羅馬書註 第 1 章

Having stated beforehand that, because of Adam's sin and the sentence of death, all the rest also sinned, he confirms that they sinned by adding:

"For until the law sin was in the world" (Rom 5:13).

Do not suppose, he says, that there was no sin before the Mosaic law, nor that sin was not reckoned against men;

for sin existed and was reckoned, since there was indeed a law.

What sort of law, then, does he indicate? The natural law, according to which we are moved to discern the better things from the worse—the law concerning which he had already said:

"For when the Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are a law to themselves" (Rom 2:14).

So then, even before the Mosaic law there was the law of nature.

But since sins existed and held sway, he says, death reigned from Adam until the establishing of the law, even over those who had not sinned nor transgressed a commandment of God after the manner of Adam, but had defaced the law of nature.

As for the phrase "who is a type of the one to come" (Rom 5:14), this means that Adam is a type of Christ—not according to sin or righteousness (for in these respects they were opposites), but according to his having come first;

for just as death was transmitted from Adam to all, so from Christ life was transmitted to all.

He is also a type in another sense:

for just as Adam was the head of Eve inasmuch as he was her husband, so also Christ is proclaimed head of the Church inasmuch as he is her bridegroom, as the Apostle also says:

"For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and shall be joined to his wife" (Eph 5:31).

"This mystery is great; but I speak concerning Christ and the Church" (Eph 5:32).

This seems to contradict what was set forth, namely that "death passed unto all men" (Rom 5:12);

for having spoken above of "all," he now speaks of "the many."

But one must understand that death indeed passed unto all, since all of us also sinned; yet it passed through all by searching out and testing them, but it laid hold not of those who merely sinned, but of those who persisted in their own sins—which he also makes clear through what follows, saying that "the many were made sinners" (Rom 5:19), by which he indicates the unchangeable character of their wickedness.

So then, death indeed passed unto all, searching them out and seeing them sinning, but it did not put all to death.

Now some supposed that a distinction of death was being indicated by these words—that by "all" bodily death was being signified, but by "the many" the death of fortune (i.e., spiritual death).

But the sequence of the argument here indicates none of these things;

for there is no such distinction in it, but he proceeds as concerning one universal matter.

He is eager, however, to show that even though the evil one contrived Adam's transgression, devising for himself a beginning of his dominion over men, yet the Lord, having sojourned among us, granted a greater gift of grace.

That is, the free gift outweighs the one sin of Adam;

for it was great and abundant, surpassing the sins of all by its lovingkindness—which, in teaching, he adds:

"For the judgment came from one unto condemnation, but the free gift came from many trespasses unto justification" (Rom 5:16).

For he means to say that Adam's sin was one, yet, being one, by one sin it condemned the many because of their imitating Adam; but the Lord's free gift was not measured against the one sin, but against the many sins of all.

So then, by delivering from many trespasses, it led men unto justification;

for in this consists the superabundance of grace: that it not only freed men from their trespasses, but also led them by the hand unto righteousness.

But the righteous act of the Lord gave life.

And what was Adam's trespass? Disobedience.

And what was the Lord's righteous act? The obedience by which he obeyed the Father in becoming man and suffering on behalf of mankind, as the Apostle says elsewhere:

"Being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross" (Phil 2:8).

So then, obedience overthrew disobedience, and by the best vanquished the worst.

By saying "that it might abound" (Rom 5:20), he showed that even before the law there were trespasses, and that men knew they were stumbling;

yet not everything in which they stumbled did they recognize as faults, but the law, once given, laid them bare and showed them to be more numerous than they had supposed.

And precisely did he say "the law entered alongside" (Rom 5:20);

for between Adam's disobedience and the Savior's coming, the law took a passing entry into life.

"But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound" (Rom 5:20).

Where, then, did sin abound? Where the law was.

And if the law was among the Jews, there too grace superabounded;

for from there came the evangelists and apostles and the chief point of salvation—Christ.

"What then shall we say?" he says. "Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid!" (Rom 6:1-2).

Firmly did he add "God forbid!";

for it is not those who sin by malicious craft who are worthy of forgiveness, but those who through carelessness and inattention receive the wiles of the devil—these are the ones who rightly receive mercy from God.

"We who died to sin, how shall we still live in it?" (Rom 6:2)—because, in being baptized, we confess that we have died to the world and renounce sin and the devil.

Precisely did he set down the word "grown together" (Rom 6:5);

for in the case of stocks grafted together, their natures are often united into one through the joining.

So then in this way also those who are genuinely baptized into the death of Christ are united to him through faith.

If it were possible, he says, for Christ to die twice or thrice on behalf of sinners, perhaps it would be without danger to run back again to the old habit of sins, always having a like hope of his lovingkindness;

but since, having once died, he dies no more, so we too, having been buried with him and raised with him, no longer die to sins;

for there is no second baptism, nor a second death of Christ.

Therefore one must live more securely.

"For in that he died, he died to sin once for all" (Rom 6:10), that is, on behalf of the sins of mankind;

"but in that he lives, he lives to God" (Rom 6:10), that is, he lives forever, inasmuch as he is God.

"So you also, be dead to sins, but live to God" (Rom 6:11), through whom you live.

"Do not present," he says, "your members as weapons of unrighteousness to sin" (Rom 6:13)—that is, do not yourselves hand over weapons against yourselves to the evil one, lending him strength by sinning.

"For sin shall not have dominion over you" (Rom 6:14);

"for you are not under law but under grace" (Rom 6:14).

What sort of sin shall not have dominion? That before baptism, which the grace of Christ forgives.

But this the law was unable to do.

You are not under the law, which cannot deliver, but rather punishes.

I was able, he says, to say something more perfect and greater, worthy of a surpassing benefit; but I tell you only as much as you can bear, being weak in the flesh.

Those who sin are hired as wage-earners by the devil in this manner:

selling self-control and buying licentiousness, vending kindness and receiving cruelty in exchange.

Such people, then, having become as it were the proper possession of sin, deliver themselves over to death;

"for the wages of sin is death" (Rom 6:23).

Or perhaps he means this: that the wages paid out by the enemy are productive of death.

For he sets both the law and Christ in the position of a husband;

the one [Christ as husband] of the Church, since just as the man is the source of the woman, so Christ is of the Church; and the law was once the husband of the synagogue.

"The law," he says, "has dominion over a man for as long a time as he lives" (Rom 7:1).

And as concerning a husband and one who dwells together with him, so he discourses concerning it [the law].

"For when," he says, "we were in the flesh" (Rom 7:5)—that is, in the law;

for those under the law gratified the flesh.

And precisely did he say "the passions which were through the law," not "from the law";

for the law did not furnish the power to sin, seeing that it commanded men not to sin.

He said, then, "through the law," because, in permitting indulgence, it gave occasion to the passions; so that the law did not produce what it willed, but what it did not will.

"But sin," he says, "I would not have known except through the law" (Rom 7:7).

He did not say, "But sin I would not have committed except through the law," but "I would not have known"; so that the law is responsible not for the doing, but for the recognizing of sin.

The law, then, is instructive, not permitting men through ignorance to fall away into the nature of irrational beasts.

This, however, must be inquired into: how is it that, having said here "I would not have known sin except through the law," he shows elsewhere that we have within ourselves the faculty of discernment, in the passage where he says:

"For when the Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are a law to themselves" (Rom 2:14).

By these words he establishes that even without the law it was possible to perceive what one ought to do.

But one must reckon that, even if it was possible, it was not so in all things.

Thus even now still, some things are practiced among certain nations as honorable and lawful, but among others are rejected as unlawful and base.

Therefore indeed the giving of the law was necessary, defining for us what is to be done and what is not, and articulating and illuminating for us the conduct of righteousness.

He seems to call the devil "sin."

Just as Scripture calls the Savior "life" and "righteousness" because he is the cause of life and righteousness, so also it calls the opposing power, from its proper activity, sometimes "sin," sometimes "falsehood," sometimes "death"; and thus also in what follows he says:

"Sin revived" (Rom 7:9)—he names the devil "sin."

"But sin, taking occasion through the commandment" (Rom 7:8).

How, then, did the devil take occasion through the commandment? Because, making the precepts of the law as it were a kind of material for his own craft, he turned man around to the opposite of the commandments.

And it is clear that by "himself" the Apostle indicates man in general.

"But when," he says, "the commandment came, sin revived, but I died" (Rom 7:9-10).

If it "revived," it is clear that it once lived, and having died, revived.

When, then, did it live? When Adam, having received a commandment and knowing the transgression to be deadly, was deceived and overcome by the devil.

And likewise also when [the devil overcame] Cain—for he too sinned knowingly, having been charged not to murder his brother—through the words "Have you sinned? Be still" (cf. Gen 4:7).

When, then, there was in the interval neither commandment nor law, sin lay dead through the ignorance of those who sinned;

for they were ignorant in most of their stumblings, so that they were not even condemned by their conscience.

What, then, follows from this? Was it advantageous not to give the law? But those destined to do well would have been harmed.

And it would be absurd, on account of the careless and pleasure-loving, to do away with the basis of salvation for the diligent and virtuous.

The law, he says, is a reproof of the devil's wickedness;

and he called the law "good" (cf. Rom 7:12-13).

The evil one, then, is shown to be exceedingly wicked, when through the good thing that was given he procured death for those who received the good law.

"Sinful," he says, "is sin" (Rom 7:13).

Most plainly now he has shown that by "sin" he meant the devil, and he has now named him "sinful";

for he is "sinful" who is the producer of sins.

Rightly is the law called "spiritual" (Rom 7:14);

for its precepts, when kept, made a man spiritual; or also because, he says, it was legislated by the operation of the Holy Spirit, so that those who obey it are able to become receptive of the Holy Spirit, having been cleansed by the tutelage of the law.

"Sold under sin" (Rom 7:14):

of his own accord neglecting the things commanded.

Not that he is ignorant that sin is sin, he says, but rather: how I do it and how I am stolen away I do not perceive—as, for example, often having resolved to master my anger, I was overcome by my own self.

One must, however, know that he does not accuse himself, but in himself sketches what is common to mankind, declining to lay the burdensome charge upon another;

for he shows that we long for virtue, yet are overcome by pleasure—as many of us as are under the law, but not as many as are under grace, who through grace have come to be outside of sin.

To the phrase "I find the law" (Rom 7:21) there is lacking the word "difficult to accomplish";

for he says: by reason of these things, even when I will to do something good, I am unable, but am turned aside to the worse.

I find the law difficult for me to accomplish, when I will to do the good;

for the evil things lie ready at hand for me to do them.

And by the word "lie ready at hand" he shows that it is not laborious to pursue wickedness.

Here too he depicts the man in general;

for it belongs to the common man to perceive with the mind what is fitting, yet by no means to accomplish it, but to him who has believed in Christ it belongs to accomplish it together with the mind, through the aid of the Spirit;

wherefore such a one is also called "spiritual."

And he shows that the devil, as it were, sets up a counter-legislation against the legislation of God;

for to whatever God commanded, he persuades men to do the opposite.

And very guardedly he says that the law of sin is "in the members" (Rom 7:23), showing that the soul is not pleased with the passions of the body, even if it is often dragged down along with it.

It must be noted that he says not simply "out of this body," but "out of the death of the body" (cf. Rom 7:24);

for he does not pray to be delivered from the body, but from the death that holds the body fast through sin.

He continues to expose the warfare of the old man against himself, since the body is not at peace with the soul.

He exposes these things in order to display the achievements of the Savior's coming, and the union and peace that came about between soul and body through the regeneration of the laver of washing.

He thus gathered together what he intended, and arrived at what he was establishing, saying:

"There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus" (Rom 8:1).

For having demonstrated that those under the law, inasmuch as they live according to the flesh, are under sin and condemnation, he added that those under Christ are not under condemnation, since they do not walk according to the flesh.

He said "the law of the Spirit" (Rom 8:2) in contradistinction to the law of the letter, that is, the life-giving grace which is from Christ.

"For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh" (Rom 8:3):

the law, he says, did not command impossible things, but the flesh was unable to fulfill the conduct of the law because of the evil one who hindered it—whom Christ condemned through his own flesh.

"God," he says, "having sent his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh" (Rom 8:3).

Whenever the Apostle looks to the Lord's flesh, which is truly flesh—of which he was both born and reared and lived his life in the world—he plainly calls it "flesh," as also here he adds:

"he condemned sin in the flesh" (Rom 8:3); and writing to Timothy [he speaks similarly of the flesh].

But whenever he looks to the sinlessness and purity and holiness of the flesh, he calls it the "likeness" of flesh—not because it differed in nature, but because it was like to sinful flesh.

God sent his Son, then, he says, not in the likeness of an angel or some such power, but in the likeness of flesh, so that—the flesh having been defeated in Adam—flesh might vanquish the evil one in the Lord.

The Lord was sent, he says, because of the sin that had gained mastery over men;

for this phrase "concerning sin" means "on account of sin," and the word "and" is superfluous.

The law is a righteous ordinance, but it was weak because it conceded to them to indulge themselves.

Why, then, did it make this concession? Because it would not have been accepted, had it not condescended to their weakness.

What good, then, did it do by condescending, if it did not justify? It recalled the mind that had fallen into the insensibility of ignorance.

"To those who do not walk according to the flesh," he says (Rom 8:4), meaning "according to the law";

for the law had fleshly observances, and to concede indulgence was also a fleshly thing.

"But you," he says, "are not in the flesh but in the Spirit" (Rom 8:9), meaning "you are not in fleshly desires, but you live in the Spirit."

"If indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you" (Rom 8:9).

Rousing them to keep the mind awake and not to grow slack as though they had already attained, he uttered the saying conditionally, saying:

"If indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you";

for to make them haughty and puffed up, as though they already had the Spirit of God, would have been harmful and sufficient to cut short their zeal.

Having spoken earlier of "the Spirit of Christ," he now again says, "the Spirit of him who raised Christ dwells in you" (Rom 8:11).

Tracing the Spirit back from Christ to the Father, he does nothing other than plainly teach that the Spirit, being from the Son, is not alien to the Father's deity; and for those whose operation is one, their essence too is altogether coeternal with the Father.

Consistently, then, when the Holy Spirit has indwelt and sin has been put to death, he says that prizes follow for those who contend, of which the first and greatest is the resurrection from the dead.

He called the law "a spirit of slavery," and those under the law "slaves" (cf. Rom 8:15);

for to be commanded by the law, and to fear the punishment threatened against those who neglect the command, is a sign of slavery; but to be permitted to call God "Father," on account of purity of life, holds out the hope of adoption.

And whether a spirit of slavery or of adoption was given, it is the same Spirit in both cases, having operated in each people according to what was expedient and fitting for each, in accordance with the worthiness of both.

He showed by this that he calls even the soul "spirit," whenever it is spiritual, and the gift of the Spirit too "spirit."

This, then, is what he says elsewhere:

"For we do not know what we should pray for; the Spirit himself intercedes for us with unutterable groanings" (Rom 8:26).

And this too requires interpretation;

there was such a gift of prayer, which existed in the time of the apostles.

Since we often ask even for things that are not expedient, on this account, in the apostles' time, someone who had the gift of prayer would rise up before the people and ask of God the things that were expedient, employing unutterable groanings, so that he might draw all to reverence and fear.

And this is what he says elsewhere:

"Each one of you has a psalm, has a prayer" (cf. 1 Cor 14:26).

So then there was both a gift of singing psalms and a gift of praying.

"And it bears witness together with our spirit" (Rom 8:16), since the one who had the gift prayed in the Spirit on behalf of the whole people, and in praying said, "Our Father who is in heaven."

For this reason, he says, the spirit of prayer bears witness together with our spirit which we have through baptism, that we are children of God;

"for the Spirit cries" (cf. Gal 4:6)—that is, the gift of prayer cries—"Abba, Father."

"If indeed we suffer together," he says, "that we may also be glorified together" (Rom 8:17).

"To suffer together" does not mean to feel pain together and to be distressed together with the one who has suffered, according to the ordinary sense;

for Christ did not suffer anything against his will, nor was he too weak to wish to ward off those who grieved him.

What, then, is it to "suffer together with Christ"? It is to choose to endure the same sufferings which Christ, in championing the truth, suffered patiently at the hands of the Jews.

If in the same manner we endure when persecuted, do not chafe when dishonored, and stand ready for death on behalf of godliness as having suffered together with him, then we shall also be glorified together with him in becoming children of God and joint-heirs of Christ.

Correcting this, he added that the fruit of our way of life is not measured out to us by God in proportion to our labors, but is many times multiplied and far surpasses the worth of what we have toiled for;

for God, being both good and just, preserves justice toward sinners, rendering to the one who has sinned as much as the nature of his sins demands; but he displays his goodness toward those who do well, not only giving them what is according to their worth, but even exceeding in his gifts the proportion of what they have practiced.

We shall be, he says, in so great a bestowal of good things from God, that the hope and expectation of creation awaits the revelation of the sons of God—that is to say, their hidden blessedness which will be revealed a little later.

But what is written gives to the many a suspicion that the visible creation is ensouled and that the world has a kind of rational perception;

for if it groans together and travails together and eagerly awaits the revelation, it is clear, he [the objector] says, that it also perceives and is moved by reason.

But this is not so; rather, by "creation" he now means not the inanimate substances, but the powers set over them—the powers appointed by God to administer the creation according to the will of the Creator, as it is written:

"When the Most High divided the nations, when he scattered the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the nations according to the number of the angels of God" (Deut 32:8 LXX).

And so too in the case of "Bless [the Lord], O cold and heat," and again "hail and snow" and the like, it must be understood as spoken to the powers set over these things;

for he does not bid insensible substances praise God.

For just as "Let all the earth worship you and sing to you" (Ps 66:4 LXX), and "The Lord reigns, let the earth rejoice" (Ps 97:1 LXX), refer to the men upon the earth; and "the wine shall mourn" and "the vine shall mourn" (cf. Isa 24:7) refer to the farmers set over them; so also now by "creation" he means the powers set over the inanimate substances, themselves also being created—just as "a man's attire and the laughter of his teeth and the gait of his foot shall declare the things concerning him" (cf. Sir 19:30).

Material nature being enslaved to the evil one and often plotted against by him by God's permission—so that famines and pestilences and diseases and wars and other forms of destruction are contrived by him—

for it is likely, when the inhabitants live impiously, that the evil one gains a foothold, trampling upon them as upon his own, and, to their injury, corrupting the elements around them.

When these things happen, the powers appointed over the good order of creation groan and travail and await the freedom of man, with whom creation too, being set free together, will be delivered from the authority of the devil.

What befalls the rational powers, then, he has attributed to the inanimate substance, as we too now say:

"The house is in tumult, the city is indignant, the country is angry"—often signifying, from the places administered and patrolled, those who administer and patrol them.

And in another sense too, creation awaits to be set free from the bondage of corruption, since by the contrivance of the devil it is, against its will, worshiped by its fellow-servants;

for "they revered and served the creation rather than the Creator" (Rom 1:25).

So then, enjoying against its will the honor due to the Master, it bears the matter heavily and travails and is grieved at the vain worship offered by men, and it longs for deliverance from these things.

And he says that it was subjected to him [the devil] neither willingly from the beginning nor by deserting to him, but it was subjected by God's permission, and was subjected in hope of what is to come.

In what hope? In this: that the creation itself also will be set free.

And when will it be set free? At the time of the freedom of the righteous;

wherefore rightly the earnest expectation of creation eagerly awaits the revelation of the children of God.

We have not yet received the perfection of the promise, which is the adoption through the redemption of the body (cf. Rom 8:23).

Not even in these passages does the discourse abolish free will;

for he first said that God foreknows, then that he predestines (cf. Rom 8:29).

And it is clear that foreknowledge is not coercive of the impulse and purpose of those who live their lives.

And what has been said would be clearer if, beginning from the last of the things stated here, we should ascend to the first.

Whom, then, did God here glorify? Those whom he justified.

And whom did he predestine? Those whom he foreknew, who are called according to purpose—that is, those who through their own purpose are worthy to be called and to be conformed to Christ.

Having shown through deeds that all things work together for good to us because of God's love toward us—to us whom he found called according to purpose—he adduces the great proof of God's love, which he displayed in not sparing his Only-begotten;

for what of it, even if death did not gain mastery over the Savior, seeing that it lay in the Lord's own power both to lay down his life and again to take it up? Yet nevertheless one must consider that Christ subjected himself to human sufferings, fulfilling both his own will and that of the Father.

Since, then, God orders all things on our behalf, who shall hinder? Who is so strong as to obstruct God's gifts to us? For rightly, he who did not spare his Son for our sake will also order all other things on our behalf and will add the grace of good things.

Necessarily he confirms the statement with the attendant oath;

for having said beforehand that there is nothing that can separate him from the love of Christ, he adds that he is overcome only by [his love for] his kinsmen.

He says, then, that for the sake of the Jews he would gladly give up both body and soul, so that what they have fallen from they might recover, by believing in Christ.

For what good thing did not belong to the Jews, in which the Gentiles now glory? The adoption, the glory, the covenants, the promises, the worship, the God-loving fathers, and—greatest of all—

"from whom is Christ according to the flesh" (Rom 9:5).

From them, he says, is Christ;

but God is not theirs only, but is in common the God over all.

From all these things, then, the Jews have fallen away; but in order that they might regain them, he says, I would gladly have become accursed, separated from Christ, on their behalf (cf. Rom 9:3).

And the word "accursed" (anathema) signifies that which is set apart as alien, since what is dedicated becomes alien to the one who dedicates it.

And of necessity he shows how great a disposition he has toward them, lest anyone suppose that his reproofs against them were spoken out of hatred.

Since he indicated that what had been promised to the Israelites was transferred to the Gentiles—which amounted to an accusation against God as falsifying his promises—he establishes God's truthfulness, showing that Scripture did not mean the Israelites according to the flesh, but those who through godliness show that they are worthy to be called Israelites and children of Abraham;

for "in Isaac," he says, "shall your seed be called," and what follows (Rom 9:7; Gen 21:12).

"In Isaac" means "through Isaac," which, interpreting, he says:

that is, "the children of the flesh are not these the children of God, but the children of the promise are reckoned for seed" (Rom 9:8).

He means to say that it is not those from the flesh of Abraham who are the children of God, but the children of the promise—that is, the godly and righteous, whom God by foreknowledge promised as sons to Abraham; since Isaac, having come into being through promise, was shown to be righteous;

for foreseeing him to be righteous, God also made the promise;

for God would not have promised to grant an impious son.

So then in this way too he promised that Abraham would become a father of nations, foreseeing the godliness of the nations that were to come.

"In Isaac shall your seed be called," that is, through the promise, after the type of Isaac, who was righteous and a type of the righteous.

And the whole drift of the argument is that the promise of God is according to foreknowledge, and the promise is according to righteous judgment; and as in the case of Isaac, so also in the case of the Gentiles.

It belongs to the very manner of his interpretation here that he sometimes speaks in transposed order, and sometimes places things in reversed sequence (hysteron proteron) and inverts them.

And the use of these [figures] is frequent, not only in the Old but also in the New Testament;

for the Apostle, to prove the point set before him, having made mention of both Esau and Jacob, speaks thus:

"For [the children] not yet being born, nor having done anything good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand" (Rom 9:11)—that is, the election according to their purpose;

for God did not, according to his own purpose, choose the one and reject the other—for, as far as it depended on him, he willed both to be good—but he made the election according to the purpose of each of these two, loving the one because of the excellence of his purpose, and hating the other because of the wickedness of his disposition; from which it is clear that the Apostle means "the election according to purpose," and not "the purpose according to election."

"What then shall we say? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid!" (Rom 9:14).

"I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion" (Rom 9:15; Exod 33:19).

"So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who has mercy" (Rom 9:16).

Since, before the birth of Esau and Jacob, God appears to have welcomed the one and hated the other, and this seemed to be unrighteousness to those who do not reckon the righteous judgment of God according to foreknowledge, he teaches us not to follow the example superficially, since many other such things are said about God in the Scriptures that bear a deeper meaning.

For behold, God says to Moses:

"I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion" (Exod 33:19).

"So then, according to you, it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who has mercy" (cf. Rom 9:16).

"And he who strives earnestly is superfluous."

For God is not unjust, so as not to give to each according to his worth.

He says, then, he says: not on all, but on the worthy [does he have mercy].

And again the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "For this very purpose I raised you up, that I might display in you my power, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth" (Rom 9:17; Exod 9:16).

So then, [it would seem] Pharaoh is not responsible, but the one who raised him up for the display of his own power.

But neither is this the case;

for he would not have raised him up—even though through him he was chastening the others—had he not foreseen him to be sick with an incurable disease.

But if nothing depends on us, as you suppose, O man, he says, but all things rest in God—both Pharaoh's being hardened and another's receiving mercy—you would consistently say:

"Why does he still find fault? For who has resisted his will?" (Rom 9:19); for if he himself works all things through us, we have nothing in our own power of the things we do.

"On the contrary, O man, who are you who answer back to God? Shall the thing formed say to him who formed it," (Rom 9:20)

Why did you make me thus?" (Rom 9:20) and what follows.

Correcting all that preceded, he indeed rebukes [his hearers] as those who too boldly pry into the will of God, but he also shows the lowliness of human nature, taking up a fitting image—the potter's clay.

For why, he says, do you pry into the Creator? The potter knows how to use the clay, and which vessels he is to make for dishonor and which for honor.

And the clay, being clay, ought not to judge the craftsmanship of the maker;

for even if you seem to have rational perception, O man, yet know that you fall as far short of God's economy and craftsmanship as insensible clay falls short of the potter's will.

Do not, therefore, presume to accuse God, nor suppose that he has mercy on one and hardens another at random, but [know] that according to the power of his foreknowledge he renders to each according to his worth.

So then it is not the one who foreknows who is responsible, but those who are foreknown, in whom it lies to be wicked or not.

That this lies in us, he teaches elsewhere;

for, treating of gold and silver and earthenware vessels, he says:

"If anyone, then, cleanses himself, he will be a vessel unto honor, sanctified" (2 Tim 2:21).

So then we provide the cause, but God renders according to worth.

Therefore let no one suppose, because God, ordering things according to foreknowledge, either raised up Pharaoh or hated Esau and loved Jacob, that on this account nothing depends on us, but that we have been stripped of free will.

Some supposed that the words "On the contrary, O man, who are you who answer back to God?" were not spoken by way of rebuke; for it is absurd, they say, after raising such great questions and throwing the hearer's mind into confusion, and resolving none of them, merely to rebuke those who inquire and simply to leap away from the matters under inquiry—together with the image of the potter, which seems to do away with our free will, if indeed the one who forms shapes the vessels as he pleases, and they remain just as they were made from the beginning.

And they say these things unworthily of the apostolic grace and teaching.

The saying was not spoken by way of rebuke, but the meaning is thus:

If, he says, from the facts that he raised up Pharaoh and hated Esau and loved Jacob even before their birth, you assign everything to the will of God, and [say] that nothing depends on us, then say further:

Who are you, O man, and how do you answer back to God? And how do you have authority to speak and to blame him as one who reproaches us unjustly, saying:

"Why does he still find fault? For who has resisted his will?" How, then, do you yourself blame God, if nothing lies within our authority, as you say? For if nothing depends on us, then not even the very blaming and answering back to God lies within your authority.

Do the potter's molded vessels, he says, since they have no perception, blame their maker, whether they turn out dishonorable or honorable according to the maker's authority? But you do blame; therefore you have perception and authority, having free will.

And he who has authority to blame is clearly also master of himself in other matters, both to say and to do what he wills.

For it is not the case that one is master of himself in blaming God, but has been deprived of his mastery in other matters.

This oracle came into effect through the blessed apostles, who, having written up the lengthy circuit of the old legislation, set the Gentiles upon a concise path of conduct, writing: "For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: to abstain from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from fornication, and from what is strangled" (Acts 15:28-29).

For having narrowed down the observance from many things to these, they made the conduct of righteousness easy—which the divine Apostle also teaches, saying:

"having abolished the law of commandments in ordinances" (Eph 2:15), and again, "having blotted out the handwriting against us in the ordinances" (Col 2:14).

Since, then, the law made many distinctions concerning foods, the apostles commanded only to keep oneself from things offered to idols and from blood and from what is strangled, and, in place of keeping circumcision, they introduced instead the keeping oneself from fornication;

for circumcision, even though it was a sign and reminder of Abraham's faith, was also given as a symbol of self-control, indicating that one ought to cut away licentiousness.

Since in what was said earlier he shows that the nation of the Jews is, for the greater part, rejected, while the Gentiles are introduced in their place into the dignity of adoption, he consistently inquires into the reason why those trained in the law have fallen away, while those who had no claim to the law were justified.

Resolving it, then, he adds that the Jews fell away from not running to faith as the Gentiles did;

for they willed to be justified by works of the law, not even believing the law itself, which had proclaimed the faith that was to be introduced in place of the legislation.

They did not recognize, he says, that through the law God promised the faith, and that faith is not contrary to the law, being attested by it.

The righteousness of God, then, is Christ and faith in him; but the righteousness of the Jews is the conduct prescribed by the legislation.

The Jews, then, being ignorant of Christ and establishing the conduct of the law, rightly fell away from salvation;

for those are saved who make progress in faith in Christ.

The one who has fulfilled the law, he says, will enjoy only those good things promised through the law, that is, "a land flowing with milk and honey."

The discourse teaches believers to entertain no doubt, neither concerning the Lord's descent to us from the heavens, nor concerning the resurrection of the dead and the ascent into heaven.

Necessarily he placed first "those who call upon him" (cf. Rom 10:12-13);

for God does not give grace indiscriminately, even to those who are unwilling to render to their Benefactor so much as at least to ask and to entreat.

And lest anyone say that it is not through unbelief and thanklessness, but through ignorance, that many do not call upon the Lord Jesus, he shows through what follows that God removed even the pretext of their ignorance, by sending evangelists and heralds to urge and call them to ask for the gift.

He seems, through the spreading out of his hands, to call the people to himself, together with stretching out his hands toward them, and by this same gesture also to indicate the figure of the cross (cf. Rom 10:21; Isa 65:2).

Again the Apostle, fearing lest the excessive rejection of the Jews should seem to produce a sect of disobedience, proceeds to the small remnant of the election of the apostles and of those who believed together with them.

"For not all who are of Israel, these are Israel" (Rom 9:6)—he indicated that there were some who were being saved, even if not all; and again:

"whom also he called, not only from among the Jews but also from among the Gentiles" (Rom 9:24).

As testimony to the remnant, he takes up the matters concerning Elijah, from which he shows him confessing that God preserved his people, not in a great multitude, but in seven thousand men; in likeness to which it also turned out in the case of the Savior, the remnant alone having received the grace of the promise (cf. Rom 11:2-5; 1 Kgs 19:18).

And it has already been said that faith brought the law to an end, and that grace prevailed over works (cf. Rom 11:6).

"But if by grace, then no longer of works" (Rom 11:6);

for grace indicates the lovingkindness of the one who bestows, but works demand recompense according to the worth of the works.

"What then?" he says. "That which Israel seeks, this it did not obtain, but the election obtained it" (Rom 11:7);

"all," he says, "who are of Israel were hardened, except the election";

wherefore they did not obtain what they were seeking.

And what were they seeking? The promise of becoming sons and heirs of the world.

It is customary for Scripture to attribute the things that befall men by God's permission to the one who permitted them.

And God permits each one's impulse to proceed to whatever it wills, lest, by forcibly drawing it, he should seem to take away the authority of freedom.

And what he says is of this sort:

For He gave them a spirit of stupor with respect to godliness, yet they neither see for themselves nor listen to others.

How then could they be saved, as he says also elsewhere:

"For I testify concerning them that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge."

Those who in the time of the Flood sinned incurably, and those around Sodom who transgressed in like manner, fell in such a way as to fall once for all and rise up no more, but to be utterly destroyed.

What then? Have the Jews also stumbled in this way, so as to fall to their ruin and be saved no more? "By no means," he says.

For their trespass has a twofold dispensation:

for the Gentiles were brought in instead, and the Jews themselves, provoked to jealousy on this very account, will turn back.

For since they had turned aside before the Law, and after receiving the Law were burdened rather than benefited, and neither yielded to threats nor were persuaded by exhortations, but always remained disobedient, the Savior turned to another dispensation, and the Gentiles are saved through their trespass, so that the Jews might at least be saved through being provoked to jealousy by the Gentiles.

Since the Jews did not keep the Law, the coming of Christ was necessary for the sake of grace;

but not all the Jews received Christ nor the grace that comes from Him, but only the remnant; while the rest, as though contending never to be saved, thrust the grace out to the Gentiles.

And through their trespass they bestowed riches upon the world, that is, a multitude of those being saved.

But if God enriched the world through the Gentiles who turned, how would it not be a yet greater good and the most perfect riches for the world, if, when the Jews repent, their lacking should be supplied to fullness, so that both Gentiles and Jews might run together into one perfect godliness?

For the apostle is accustomed to call "fullness" the body of people filled with godliness and the knowledge of God.

The firstfruits and root are the patriarchs, the lawgiver, and the prophets;

while the lump and the branches are the whole nation of the Jews.

What does "and so all Israel will be saved" mean? Just as we say that all the world and all the nations are being saved—because those who come to the faith come from everywhere and from all the nations—so too "all Israel will be saved" does not signify the entire people universally, but rather either those who will be found alive at the time of Elijah, or, of those scattered everywhere throughout the whole world, those who are destined to come to the faith.

What is being said is something like this:

if the former unbelief of these did in no way hinder the faith of the Gentiles, then neither, for the Jews who are now disobedient, is the authority of repentance with respect to the future shut off.

And the phrase "that they also may obtain mercy" does not mean this—that they sinned on purpose for this reason, in order to obtain mercy as you also did—but rather that, even having sinned, they are worthy to obtain mercy, just as you are.

Just as in the case of "God gave them up to passions of dishonor" and "God blinded the minds of the unbelievers," we do not take the saying as though God were doing evil, but as His permitting men to do what they will, on account of the freedom of self-determination;

so now too "God shut up all to disobedience" must be understood in this way: that He allowed those who willed to disobey to disobey, granting throughout to man the power to have it in himself to do what he wishes.

"God therefore shut up all to disobedience," that is, He permitted them to disobey—not in order to condemn those who persist in their sins, but in order that, in time, when they perceive the things in which they sin and repent and turn back, He might have mercy.

Or else "He shut up to disobedience" stands for "He convicted them of disobeying," and, as it were, He shut off from them every excuse, so that they might perceive that henceforth it is not by works, but by the loving-kindness and mercy of God that they are saved.

(a) So that no one might think that the word of his exhortation is merely human, he showed that it is by grace that he both speaks and teaches.

Since, then, arrogance is a most grievous disease, to which the Romans were especially prone, he leads them to act with moderation toward the most excellent habit of humility, drawing them on in accordance with the teaching of the Spirit.

He who knew the haughtiness of human nature washed the feet of His disciples, training them to be humble-minded, so that, having shared in grace and worked signs, they might not be puffed up by the grace and fall from the gift.

(b) "To each one," he says, "as God has apportioned a measure of faith"—that is, as He measured out grace to each according to his faith.

"Whether prophecy," he says, "according to the proportion of faith."

For there is wanting to the phrase "whether prophecy, according to the proportion of faith" the words "in prophecy let us display the grace," so that the sense may be like this:

having different gifts, whether prophecy, or service, or teaching—

those who have prophecy display the grace in prophecy;

those who have service, in service;

those who have teaching, in teaching;

and each one in the ministry entrusted to him.

And it is also called prophecy when one interprets the words of the prophet.

Service is the rendering of help toward the proclamation of the gospel.

Teaching is the instruction in things to be done, which those who have already believed in Christ are taught.

Exhortation is the encouragement by which we call those still in ignorance to the faith of Christ, not yet setting before them the goal of the Christian life, but instilling in them a desire by telling them that, if they believe in Christ, they will enjoy eternal good things.

"Sharing," he says, "in the commemorations of the saints."

The most obvious sense of the thought is to gather together in honor of the saints and to perform their commemorations on the day of their perfecting.

But it is also possible to say that it is especially fitting for those who aspire to virtue to share in the remembrances of the saints—that is, to remember them and to have their manner of life as a pattern for one's own conduct.

By saying "if possible," he hinted at what is impossible;

for even if we should escape all other enmities, yet the ordinance of godliness draws upon us the hatred of the ungodly, or our hatred toward the ungodly.

He calls "wrath" the punishment that comes from God—not as though it befell God by way of passion, but because men would not easily conceive of a vengeance proceeding from God unless they heard the customary term "wrath";

for since men, with anger and wrath, correct those who sin against them, Scripture ascribes these things to God, in a way that the multitude can hear and understand.