Chapter 4

1 What shall we say then, that our father Abraham has found concerning the flesh. 2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he has wherein to rejoice, but not with God. 3 For what says the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness.

What shall we say then. This is a confirmation taken from an example, which is strong enough, because all things are alike as well in the matter as in the person. For both he is the father of the faithful, to whom all ought to be conformed: and also there is but one, not many ways for all men to obtain righteousness by. In many other things an example should not serve to make a common rule: but because in the person of Abraham there was proposed a mirror or pattern of righteousness which appertains to the whole church: [reconstructed: therefore] does Paul apply that to the whole body of the church, which was written of him only. And also hereby he restrains the Jews, to whom nothing was more plausible to glory of, than to boast themselves to be the sons of Abraham. They never durst ascribe to themselves more sanctity or holiness than to the holy Patriarch. Now seeing it is apparent he was justified freely, his posterity which do arrogate to themselves their own proper righteousness out of the law, must needs for shame hold their peace. According to the flesh. Because in the text of Paul the verb Eurckenai that is has found is put between this particle and the name father. After this manner, what shall we say Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? Some interpreters think here to be demanded, what Abraham has gotten according to the flesh. Which exposition if it be liked, then this saying according to the flesh, shall be as much as naturally, or of himself. Nevertheless, it is likely that it is joined to this father in stead of an Epithet. For besides that we are [reconstructed: accustomed] to be more moved with domestic examples: the dignity of [reconstructed: pedigree] wherein the Jews glorified too much is precisely noted again. Many think it to be added by the way of contempt: in which sense in another place they are called the carnal sons of Abraham, which are not spiritual nor at all lawful. I verily suppose it was expressed for the Jews sake only: because it was more excellent to be the sons of Abraham by nature and descent of flesh, so that they were faithful also, than to have been by adoption only. He grants therefore to the Jews a nearer bond of conjunction, but yet to this end only, that he might the rather move them, that they should not depart from the example of their father.

2 For if Abraham. It is an Epicheirema. That is, an imperfect argument, which ought to be gathered into this form: if Abraham be justified by works, he may glory of his merit: but he has not wherein to glory with God: therefore he is not justified by works. So that member, but not with God, is the minor proposition of the Syllogism. Hereunto ought to be added the conclusion which I have put down, although it is not expressed by Paul. He calls that glorying when we may pretend something of our own, whereto a reward is due in the sight of God. Which seeing he takes away from Abraham, who of us, shall challenge to himself the least drop of merit?

3 For what says the Scripture? This is the proof of the minor or second proposition in the former argument, where he denied Abraham to have any matter of glorying. For if Abraham were therefore justified, because he embraced the goodness of God by faith: it follows he had nothing to glory of, because he brought nothing of his own, but an acknowledging of his misery, which sought for mercy. For he takes it as a thing confessed, that the righteousness of faith is the refuge and as it were the privilege place for a sinner that is destitute of works. For if there were any righteousness of the law or works, it should remain really in men themselves: but faith borrows that elsewhere which it has not in itself: therefore the righteousness of faith is fitly called Imputativa, that is, such as is by imputation.

Furthermore, the place which is cited, is taken forth of Genesis, where the word believe or the word believing, ought not to be restrained to any one particular thing there spoken of, but to the whole covenant of salvation, and grace of adoption, which Abraham is said to have apprehended by faith. The promise indeed of seed or posterity to come is there rehearsed, but yet which was grounded upon the free adoption. And we are to note that neither salvation is promised without the grace of God, nor yet the grace of God without salvation. Again, we are neither called into the grace of God, nor into the hope of salvation, but righteousness is also offered. This being set down, we may see they hold not the principles of divinity, which think the testimony of Moses to be violently wrested of Paul. For because there is there a particular promise, they understand Abraham to have done right and well, in that he believed it, and that he was so far forth approved of God. But therein they are deceived, first in that they mark not, how that word believe, is extended to the whole content: therefore it ought not to be restrained to one member. And the chiefest error is, that they begin not at the testimony of the grace of God. But this does God that he might assure Abraham both of his adoption, and fatherly favor: under which, eternal salvation by Christ is contained. Therefore Abraham in believing embraces nothing but grace offered to him, that his faith should not be void. If this be imputed to him for righteousness, it follows he was justified no otherwise, but because he trusting in the goodness of God, dared hope for all things from him. Neither does Moses say what men thought of him: but how he was accounted before the judgment seat of God. Abraham therefore apprehended the grace of God offered to him in the promise, wherein he felt righteousness to be communicated to him. It is necessary for the establishing of righteousness to know this relation between the promise and faith: for there is here the same reason between God and us, that is with the lawyers between the giver and him to whom the thing is given. For we do not otherwise obtain righteousness, but because as it is offered to us in the promise of the Gospel, so we do by faith as it were, see the possession of it. How the place of James which seems to be much contrary to this, is to be reconciled, I have already showed. And there (meaning the Epistle of James) I shall (by the leave of God) declare it more at large. Only let us note, that they to whom righteousness is imputed are justified:

Seeing these two are put of Paul, as words of one signification. Whereby we gather the question is not what men are in themselves, but what God does account of them not that purity of conscience; and integrity of life is separated from the free favor of God: but, for that, when the cause is demanded why God does love us, and acknowledge us for just, Christ must needs come forth, who may clothe us with his righteousness.

4 For to him verily that works, reward is imputed not of grace or favor, but of debt.

5 But to him that works not, but believes in him that justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

4 For to him that works. He calls him a worker, not every one that is addicted to good works, which study ought to flourish in all the sons of God: but him that deserves something by his merits: likewise he counts him a non-worker, or one that works not, to whom nothing is due by the merit of works. Neither is his meaning that he would have the faithful unprofitable, or idle loiterers: but he forbids them only to be hirelings, who whatever they ask of God, they crave it as of right due to them. And we have already admonished, how the question is not here, after what sort we should frame our life, but the question is of the cause of salvation. And he reasons from the contrary, that God does not pay to us righteousness as of debt: but does frankly give it to us, that we might ascribe it to him. And I truly am of Bucer's mind, who shows the form of reasoning, not to be drawn from one word, but from a whole sentence, after this manner, if there be any that merits anything by his work, the thing merited is not imputed to him of grace: but is paid to him as of debt or duty. Faith is counted to righteousness, not as though it brought any merit from us, but because it apprehends the goodness of God. Therefore is righteousness no debt to us, but given us freely. For because Christ at our prayer or suit does justify us by faith, Paul does always therein consider our evacuation or emptiness. For what do we believe, but Christ to be the satisfaction for our sins, that he might reconcile us to God? The same, though in other words, is in the Epistle to the Galatians, that no man is justified by the law it is evident, for the just by faith shall live. But the law is not of faith: but he that shall do these, shall live in them (Galatians 3:11). For because the law promises wages to works, thereupon he concludes the righteousness of faith which is free, not to agree with that of works. Which cannot hold if faith does justify in respect of works. These comparisons are diligently to be observed wherein all merit is utterly done away.

5 But believes in him. This is a circumlocution very significant: wherein he expresses the substance and nature of faith and righteousness, for he concludes plainly that faith does justify us not as though it were a meritorious virtue, but so far forth as it obtains for us the grace of God. Neither does he only pronounce God the giver of righteousness, but also condemns us of unrighteousness, that the liberality of God might help our necessity. To be brief, none shall come to the righteousness of faith, but he that is a sinner in himself. For this circumlocution is to be applied to the circumstance of the place, that faith does adorn us with the righteousness of another, which righteousness it begs of God. And here again God is said to justify us, while he does freely pardon us being sinners, and does love us, with whom he might justly be angry, namely, while by his mercy he does away our unrighteousness.

6 Even as David declares the blessedness of man, to whom God imputes righteousness without works: saying,

7 Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.

8 Blessed is the man, to whom the Lord does not impute sin.

6 As David, etc. Here we may see they do but cavil who would hem in the works of the law within the compass of ceremonies. Seeing he now calls them simply and without any addition "works," which he called before the works of the law. If no man can deny, but a simple and unlimited speech such as we have now in hand, is indifferently to be understood of every work: the same must always hold in the whole disputation. For there is nothing less reasonable, than to take the power or force of justification away from ceremonies only, seeing Paul does indefinitely exclude works. To this also belongs the contrary member, that God does justify men by not imputing their sin. In which words also we are taught, that righteousness, with Paul is nothing else than the remission of sins. Lastly that this remission is free, because it is imputed without works: which the very name of remission shows. For that creditor or lender which is paid does not remit: but he which willingly of mere liberality does cancel or erase the debt. Away now with those [who] teach us to redeem pardon of our sins by satisfactions: from which remission of sins Paul draws an argument to establish the free gift of righteousness. For how is it possible they should agree with Paul? They say, by works we must satisfy the justice of God, that we may obtain pardon of our sins. On the contrary Paul reasons, that the righteousness of faith is free and without works: because it depends upon the remission of sins. This were undoubtedly a false argument, if in the remission of sins there were any regard or respect to works at all. In like sort by the same words of the prophet, the folly of the schoolmen is refuted regarding half-remission. They babble that the fault being remitted, the punishment is retained of God: but the prophet cries that our sins are not only covered, that is, taken away in the sight of God: but also he adds they are not imputed.

How shall God take punishment of those sins he does not impute? Therefore there remains sound to us, this most excellent sentence, he is justified by faith, who is purged or cleansed before God by the free remission of his sins. Moreover hence may be gathered the perpetual continuance of free righteousness or justification through the whole life. For when David being wearied with the continual sting of his conscience, burst forth into this saying, he spoke surely by his own experience. And now also he had served God many years. Therefore after great proceedings, or goings forward, at the length he proved it by experience true, that all they are miserable which are cited before the judgment seat of God: crying out there is none other way to obtain blessedness, than if the Lord receive us into favor by not imputing our sins. Whereby the imagination of those is very well refuted, which dream that the righteousness of faith, is but the entrance, so that the faithful by works retain the possession of righteousness, which righteousness they did not obtain by any merits. Whereas sometimes works are said to be imputed to righteousness, and also other beatitudes are reckoned, that does nothing prejudice the sentence of Paul. Psalm 106:30 says it was imputed for righteousness to Phinehas the priest of the Lord, that in taking punishment upon the adulterer and the harlot, he took away the reproach of Israel. Indeed we hear in this place how a man did a good work: but we know a man is not justified for one deed. For there is required a perfect and most absolute obedience, as the promise says: He that shall do these shall live in them. How then is this punishment of Phinehas imputed to him for righteousness? Surely it must needs be, he was justified before by the grace of God. For they which have put on the righteousness of Christ, have God not only favorable to themselves, but also to their works: whose spots and moles are covered with the purity of Christ, that they come not into judgment: whereby works being infected with no corruptions are counted just: and that no work of man can any otherwise than by this favor please God, it is evident. And if the righteousness of faith be the only cause why our works are counted just: see then how sottishly they reason, because righteousness is given to works, it is not of faith only. But I oppose an invincible argument against them, namely, that all works are condemned for unrighteous, except a man be justified by sole faith. The like is to be understood of blessedness: they are denounced blessed which fear the Lord, and walk in his ways. Which meditate in his law day and night: but because no man does that, in such perfection as were meet, that the commandment of God might be fully satisfied, all such blessedness is void, and of none effect, until that we being purified and cleansed by the remission of sins, be made blessed: and so are made capable of that blessedness, which the Lord promises for his servants for the study of the law and good works. Therefore both righteousness of works, is an effect of the righteousness of faith: and the blessedness comes of works, an effect of the blessedness that consists in the remission of sins. If the cause neither ought, neither can be destroyed of his effect, they go ill-favoredly to work, if any go about to overthrow the righteousness of faith by works. But why may not a man (will some say) by those testimonies contend to prove a man to be justified and also made blessed through works? For the words of the Scripture say no more that a man is justified by faith, and made blessed by the mercy of God, than by works. Verily here as well the order of causes, as the dispensation of the grace of God is to be considered. For because whatever is spoken either of the righteousness or blessedness of works, it takes no place, unless this sole righteousness of faith go before, and only fulfill all parts: this must be raised up and established, that the other as fruit from a tree may grow and come forth of it.

9 Came this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? For we say that faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousness.

10 How was it then imputed? When he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not when he was circumcised, but when he was uncircumcised.

Because there is mention made of circumcision and uncircumcision only, some foolishly gather, there is nothing else in question, than that righteousness is not obtained by the ceremonies of the law. But we are to note with what sort of men Paul has to deal. For we know that hypocrites, while in general they boast their meritorious works, yet they pretend a color in external works. The Jews also which through the gross abuse of the law were alienated from true and perfect righteousness, had their peculiar reason. Paul said no man is blessed but he whom God by his free mercy reconciles to himself: whereby it follows all they are cursed whose works come into judgment. Now this principle is held, that men are not justified by their worthiness, but by the mercy of God. But yet that is not enough, except remission of sins go before all works, of which circumcision is the first, whereby the people of the Jews were ingrafted into the obedience of God. Therefore he goes on in showing that also. We are always to bear this one thing in mind, that circumcision is reckoned here as the inceptive work (if I may so term it) of the legal righteousness. For the Jews did not glory in it, as in the pledge or seal of the grace of God, but as in a meritorious observation or keeping of the law. Therefore they preferred themselves before others, as though they were more excellent than others in the sight of God. Now we see the controversy is not of one rite: but under one kind are all the works of the law, that is, all works to which wages can be due, comprehended. And for this cause chiefly is circumcision named, because it was the foundation of legal righteousness. But Paul disputes from the contrary, if the righteousness of Abraham be the remission of sins (which he plainly takes for a thing granted) and the same remission of sins came to Abraham before circumcision: then it follows, the remission of sins was not given in regard of merits going before. You see it is an argument drawn from the order of the causes and the effects. For the cause is ever before its effect. But righteousness was in Abraham before circumcision.

11 After he received the sign of circumcision, the seal of the righteousness of faith, which was in the uncircumcision: that he might be the father of all them that believe by uncircumcision, wherein righteousness is also imputed to them.

12 And the father of circumcision, not to them only which are of the circumcision, but to them also that walk in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham, which he had when he was uncircumcised.

11 After he received the sign. By way of anticipation or preventing he declares, that though circumcision justified not, yet was it not in vain or superfluous: seeing it had another and the same a very excellent use, namely, whose office was to seal the righteousness of faith, and as it were to make it sure. And yet in the meantime, from the end itself he insinuates to us, that it is not the cause of righteousness. For it tends to the confirmation of the righteousness of faith, indeed and of that verily which was had in uncircumcision: therefore it derogates or takes nothing from it.

Moreover, here we have a notable place, concerning the common use of Sacraments: for they are (as Paul witnesses) seals, whereby both the promises of God are after a sort sealed in our hearts, and the certainty of the grace of God established. And although they profit nothing by themselves, yet God who would have them to be instruments of his grace, does make that they want not a secret grace, and profit in the elect. And although they are to the reprobate only dead and unprofitable figures, yet they always retain their virtue and nature: for although our unbelief deprives us of their effect, yet it shakes not, neither extinguishes the truth of God. Therefore let us stand sure, that the holy Sacraments are testimonies, with which God seals his grace in our hearts. Touching the Sacrament of circumcision this is to be said in particular, therein was a twofold grace represented. God promised to Abraham a blessed seed, wherein both he and all the world should hope for salvation. Hereupon depended that promise: I will be your God. Therefore the free reconciliation in God was included in that sign: and the analogy or proportion served, that the faithful might respect the promised seed. Again, God required integrity and holiness of life: by the Sacrament he declared how it might be come to: namely, if in man that be cut off, whatever comes of the flesh, because the whole nature of man is corrupted. By the external sign therefore he admonished Abraham, that he should spiritually circumcise the corruption of his flesh, which Moses also alluded to. And that he might show it was not the work of man but of God: he would have tender infants circumcised, who for want of years could not yet execute that commandment. For, that spiritual circumcision is an effect or work of the celestial power, Moses has spoken, as you have in Deuteronomy: The Lord shall circumcise your heart. The Prophets also afterward declared the very same more clearly.

Finally, as at this day baptism, so in old time circumcision consisted of two parts: namely, that therein was testified as well newness of life, as the remission of sins: but whereas in the person of Abraham circumcision was after righteousness, that holds not always in the Sacraments: as it appears in Isaac and his posterity: but God would once at the beginning show forth such an example, lest any should tie salvation to the external signs. That he might be the father. Note how the circumcision of Abraham confirms our faith concerning free righteousness: for it is a sealing of the righteousness of faith, that to us also who believe, righteousness might be imputed. And so, very artfully Paul returns those things upon the adversaries, which might be objected by them. For if the truth and virtue of circumcision, be found in uncircumcision: there is no cause why the Jews should so greatly advance themselves above the Gentiles.

But seeing a doubt might arise, whether we also after the example of Abraham are not to confirm the same righteousness by the seal of circumcision? Why did the Apostle omit it? Namely, because he thought the question to have been sufficiently answered by his words. For seeing this sentence is admitted, that circumcision serves only to seal the grace of God: it follows that at this day it were superfluous for us, who have another sacrament ordained of the Lord in place thereof. Because therefore where baptism is, there is no use now of circumcision, he would not to no purpose dispute of that, of which was no question at all, namely, why the righteousness of faith should not be sealed in the Gentiles by circumcision, if they should be like to Abraham.

To believe by uncircumcision. Is, that the Gentiles being content with their estate, are not to interpose the seal of circumcision. And so this preposition dia, by, is put in place of en, in.

12 Not to them which are, etc. This word are or be in this place is taken for to be reckoned or counted. For he rebukes the carnal sons of Abraham, who having nothing but external circumcision, did boldly glory in it. As for the other, which is the principal, they neglected it, namely, that they should imitate the faith of Abraham, by which only he obtained salvation. Hereby may appear how seriously he discerns faith from the sacrament: not only lest any should content himself with this, without the other, meaning with the sacrament without faith, as though it were sufficient to justification: but also that the same faith only might fulfill all parts. For while he confesses the Jews which are circumcised to be justified, he does precisely except, so that they after the example of Abraham abide in faith only. For what should be the meaning of faith in uncircumcision, but that he might show, faith only without any help elsewhere to be sufficient? It is therefore to be taken heed of lest any man by dividing or parting in halves, mix together two causes of justification. By the same argument the scholastic divinity is convicted, touching the difference of the sacraments of the old and new testament: for from those they take away the power of justifying, to these they give it. But if Paul reasons orderly, while he proves that circumcision justifies not, because Abraham was justified by faith: the same reason is also of strength with us: that we may deny men to be justified by baptism, seeing they are justified by the same faith, by which Abraham was justified.

13 For the promise that he should be the heir of the world: was not given to Abraham and his seed by the law: but by the righteousness of faith.

13 For the promise, etc. Now he does more clearly repeat that antithesis or contrariety of the law and faith, which he touched before, which also is diligently to be noted: because if faith borrows nothing of the law that it might justify, from there we understand, it has respect to nothing but the mercy of God.

Furthermore the notion of those, which would have this to be spoken of ceremonies, is easily refuted: because if works brought anything to justification, then he should rather have said not by the written law, but by the law of nature.

But Paul does not oppose spiritual holiness of life against ceremonies, but faith and his righteousness. The sum therefore is, the inheritance was promised to Abraham, not because he had deserved it by keeping the law, but because by faith he had obtained righteousness. And surely (as Paul immediately declares) then do the consciences of men enjoy perfect peace, when they feel that to be freely given them, which is not due to them by right. From this also it follows, that the benefit is no less common to the Gentiles than to the Jews, the cause of which benefit does equally pertain to both. For if men's salvation be founded upon the only goodness of God, they restrain and hinder the course thereof as much as in them lies, who exclude the Gentiles from it. That he might be the heir of the world. Seeing eternal salvation is now in hand, the Apostle seems out of season to carry the readers to the world. But generally under this word he comprehends, the restoration which was looked for in Christ. Indeed restitution of life was the principal: yet it behooved that the decayed state of the whole world should be repaired. Therefore the Apostle calls Christ the heir of all the goods of God. Because the adoption which we obtain through his grace, has restored to us the possession of that inheritance, from which we fell in Adam. And because under the type of the land of Canaan, not only the hope of eternal life was proposed to Abraham, but also the full and perfect blessing of God: the Apostle very aptly teaches that the dominion of the world was promised to him. The godly in this present life have a certain taste hereof: because however they are at various times pinched with poverty, yet, for that with a quiet conscience they participate those things which God has created to their use, and with his favor and will enjoy the earthly blessings, as pledges and earnest pennies of eternal life, poverty is no hindrance to them, such that they should not acknowledge heaven, earth, and the sea to belong to them.

The wicked although they heap up the riches of the world, they can call nothing theirs: but rather they get them by stealth, because they use them with the curse of God. And it is great comfort to the godly in their poverty, that though they live poorly, yet they steal nothing from any: but they receive their lawful allowance at the hand of their heavenly father, until they see the full possession of their inheritance, when all creatures shall serve for their glory. For to this end both earth and heaven shall be renewed, that according to their measure they might partly serve to illustrate the kingdom of God.

14 For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise is made of none effect.

15 For the law causes wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.

14 For if they which are of the law. By an argument taken from that which is impossible or absurd, he proves that the grace which Abraham obtained from God was not promised to him in regard of the legal part, or in respect of works: for if this condition had been interposed, that God would vouchsafe to adopt those only which deserve it, or which keep the law, no man should have dared to believe that it appertains to him. For what man finds such perfection in himself, that he dare resolve himself, the inheritance is due to him by righteousness of the law? Then were faith made void: because an impossible condition does not only hold the minds of men in suspense, and makes them doubtful, but also smites them with fear and trembling. So the effect of the promises should vanish away, because they profit nothing except they be received by faith. If our adversaries had ears to hearken to this one reason, then should the controversy between them and us easily come to an end. The Apostle takes it for a thing out of all question, that the promises of God cannot be effectual, except we receive them with sure assurance of mind. And what should come to pass if the salvation of man were grounded upon the keeping of the law? The consciences should have no certainty, but being vexed with a perpetual unquietness at length shall fall to desperation. The promise also whose performance depends upon an impossible thing, should vanish away without fruit. Let them go now which teach the wretched people, to save themselves by works: seeing Paul plainly pronounces, that the promise is made of none effect, if it depend upon works. But that is very necessary to be known, faith is made void, if it stand upon works. For thereby we both learn what faith is, and what kind of righteousness, that righteousness of works ought to be, to which men may boldly trust. The Apostle teaches that faith does perish, unless the soul rest securely in the goodness of God: faith then, is not either a naked knowledge of God or of his truth, neither a simple persuasion that God is, that his word is truth itself: but a sure knowledge of the mercy of God conceived by the Gospel, which sure knowledge brings the peace and rest of conscience toward God. The sum therefore is, that if salvation rested in the observation of the law, the mind of man could have no certainty thereof: indeed whatever promises were offered us by God, they should be void and of none effect. So miserable and wretched are we, if we be turned over to works, while the cause and certainty of salvation is to be sought for.

15 For the law, etc. This is a confirmation of the former sentence, taken from the contrary effect of the law. For seeing the law begets nothing but vengeance, it cannot bring grace. To those were good and perfect it would show the way of righteousness: but inasmuch as it commands those who are sinful and corrupt, what they ought to do, and ministers not strength to perform the same, it proves them guilty before the judgment seat of God. For such is the corruption of our nature, that the more we are taught what is just and right, the more plainly is our iniquity discovered, and chiefly our disobedience: and so the greater judgment of God is procured. By wrath understand the judgment of God, in which signification it is often used. They which understand it, that the wrath of the sinner is inflamed by the law, because he hates and curses the Lawgiver, whom he sees to be adversant to his lusts: they say that wittily, but yet unfitly in respect of the present place. For that Paul would not do anything else but show, how nothing except condemnation comes to us all by the law, both the common use of the word, and also the reason which he adds straightway does declare. Where there is no law. The second proof whereby he confirms that which he said. For otherwise it would have been obscure how the wrath of God should be kindled against us by the law, unless the reason were more apparent. And that is, because we having tasted the knowledge of the justice of God by the law, offend so much the more grievously against God, as there remains less excuse to us. For they are worthy to sustain more grievous punishment, which despise the known will of God, than they who sin of ignorance. The Apostle speaks not of the simple transgression of righteousness, from which no man is exempted: but he calls that transgression, when a man's mind, being taught what does please or displease God, does wittingly and willingly burst the bounds prescribed to him by the word of God. And that I may speak in a word, transgression here does not signify a simple offence, but a purposed stubbornness in violating justice. I take this particle adverbially, to wit, for where. Others turn it, whereof, as though it were a pronoun relative: but the first reading agrees best, which is also most received. Whether reading soever you follow, the same sense abides: namely, that he who is not instructed by the written law, if he offend, is not guilty of so great transgression, as he who stubbornly infringes and breaks the law of God.

16 Therefore it is by faith, that it might come by grace, and the promise might be sure to all the seed, not to that only which is of the law: but also to that which is of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all. (as it is written,

17 I have made you a father of many nations) even before God. Whom he believed, who quickens the dead, and calls those things which are not, as though they were. (Genesis 17:4)

16 Therefore it is of faith. This is the winding up of the argument, so that you may gather the whole into this sum. If the inheritance of salvation comes to us by works, then shall the faith thereof fall, the promise of it shall be of none effect: but both these must be sure. Therefore it comes to us by faith, that the firmness thereof being founded upon the only goodness of God, it might have a sure effect. See how the Apostle, esteeming faith by firm and stable certainty, does count doubting and wavering for unbelief, whereby both faith is abolished, and the promise abrogated. And yet this is that doubting, which the Schoolmen term moral conjecture: and, if it please God, they put it in place of faith.

That it might come by grace. Here first the Apostle shows, that nothing is set before faith, but mere grace: and this is as they commonly term it, his object. For if it respected merits, wrongfully should the Apostle infer, that that is of free grace whatever faith obtains for us of God. I will repeat it again in other words, if it be of grace, whatever we obtain by faith, then all respect of works does lie dead. But that which follows next, does more clearly remove all ambiguity or doubtfulness: namely, that the promise then stands firm, when it leans upon grace. For by this word Paul confirms, that so long as men depend upon works they are in suspense or doubt: because they deprive themselves of the fruit of the promises. Here also we may easily gather, that grace is not (as some imagine) taken for the gift of regeneration, but for free mercy or favor: for as regeneration is never perfect, so should it never suffice to appease the consciences, neither by itself should it make the promise firm. Not to that only which is of the law. Whereas this clause elsewhere does signify those, who being preposterously zealous of the law, tie themselves to the yoke thereof, and glory in confidence of it: here it signifies simply the nation of the Jews, to whom the law of the Lord was delivered. For whoever abides under the power of the law, Paul in another place teaches, they are subject to the curse. And therefore it is certain, they are excluded from the participation of grace: he means not then the servants of the law, who being addicted to the righteousness of works, renounce Christ: but the Jews who being brought up in the law, gave their name to Christ. But that this sentence may be more clear, resolve it thus. Not to them only which are of the law, but to all those which follow the faith of Abraham, although they had no law before. Who is the father of us all. The relative has the force of a causal particle. For thereby he goes about to prove, the Gentiles to be partakers of this grace, because by the same Oracle wherein the inheritance was given to Abraham and his seed, the Gentiles were received into his stead. For it is said, he is ordained to be the father, not of one, but of many nations: wherein was prefigured the dispensation, of the grace to come, which then was contained in Israel only. For unless the promised blessing were extended to them, they could not be reckoned among the seed of Abraham. The preterite of the verb according to the common use of the Scripture, notes the certainty of the counsel of God. For although nothing appeared then less: yet because God had so ordained, he is truly said to be appointed the father of many nations. Let the testimony of Moses be included in a parenthesis, that this sentence may be joined, Who is the father of us all before God &c. For it was necessary also to show what was the form of that consanguinity or kinship: lest the Jews should glory too much in their carnal generation. He says therefore Abraham is our father before God, which is as much as if he should call him a spiritual father. For he has that privilege not from his own flesh, but from the promise of God.

17 Whom he believed, who quickens the dead. In this circumlocution the very substance of Abraham's faith is declared: that from his example he might pass to the Gentiles. For Abraham was to come to that promise which he had heard from the mouth of God, by a wonderful way, seeing there appeared as yet no token thereof. Seed was promised to him, as to one that had been lusty and lively: but he was dead. Therefore it lay upon him to have his cogitation erected, to that power of God, whereby he quickens those that are dead. Now there is no absurdity if the Gentiles which otherwise are barren and dead, be incorporated into the society. For he which therefore denies them to be capable of grace, does injury to Abraham, whose faith did lean upon this cogitation, that it matters not though he be dead which is called of the Lord to life: who can easily by his word through his power raise the dead.

Moreover, here we have a type and example of our universal calling. Wherein our original or rising is set before our eyes, not that original or rising, whereby we grow up to the first nativity, but whereby we grow up into the hope of the life to come: namely, that while we are called of the Lord, we arise up out of nothing. For whatever we seem to be, yet have we not any sparkle of goodness, whereby we might be made apt for the kingdom of God. For that we may be rather meet to hear the calling of the Lord, we must utterly die to ourselves.

This is the condition of calling, that they which are dead in themselves might be raised up of the Lord: they which are nothing, by his virtue may begin to be something. The word calling ought not to be restrained to preaching, but according to the usual manner of the scripture, it is taken for to raise up: and the rather to set forth the power of God, who by a beck only, can raise up whom he will.

18 Who above hope, believed under hope, that he should be the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken to him, so shall your seed be.

18 Who besides hope. If it be read so, the sense shall be, when there was no argument, yea, when all things were contrary, yet he did not cease to believe. And surely there is no greater enemy to faith, than to tie our minds to our eyes, that from their sight we might take the matter of hoping.

It may also be read, above hope, and perhaps more fitly: as though he said that Abraham by his faith did far exceed, or go beyond whatever he could conceive. For unless faith by celestial wings flies up, that it might despise all the senses of the flesh, it shall always stick in the clay of the world. And whereas Paul uses the word hope, twice in the same sentence: in the first place it signifies that argument of hoping, which may be taken from nature, and the reason of the flesh: in the second place it signifies faith given of God, in this sense, when there was no matter of hoping, yet through hope he depended upon the promise of God: and to hope, he thought it sufficient, that the Lord had promised, however the thing was in itself incredible.

according to that was said. I thought good to turn it so, that it might be referred to the time of Abraham. For the meaning of Paul is, that Abraham when many temptations would have driven him to desperation, lest he should faint, converted his mind to that was promised to him, Your seed shall be like the stars of heaven, and sands of the Sea. For purposely he alleged this testimony but in part, that he might stir them to the reading of the scripture. For the Apostles everywhere in citing holy scripture have a religious care, to provoke us to the diligent reading thereof.

19 And he not weak in the faith, considered not his own body, which was now dead, being almost a hundred years old: neither the deadness of Sarah's womb.

20 Neither did he doubt of the promise of God through unbelief, but was strengthened in the faith, and gave glory to God.

21 Being full assured that he which had promised, was also able to do it.

22 Therefore was it imputed to him for righteousness.

19 And he not weak in faith. If you had rather, one of the negatives being left out, you may declare it thus, and he not weak in faith considered his own body, but this makes nothing for the sense. Now he shows more nearly what might have hindered, indeed, what might have utterly turned Abraham from receiving the promise. Seed was promised to him, when by nature neither he was fit for generation, nor Sara for conception. Whatever he could see in himself or about himself, it was against the effect of the promise. Therefore that he might give place to the truth of God, as though he had forgot himself, he withdraws his mind from those things were in his sight. Yet you are not to understand it, as though he had no respect at all to his barren or dead body: seeing the Scripture testifies he reasoned thus with himself, shall a child be born to a man that is a hundred years old? And shall Sara which is ninety bear a child? But because, that consideration being laid apart, he resigned his whole sense over to the Lord: the Apostle says he considered not. And surely it was an argument of greater constancy, to draw his thought from that thing which did voluntarily offer itself to his eyes, than if no such thing had come into his mind. And that the body of Abraham for age was past fruit, before the blessing of the Lord, it may plainly be proved both here, and also out of the seventeen and eighteen chapters of Genesis. So that the opinion of Augustine is in no wise to be admitted, who in a certain place, thinks that the cause was only in Sara. Neither ought the absurdity of the objection move us, which drove him to that resolution. He thinks it very ridiculous, that Abraham at a hundred years should be called barren, who sometime after had many children. For thereby the Lord made his power more notable, that he which before was like a withered and dry post, when through the blessing of God he flourished, he was not only sufficient for the procreation of Isaac: but as one restored to a flourishing age, he had strength afterward to beget others. But some will say, it is not besides the order of nature, that a man should beget a child at that age. That I may grant it is not a wonder, yet it differs little from a miracle. Consider also with what labors, molestations, peregrinations, and extremities that good man was exercised all his life: and then you must needs confess he was no more broken with age, than he was worn and wasted with labors.

Lastly, his body is not simply, but by the way of comparison called barren or fruitless. For it was not likely, that he which in the flower and strength of age was unfit for procreation, should then begin when he was void of strength. Whereas he says, he was not weak in faith, understand it thus, he did not shake or waver as we are wont to do in doubtful things. For there is a twofold weakness of faith, one, which by yielding to temptations of adversity, does make us fall from the power of God: another which arises truly of imperfection, yet does it not extinguish faith. For the intellect is never so illuminated, but there remain many relics of ignorance: the mind is never so established, but there abides much doubting. The faithful therefore have a continual conflict with those vices of the flesh, namely, ignorance and doubting: in which conflict their faith is often times grievously assaulted, and put in hazard, yet at the length it overcomes: so that they may be called firm, even in infirmity.

20 Neither did he doubt of the promise of God. Although I follow not the old interpreter and Erasmus, yet my translation has its reason. For it seems the Apostle would say, that Abraham examined not in the balance of incredulity, whether the Lord could perform that he promised. To make inquisition of a thing is properly, when we sift it with mistrust: neither will we admit it before it be thoroughly examined, where it appears credible. Indeed he demanded how it might come to pass: but that was an interrogation of one wondering: as the Virgin Mary, when she demanded of the Angel how that might come to pass, which he showed to her: and such like. The godly therefore, while a message is brought to them of the works of God, whose greatness exceeds their capacity, they burst forth into admiration, but from the admiration they pass straightways to the consideration of the power of God: the wicked, while they demand, they [reconstructed: scoff and deride], and reject it as a fable. As you may see in the Jews, while they ask Christ how he could give his flesh to be eaten.

Therefore Abraham is not reprehended for that he laughed, and demanded how a son should be born to a man of a hundred, and a woman of ninety years old: because in his admiration, he nevertheless gave place to the power of the word of God. On the contrary the like laughter and question is reproved in Sara, because she charged the promise of God with vanity. If these things be applied to the present cause, it shall appear there was no other origin of Abraham's justification, than there is of the Gentiles. The Jews then are insolent against their father, if they gainsay the calling of the Gentiles, as though it were absurd.

Let us also remember, how all of us are in the same predicament with Abraham. The things that are about us are all adversarial to the promises of God. He promises immortality: and we are clothed with mortality and corruption. He pronounces that he accounts us for just: we are covered with sins. He testifies that he is merciful and benevolent to us: his external judgments threaten his wrath. What shall we do then? With closed eyes we must pass over ourselves and all that is ours, so that nothing hinders or prevents us, why we should not believe that God is true. But he was strong. This is opposed against that sentence that went before, where it was said, he was not weak in faith: as if he should have said, through constancy and firmness of faith he overcame incredulity. For none shall go a conqueror out of this field, but he who shall borrow weapons and strength out of the word of God. Whereas he adds, that he gave glory to God, therein we are to note, there can be no greater honor given to God, than while by faith we subscribe to his truth: as again there is no greater contumely that can be done against him, than while the grace he offers is refused, or authority is taken from his word. Therefore this is the chief point of his worship, obediently to embrace his promises: and true religion begins at faith.

21 He which had promised, was also able to perform. Because all men acknowledge the power of God, Paul seems to say no excellent thing of the faith of Abraham: but experience teaches there is nothing more rare or difficult, than to give the honor which is due to the power of God. For there is no hindrance so small or light, whereby flesh and blood imagines not that the hand of God may be driven from his work. Upon this it comes that in the least temptations whatever, the promises of God slide from us. Out of controversy no man denies, God can do all: yet as soon as anything is objected which may hinder the course of God's promises, we throw down the power of God from his state. Therefore, to the end it might obtain its right, and honor among us, when we happen upon some comparison, we must needs determine thus: that the power of God is no less sufficient to overcome all impediments, or hindrances, than the shining of the sun is of force to disperse the clouds. We are accustomed to excuse that we derogate nothing from the power of God, as often as we doubt of his promises: namely, because this imagination, to wit, (that God has promised more in his word than he is able to perform, which were open perversity and blasphemy against God) is not the cause of doubting, but that same defect which we feel in ourselves. But we do not sufficiently advance the power of God, unless we think the same to be greater than our weakness. Faith therefore ought not to consider our own imbecility, misery and defect: but wholly to intend upon the only power of God. For if righteousness should depend upon our worthiness, it would never scale to the consideration of the power of God. And this is the examination of incredulity, of which he spoke lately: when we measure the power of the Lord by our own measure. Neither does faith so imagine God to be able to do whatever he will, that in the meantime it leaves him sitting idly: but rather does place his power in continual action. And specially it applies the same power to the effect of his word, that the hand of God might be always ready to execute whatever he has uttered by his mouth. I marvel why the relative masculine did please Erasmus: for although the sense is not thereby altered, yet I had rather come near to the Greek words of Paul. I know the verb is passive: but the asperity was to be mollified, by a little digression.

22 Therefore was it imputed. Here now appears more clearly, why, and how faith brought righteousness to Abraham: namely, because he leaning to the word of God, did not refuse the promised grace. And this relation between faith and the word is diligently to be retained, and committed to memory. For faith can bring us no more than he has received from the word. Therefore he is not straightaway righteous, who being endowed with a general and confused knowledge, grants God is true, except he rest in the promise of grace.

23 Now it was not written for him only, that it was imputed to him for righteousness.

24 But also for us, to whom it shall be imputed for righteousness, which believe in him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead.

25 Who was delivered to death for our sins, and is risen again for our justification.

23 Now it was not written. Because a proof taken from an example (as we have admonished above) is not always firm, lest that should come into question, Paul affirms plainly that in the person of Abraham was shown an example of that common righteousness, which indifferently appertains to all. In this place we are admonished of making our profit of examples in the scriptures. The Heathen have truly called a history the mistress of life: but as it comes from them, no man can safely profit in it: the scripture only does by right challenge that preeminence. For first it prescribes general rules, to which we may bring every history for trial, that it may serve to our profit. Secondly, it clearly discerns what deeds are to be followed, and what are to be avoided. And as for doctrine, wherein it is chiefly conversant, it has that peculiar to itself: as namely, it shows the providence of the Lord, his justice and goodness towards his, and his judgments towards the reprobate. That therefore, which is said of Abraham, Paul denies it to have been written for his cause only. For it is not a thing which appertains to the special calling of some one and certain person, but the manner of obtaining righteousness is described, which is one and perpetual among all: and this description is made in him that is the father of all the faithful, upon whom the eyes of all ought to intend. Therefore if we will handle the sacred histories purely and godly, we must remember they are so to be handled, that we may reap from there the fruit of sound doctrine. And partly they instruct us to frame our lives, partly to confirm our faith, partly to stir up the fear of the Lord. For the framing of our lives, the imitation of holy fathers shall help, if we learn of them sobriety, chastity, love, patience, modesty, contempt of the world, and other virtues. For the confirmation of our faith, the help of God makes, which was always present to them, his protection and fatherly care which he always had over them, shall minister consolation in adversity: the judgments and punishments of God executed upon the wicked, shall help us, if they put into us a fear, which may replenish our hearts with reverence and piety. And whereas he says: not for him only, thereby he seems to insinuate, that it was partly written for his sake: whereby some understand, that to the praise of Abraham it is said what he obtained by faith: because the Lord will have his servants committed to eternal remembrance: as Solomon says, Their name is blessed. But what if you take it more simply, (as though it were some special privilege which might not be drawn into an example) but that it also appertains to our instruction, who must be justified by the same manner? This shall be the fitter sense.

24 Which believe in him, and so on. I have already admonished, what value these circumlocutions be of: namely, Paul has inserted them, that according to the circumstance of the places, they might diversely show the substance of faith: concerning which, the resurrection of Christ is not the last part, which resurrection is to us the ground of the life to come. If he had simply said, that we believe in God, it had not been so easy to gather, what this did make to the obtaining of righteousness: but while Christ appears, and in his resurrection does offer a sure pledge of life, it is evident from what fountain the imputation of righteousness flows.

25 Which was delivered. He prosecutes and illustrates at large that doctrine which I touched immediately before. For it stands upon us not only to have our minds directed to Christ, but also to have it distinctly opened to us, how he has purchased salvation for us. And although the Scripture when it speaks of our salvation, stands only upon the death of Christ, yet here now the Apostle goes further. For because his purpose was, to deliver the cause of salvation more clearly, he reckons two branches thereof. And first he says, our sins are done away by the death of Christ: secondly, that righteousness is purchased by his resurrection. The meaning is, when we hold the fruit of Christ's death and resurrection, nothing is missing to us, as concerning perfect righteousness. And there is no doubt, but while he distinguishes the death of Christ from his resurrection, he applies his talk to our capacity: for otherwise it is true, the obedience of Christ which he showed in his death, was the righteousness purchased for us: as he also will show in the chapter following. But because by rising from the dead Christ declared, how much he had prevailed by his death, this distinction serves to teach us, that by that sacrifice, wherein sins are done away, our salvation was begun, and by his resurrection it was perfected. For the beginning of righteousness, is that we be reconciled to God: and the perfection is, that death being overcome, life might reign. Paul therefore signifies how satisfaction for our sins was accomplished on the cross. For that Christ might restore us again into the favor of the Father, it was meet our guiltiness were abolished by him: which could not be unless he would suffer that punishment for us, which we were not able to abide. For the chastisement of our peace was upon him, says Isaiah; and he chooses rather to say he was delivered, than dead: because the satisfaction depends upon the eternal pleasure of God, who would be pacified this way. And is risen again for our justification. Because it was not sufficient for Christ to oppose himself to the ire and judgment of God, and to take upon him the curse due to our sins, unless he should also go forth the conqueror thereof, that being received into the celestial glory, by his intercession he might reconcile God to us. The virtue or power of justification is ascribed to the resurrection whereby death was overcome: not that the sacrifice of the cross, whereby we are reconciled to God, did further our righteousness nothing: but because in the new life the perfection of this grace does more clearly appear. And yet I cannot consent to those, who refer this second member to newness of life: for the Apostle as yet has not begun to speak of the matter: secondly, it is sure that both members appertain to one end. Therefore if justification signifies renovation, then to have died for our sins, were to be understood in this sense, namely, that he died to purchase for us the grace of mortifying the flesh: which thing none grants. Therefore as he was said to die for our sins, because the price of sins being paid by his death, he has delivered us from the calamity of death: so now he is said to be risen for our justification, because by his resurrection he has perfectly restored life to us. For first he was smitten by the hand of God, that in the person of a sinner he might sustain the misery of sin: secondly, he was exalted into the kingdom of life, that he might endue his with righteousness and life. So then he speaks still of justification by imputation: and that which follows in the next chapter will prove the same.