
dem inducant, xgrjOrokoyfuv et Ivkoyiav, quarum altera summam
humanitatis, altera pietatis prae se speciem fert. Nam yigriaTokoyia,
qua rationis blanditias, seu blandiloquentiam significat, cujusmodi

cap. xvi. 12-20. 513
est eorum, qui multum poUicentur, parum aut nihil praestant; qui
de aliorum magis, quam suis commodis videri volunt solliciti;
reapse tamen blandiores, quam benigniores, ut de Pertinace
.Imperatore AureUus Victor: De quibus vulgatus iste versicidus,
, Catoni inscriptus :
NoU homines blandos nimium sermone probare,
Fistula dulce canit, volucrem dum decipit auceps.
EuXoy/a dicitur a profanis quidem scriptoribus oratio ad aliorum
laudea praedicandaa accommodata, a verbo evkoySv, vel de fricata
etinanifacundia; Evkoyog atria de causa probabUi aut verisimili; et
fortasse evkoyia significat speciem rationis et probabUitatis, ut ti-
davokoyia aUbi apud Apostolum in vitio ponitur. Verum ex usu
Scripturae, et hujus ApostoU acceperim de benedictione, vel de fausta
precatione, quod his artibus soleant uti Pseudoprophetae, ut pieta-
tis obtentu faUant. Utitur autem verbo TagaxakSv, quo serio se
agere significat, non quod de eorum fide, aut obedientia dubitet,
quae toti fere terrarum orbi innotuerit, quae et Apostolo magnam
spirituahs gaudii materiam subministret ; verum quia ea est vete-
ratorum fraus et versutia, ut quae facUe clandestinis artibus et cal-
liditate, ut est Eph. c, iv. v. 14, minus circumspectis imponat.
Ideo ait se requirere, ut non solum sint simpUces, axegaioi, qui nul
lam prorsus nocendi artem teneant, nedum ut reapse nocere stude-
ant ; sed etiam ut cognitione veritatis, et prudentia instracti, aopoi,
bona amplecti, mala vitare, fraudes et laqueos pseudo-apostolorum
effugere, Ulis aperte possint obsistere. Sic Christus monet disci-
pulos suos, ut serpentea prudentia, aimpUcitate columbas imitentur.
Cautio his temporibus apprime necessaria. Et ne despondeant
animos ob veteratoriam impostorum versutiam, aut hominum gra
tiam, aut potentiam, spondet victoriam brevi de ipsorum Imperatore
(si veterem interpretem Latinum et Syrum sequamur, qui avv-
¦rgtyri legunt), et fraudis ac mendacu parente, Diabolo, cum omni
ejus falsorum doctorum sateUitio, pacis nostrae autore Deo in
Christo : Verum ita, ut nolit nos aecuros esse, sed dum praeit ipse
precibus, ut supra saepius, sic etiam nunc repetitis, gratiae Dei in
2k

514 COMMENTARIUS, ETC.
Christo Romanos commendans, tam nos, quam Ulos suo exemplo
docet hoc genus daemoniorum (ut Christus ait) nonnisi jejunio et
precibus profiigari ; Et solam Dei gratiam in Christo feUcem nobia
exitum e tantis difficultatibus largiri posse. Atque haec de cautione,
cui subjicienda (ut dixi) generalis omnium Ecclesiarum salutatio,
et nominatim quarumdam iUustrium personarum, cum ad fovendam
animorum conjunctionem mutuam, turn ad obsignandam tot quasi
subscriptionibus superioris doctrinae veritatem, v. 2. Tertius,
ApostoU amanuensis, qui sive dictante Apostolo scripserit, sive ex
ejus uvroygdpu, adversariis, descripserit hanc Epistolam, suam
quoque salutationem adscribit lv xvgiu, quae verba referri etiam
possunt ad scriptionis verbum, q. d. se hanc operam Apostolo non
solum propter Dominum accommodasse, sed etiam lv xvgiu h. e.
sincere et fide optima et Christi Spiritus ope. Sequitur Caius hoa-
pitalitatis nomine commendatissimus, sive Derbaus Pauli comes,
Act. cap. xx. v. 4, sive Macedo, Act. cap. xix. v. 29, sive Corinth-
ius quem Paulus ipse baptizavit, 1 Cor. cap. i. ; quod postremum
est maxime probabUe, nee non Corinthi scriptam hanc Epistolum,
2 Cor. cap. xn. v. 14, et Act. 20. Atque hanc etiam Corinthum,
sequenti versu urbis nomine appellatam inteUigo : cujus oeconomus,
i. e. vel curator vel procurator, si minus quaestor, nominator Eras
tus. Denique, v. 24, jam tertio Ulis valedicit cum precibus ; ac
postremo gratiarum actione Epistolam claudit, quae clausula in qui-
busdam codicibus cap./14, fini attexitur. Sensus est, Deo sit gratia
per Iesum Christum. Rationes sunt, quia solus potest confirmare
in nobis, quam dedit, fidei obedientiam, quia solus revelavit nobis
illud Evangelium mysterium, quod a temporibus aeternis taciturn
fuit, quod obscurius in veteri Testamento, in Novo reddidit Ulus-
trius, quia solus sapiens, etc. Ubi doctrinam fidei vocat Evange
lium suum, et praedicationem Christi revelationem mysterii ab
aeterno taciti : hujusque revelationis gradum duplic'em, obscurio-
rem per prophetas, Uhistriorem per Christum et Apostolos, eamque
ex imperio ipsius Dei, ad efficacem Gentium vocationem.
T'ekog.

irNATIOT sv rrj Tgbg 'Epsaiovg [§ 14].
'Agyi Zprjg Titrrig, r'skog dyaTrj- rd de dvo ev evbrrjri ysvbpsva
Deov dvdguTov aTorskS' rd de akka Tavra elg xakoxayadiav
uxbkovdd len. ScaUger. Poetices, Ub. 6, cap. 4, fo. 790.
Selecta esse oportet, quae proponas tanto theatro, quantus est
ambitus universae linguae Latinae, tractus aetatis orbis. universae.
Divitiae non in copia, sed in electis opibus consistunt.
Ad. D. Andream Melvinum.
Defessus veluti patula requiescit in herba,
Assidet inventis ut sitibundus aquis,
Thesauro veluti effoaao aub vomere fossor
Abjecto ad loculos sponte Ugone sedet :
Sic cupida et defessa diu sitibundaque nobis
Melvine exprompto nectare corda reples.
Et recreas animum vino, et coelestia dona
Aerei mellis suppeditare soles.
Finis:
Quem impoauit Daniel Demetrius, octo dierum spatio, exemplar
Andr. Melvini secutus, Andreapoli in Scotia, Anno 1601, 26. JuUi.

ERRATA.
¦^•-B- — The first twelve chapters of Ferme's commentary having been
printed, without being submitted to the Translator for correction while
passing through the press, he regrets to find that several verbal inaccu
racies, and numerous mistakes in the punctuation, division of sentences,
and marks of quotation, have escaped notice. — The errors of the latter
description particularly affect the syllogisms and enthymemes; which,
being stated in due form by the author, should have been uniformly
divided and pointed in the regular way, as has been done in the last
four chapters. Had this been attended to, as was the intention of the
Translator, it would both have been more in keeping with the character
of the treatise itself, and, at least, have somewhat lightened the' labour of
the reader.
, Of these, those only which materially affect the sense are noticed be
low, along with such verbal errors as have been detected, after a careful
revision.

i 2, 1. 15, for His read this ; p. 4. 1. 3 from bottom, read to God. " For, &c.
p. 5, 1. 18, after immediately insert after; 1. 20, after to be a break instead of a semicolon,
p. 6, 1. 5, after them a break instead of a period ; line 8 from bottom, for proximate
read last. p. 8, 1. 8, include the word gospel in brackets.
P. 9, 1. 14, instead of a break put a period after only.
p. 11, 1. 9, for faith in read faith of; 1. 12, for of faith read from faith; 1. 4 from bottom,
for of the faith iea,dfr.om the faith.
p. 12, 1. 10, for by faith read from faith; 1. 9 from bott. for profession read proposition.
p. 13, 1. 7 from bottom, after transition insert a comma; 1. 11, put a period after 'verse.'
p. 15, 1. 2, put a period after himself; 1. 20, for this read that.
p. 16, 1. 6, for has read had.
p. 17, L 3 from bottom, the asterisk should be after unnatural in the line preceding.
p. 18, 1. 4 from bottom, after held it insert in; last line, for ofthe read of this.
p. 19, 1. 1, for 1 Cor. xi. 8, read 1 Cor. ii. 8. ; 1. 10, for effecting read effect in; 1. 11,
after holy put a break for the period ; 1. 2 from bbttom, put a period instead
of a comma after conclusion.
p. 20, 1. 11, for is given read are given, p. 21, 1. 10, dele the stops ; 1. 18, dele thou.
p. 22, 1. 4, for conduct read effect [or conduct.'] „
p. 24, 1. 20, after said put a period for the comma.
p. 27, 1. 9 from bottom, after Gentiles put a period for the colon.
p. 29, 1. 6, for Jew read Jews; 1. 8, for possess read possessed; 1. 19, for god read
gods; 1. 25, after.j'rfcas insert of it.

518 ERRATA.
»
p. 30, 1. 3, after knowledge insert and boasting of being a teacher of others; 1. 10, dele'
the comma after abhor, p. 31, 1. 2, for Isaiah iii. 5, read Isaiah Iii. 5.
p. 32, 1. 13, after law put a comma for the period. -
p. 33, 1.- 4, and should begin a new sentence.
p. 35, 1. 20, insert a comma after believe; footnote, for premise read premiss.
p. 37, 1. 4, dele the period after abhorrence.
p. 38, 1. 4, after Jews insert (v. 3) ; 1. 13, instead of For read In; 1. 15, instead of
arresting read wresting; 1. 17, for laws read law; 1. 23, read ourselves, we
" in no way" &c. ; IL 28, 29, the marks of quotation are omitted.
p. 39, add as a footnote — Conjugates, i. e. cognate terms.
p. 42, 1. 9, from bottom, read " through Jesus Christ."
p. 43, 1. 5 from bottom, after classes, insert who believe.
p. 45, 1. 8, for the read his, and for his read the; 1. 15, read, for 'to be past? ; footnote,
read 'Emi^xunr. p. 47, 1. 12 from bottom, instead of (for us) read [for us],
p. 49, L 2, read "from faith," " through faith."
p. 56, 1. 5, for is a contrast read in a contrast; 1. 15, insert a comma after the word
circumcision ; insert after the last line, the first line on p. 59.
p. 61, 1. 8, insert a comma after believed.
p. 63, 1. 6, for trrfigotpogrihis, read a-XwjapsjufaV ; 1. 14 from bottom, a new paragraph
should commence -after righteousness ; 1. 2 from bottom, put a period after us
instead of a comma ; last line, commence a new sentence.
p. 64, 1. 13, insert a comma at the end of thejine, and the words and that he is.
p. 65, 1. 13, dele the first had; 1. 20, for operation read effect [or operation] ; foot note,
for TiauTgov read Aovt^ov.
p. 67, 1. 1, dele only.
p. 69, 1. 4, put a period after sufferings; 1. 15, for affliction read tribulation.
p. 70, 1. 19, for understood read understand, p. 74, 1. 11 from bottom, for was read new.
p. 76, 1. 14, for was read would be; 1. 15, for died read would die.
p. 77. II. 2, 3, read infants, who cannot sin actually, &c. ; 1. 20, insert double commas
after and, and a single inverted comma before that.
p. 84, 1. 3, for That is, read that is.
p. 86, 1. 3, only the word walk should be included within the marks of quotation.
p. 87, 1. 13, for " body of death" read " body qfsin." p. 88, 1. 15, for this read thus.
p. 94, 1. 6, the line should close with a comma only ; 1. 7, include the words for holi
ness is glory begun, in brackets, p. 96, 1. 1, for uttered read altered. i
p. 97, 1. 20, the expression sinful sin, which also occurs p. 99, line 6 from bottom ; p.
101, 1. 1 ; p. 103, 11. 5 and 7 ; p. Ill, 1. 17 ; and p. 112, 1.2, might, perhaps, have
been better rendered sin-producing sin.
p. 98, 1. 11, insert a comma after tMngs. p. 101, 1. 16, for sins work read sin works.
p. 102, 1. 3, for Is then read Therefore, and dele the mask of interrogation ; 1. 13 from
bottom, for Is then read Therefore ; 1. 15, remove the mark of interrogation.
p. 104, 1. 3, for work read works, p. 106, 1. 15, for case read cause.
p. 108, 1. 8 from bottom, read c. vi. vv. 12 and 14 ; 1. 7 from bottom, for and he read
or he.
p. Ill, 1. 14, for removed read renewed; 1. 20, a new sentence should commence with/or.
p. 113, 11. 15, 16, for acting read effect [or acting].
p. 117, 1. 7 from bottom, insert a comma after the%ords and for sin.
p. 122, 1. 14, for man read men.
p. 123, last line, place a comma after assumption; and p. 124, 1. 1, after Spirit.
p. 128, 1. 8 from bottom, for supposed read suppressed.
p. 133, 1. 22, for Ps. lxii. 10, read Ps. Ixii. 10 (9).
p. 137, 11. 9, 10 from bottom, the inverted commas shoidd be single.

ERRATA. 5I9
p. 139, 1. 4 frpm bottom, insert a semicolon before thus.
p. 142, 1. 5, after foreknows insert us ; 1. 6, include 29th within brackets.
p. 148, 1. 10, for adjunct read adjuncts.
p. 152, 1.. 11, for general read genera in italics ; I. 20, read genera in italics.
p. 157, 1. 14, for after read often, .p. 159, 1. 8 from bottom, read gbry—"for ever;"
p. 167, 1. 6 from bottom,tthe point after works should be a semicolon.
p. 171, 1. 10 from bottom, for things read thing ; I. 6 from bottom, for man read may;
1. 4 from bottom, read ' Much more, &c.
p. 172, 1. 14, for a mere man read a mean man.
p. 176, 1. 15, after predestinated the point should be a period simply, with a single in
verted comma ; 1. 16, the sentence here commencing should be in the same
paragraph with the preceding, and without inverted commas.
p. 177, 1. 7 from bottom, the point after apostle should be after the word here.
p. 178, 1. 15, for in Christ read on Christ.
p. 179, 1. 12 from bottom, insert a comma after conclusion.
p. 181, 1. 15, for Matt. xxv. 42, read Matt. xxi. 42.
p. 182, 1. 1, place a comma after faith, p. 183, 1. 13, for in read on.
p. 185, 1. 7 from bottom, for verse 13 read verse 14.
p. 189, 1. 8 from bottom, for as read so.
p. 194, 11. 6 and 7, instead of parentheses put brackets.
p. 195, 1. 3 from bottom, for Greek read Greeks. %
p. 202, 1. 2, for contradictive read contradicting, p. 204, 1. 2 from bottom, for by read qf.
p. 205, last line, According should begin a new sentence.
p. 208, 1. 8 from bottom, after that insert which.
p. 211, 1. 12 from bottom, after judgment, insert the words but their judgment.
p. 212, 1. 3 from bottom, a new sentence should commence at but.
p. 213, the same sentence should run on as far as the 10th line.
p. 214, last line, after them put a semicolon for the period.
p. 215, 1. 3, for Jude iv. read Jude 4.
f' p. 216, 1. 7, put a mark of interrogation after stumbled; 1. 9 from bottom, after verse
the point should be a period ; 1. 5 from bottom, the asterisk should be after the
word recompense in this line, instead of the Une following, and for and read or.
p. 217, 1. 7, after salvation there should be simply a comma.
p. 219, 1. 14, for 1st Eph. ii. 9, read 1st Epist. ii. 9.
p. 222, 1. 5 from bottom, for bear read bare.
p. 224, 1. 17, put a period after quoted; 1. 22, after or insert one.
p. 228, 1. 10, for Jews read Israelites.
p. 229, insert as a footnote, (to 1. 11,) ^alternates, i.e., things opposed to each other, as
universal and particular.
p. 234, 1. 7, after make insert up. p. 239, 1. 14, for To have read So have.
p. 240, 1. 2 from bottom, at the end, insert in so far as it is sin.
p. 241, foot note, read Epiphonema, a sentence, &c.
i p. 243, 1. 15 from bottom, read but dispenses reward or punishment, as the case may de
mand, to him who has previously deserved;
p. 246, 1. 20, after can live, insert to Goo™ or had.
p. 247, 1. 15 from bottom, read ' the very tender affections, as it were, of, &c.
p. 249, 1. 15, for subjugated read subjected; 1. 17, read "Living." This is, &c. ; 1. 2
from bottom, read redemption, by death ;
p. 250, 1. 13, the words of that person or tMng should be within parentheses.
p. 257, 1. 18, for 1 Tim. ii. 8, read 1 Tim. ii. 3.
p. 259, 1. 13, place a period after wisdom and insert He ; 1. 6 from bottom, remove the
brackets and read as a weak brother, namely lest he, &c. ,

520 ERRATA. •
p. 260, 1. 3 from bottom, for is read as. p. 261, 1. 17, fd* here read there. '?
p. 262, 11. 5 and 16, for isng pfsvsiV read imgfgmn (in one woyd.)
p. 264, 1. 5, after he lays insert down ; 1. 3 from bottom, for member read members.
p. 265, 1. 5 from bottom, after testifies insert (I Cor. xii. 7.)
p. 266, 1. 16 from bottom should end with a period.
p. 267, 1. 2, for Eph. vi. 11 read Eph. iv. 11.
p. 268, 1. 17, for words read word; 1. 2 from bottom, at the beginning insert the.
p. 273, 1. 9 from bottom, remove the asterisk from this line to the word just in 1. 4 from
the bottom.
p. 282, 1. 10 from bottom, and 1. 5 ditto, insert commas after relation and respect.
p. 294, 1. 6, for his. read their.

ALEX. WALKEK, PE1KXEE, 6. JAMES'S CODBT, EDIHBDKGH.

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 02443 8112