John Calvin.

Institutes of the Christian Religion.

Book Third.

The mode of obtaining the grace of Christ. The benefits it confers,
and the effects resulting from it.

Contents

1. The benefits of Christ made available to us by the secret
operation of the Spirit.
2. Of faith. The definition of it. Its peculiar properties.
3. Regeneration by faith. Of repentance.
4. Penitence, as explained in the sophistical jargon of the
Schoolmen, widely different from the purity required by the Gospel.
Of confession and satisfaction.
5. Of the modes of supplementing satisfaction, viz., indulgences and
purgatory.
6. The life of a Christian man. Scriptural arguments exhorting to
it.
7. A summary of the Christian life. Of self-denial.5
8. Of bearing the cross - One branch of self-denial.
9. Of meditating on the future life.
10. How to use the present life, and the comforts of it.
11. Of justification by Faith. Both the name and the reality
defined.
12. Necessity of contemplating the judgment-seat of God, in order to
be seriously convinced of the doctrine of gratuitous justification.
13. Two things to be observed in gratuitous justification.
14. The beginning of justification. In what sense progressive.
15. The boasted merit of works subversive both of the glory of God,
in bestowing righteousness, and of the certainty of salvation.
16. Refutation of the calumnies by which it is attempted to throw
odium on this doctrine.
17. The promises of the Law and the Gospel reconciled.
18. The righteousness of works improperly inferred from rewards.
19. Of Christian Liberty
20. Of prayer--a perpetual exercise of faith. The daily benefits
derived from it.
21. Of the eternal election, by which God has predestinated some to
salvation, and others to destruction.
22. This doctrine confirmed by proofs from Scripture.
23. Refutation of the calumnies by which this doctrine is always
unjustly assailed.
24. Election confirmed by the calling of God. The reprobate bring
upon themselves the righteous destruction to which they are doomed.
25. Of the last resurrection.

Subject.

    The two former Books treated of God the Creator and Redeemer.
This Book, which contains a full exposition of the Third Part of the
Apostles' Creed, treats of the mode of procuring the grace of
Christ, the benefits which we derive and the effects which follow
from it, or of the operations of the Holy Spirit in regard to our
salvation.
    The subject is comprehended under seven principal heads, which
almost all point to the same end, namely, the doctrine of faith.
    I. As it is by the secret and special operation of the Holy
Spirit that we enjoy Christ and all his benefits, the First Chapter
treats of this operation, which is the foundation of faith, new
life, and all holy exercises.
    II. Faith being, as it were, the hand by which we embrace
Christ the Redeemer, offered to us by the Holy Spirit, Faith is
fully considered in the Second Chapter.
    III. In further explanation of Saving Faith, and the benefits
derived from it, it is mentioned that true repentance always flows
from true faith. The doctrine of Repentance is considered generally
in the Third Chapter, Popish Repentance in the Fourth Chapter,
Indulgences and Purgatory in the Fifth Chapter. Chapters Sixth to
Tenth are devoted to a special consideration of the different parts
of true Repentance, viz., mortification of the flesh, and quickening
of the Spirit.
    IV. More clearly to show the utility of this Faith, and the
effects resulting from it, the doctrine of Justification by Faith is
explained in the Eleventh Chapter, and certain questions connected
with it explained from the Twelfth to the Eighteenth Chapter.
Christian liberty a kind of accessory to Justification, is
considered in the Nineteenth Chapter.
    V. The Twentieth Chapter is devoted to Prayer, the principal
exercise of faith, and, as it were, the medium or instrument through
which we daily procure blessings from God.
    VI. As all do not indiscriminately embrace the fellowship of
Christ offered in the Gospel, but those only whom the Lord favors
with the effectual and special grace of his Spirit, lest any should
impugn this arrangement, Chapters twenty-first to twenty-fourth are
occupied with a necessary and apposite discussion of the subject of
Election.
    VII. Lastly, As the hard warfare which the Christian is obliged
constantly to wage may have the effect of disheartening him, it is
shown how it may be alleviated by meditating on the final
resurrection. Hence the subject of the Resurrection is considered in
the twenty-fifth Chapter.

Chapter 1.

1. The benefits of Christ made available to us by the secret
operation of the Spirit.

    The three divisions of this chapter are, - I. The secret
operation of the Holy Spirit, which seals our salvation, should be
considered first in Christ the Mediator as our Head, sec. 1 and 2.
II. The titles given to the Holy Spirit show that we become members
of Christ by his grace and energy, sec. 3. III. As the special
influence of the Holy Spirit is manifested in the gift of faith, the
former is a proper introduction to the latter, and thus prepares for
the second chapter, sec. 4.
    
Sections.

1. The Holy Spirit the bond which unites us with Christ. This the
    result of faith produced by the secret operation of the Holy
    Spirit. This obvious from Scripture.
2. In Christ the Mediator the gifts of the Holy Spirit are to be
    seen in all their fulness. To what end. Why the Holy Spirit is
    called the Spirit of the Father and the Son.
3. Titles of the Spirit, - 1. The Spirit of adoption. 2. An earnest
    and seal. 3. Water. 4. Life. 5. Oil and unction. 6. Fire. 7. A
    fountain. 8. The word of God. Use of these titles.
4. Faith being the special work of the Holy Spirit, the power and
    efficacy of the Holy Spirit usually ascribed to it.

    1. We must now see in what way we become possessed of the
blessings which God has bestowed on his only-begotten Son, not for
private use, but to enrich the poor and needy. And the first thing
to be attended to is, that so long as we are without Christ and
separated from him, nothing which he suffered and did for the
salvation of the human race is of the least benefit to us. To
communicate to us the blessings which he received from the Father,
he must become ours and dwell in us. Accordingly, he is called our
Head, and the first-born among many brethren, while, on the other
hand, we are said to be ingrafted into him and clothed with him, all
which he possesses being, as I have said, nothing to us until we
become one with him. And although it is true that we obtain this by
faith, yet since we see that all do not indiscriminately embrace the
offer of Christ which is made by the gospel, the very nature of the
case teaches us to ascend higher, and inquire into the secret
efficacy of the Spirit, to which it is owing that we enjoy Christ
and all his blessings. I have already treated of the eternal essence
and divinity of the Spirit, (Book 1 chap. 13 sect. 14, 15;) let us
at present attend to the special point, that Christ came by water
and blood, as the Spirit testifies concerning him, that we might not
lose the benefits of the salvation which he has purchased. For as
there are said to be three witnesses in heaven, the Father, the
Word, and the Spirit, so there are also three on the earth, namely,
water, blood, and Spirit. It is not without cause that the testimony
of the Spirit is twice mentioned, a testimony which is engraven on
our hearts by way of seal, and thus seals the cleansing and
sacrifice of Christ For which reason, also, Peter says, that
believers are "elect" "through sanctification of the Spirit, unto
obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ," (1 Pet. 1:
2.) By these words he reminds us, that if the shedding of his sacred
blood is not to be in vain, our souls must be washed in it by the
secret cleansing of the Holy Spirit. For which reason, also, Paul,
speaking of cleansing and purification, says, "but ye are washed,
but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord
Jesus and by the Spirit of our God," (1 Cor. 6: 11.) The whole comes
to this that the Holy Spirit is the bond by which Christ effectually
binds us to himself. Here we may refer to what was said in the last
Book concerning his anointing.
    2. But in order to have a clearer view of this most important
subjects we must remember that Christ came provided with the Holy
Spirit after a peculiar manner, namely, that he might separate us
from the world, and unite us in the hope of an eternal inheritance.
Hence the Spirit is called the Spirit of sanctification, because he
quickens and cherishes us, not merely by the general energy which is
seen in the human race, as well as other animals, but because he is
the seed and root of heavenly life in us. Accordingly, one of the
highest commendations which the prophets give to the kingdom of
Christ is, that under it the Spirit would be poured out in richer
abundance. One of the most remarkable passages is that of Joel, "It
shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my Spirit upon
all flesh," (Joel 2: 2S.) For although the prophet seems to confine
the gifts of the Spirit to the office of prophesying, he yet
intimates under a figure, that God will, by the illumination of his
Spirit, provide himself with disciples who had previously been
altogether ignorant of heavenly doctrine. Moreover, as it is for the
sake of his Son that God bestows the Holy Spirit upon us, and yet
has deposited him in all his fulness with the Son, to be the
minister and dispenser of his liberality, he is called at one time
the Spirit of the Father, at another the Spirit of the Son: "Ye are
not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God
dwell in you. Now, if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is
none of his," (Rom. 8: 9;) and hence he encourages us to hope for
complete renovation: "If the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from
the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall
also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you,"
(Rom. 8: 11.) There is no inconsistency in ascribing the glory of
those gifts to the Father, inasmuch as he is the author of them,
and, at the same time, ascribing them to Christ, with whom they have
been deposited, that he may bestow them on his people. Hence he
invites all the thirsty to come unto him and drink, (John 7: 37.)
And Paul teaches, that "unto every one of us is given grace,
according to the measure of the gift of Christ," (Eph. 4: 7.) And we
must remember, that the Spirit is called the Spirit of Christ, not
only inasmuch as the eternal Word of God is with the Father united
with the Spirit, but also in respect of his office of Mediator;
because, had he not been endued with the energy of the Spirit, he
had come to us in vain. In this sense he is called the "last Adam,"
and said to have been sent from heaven "a quickening Spirit," (1
Cor. 15: 45,) where Paul contrasts the special life which Christ
breathes into his people, that they may be one with him with the
animal life which is common even to the reprobate. In like manner,
when he prays that believers may have "the grace of our Lord Jesus
Christ, and the love of God," he at the same time adds, "the
communion of the Holy Ghost," without which no man shall ever taste
the paternal favor of God, or the benefits of Christ. Thus, also, in
another passage he says, "The love of God is shed abroad in our
hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us," (Rom. 5: 5.)
    3. Here it will be proper to point out the titles which the
Scripture bestows on the Spirit, when it treats of the commencement
and entire renewal of our salvation. First, he is called the "Spirit
of adoption," because he is witness to us of the free favor with
which God the Father embraced us in his well-beloved and
only-begotten Son, so as to become our Fathers and give us boldness
of access to him; nays he dictates the very words, so that we can
boldly cry, "Abba, Father." For the same reason, he is said to have
"sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts,"
because, as pilgrims in the world, and persons in a manner dead, he
so quickens us from above as to assure us that our salvation is safe
in the keeping of a faithful God. Hence, also, the Spirit is said to
be "life because of righteousness." But since it is his secret
irrigation that makes us bud forth and produce the fruits of
righteousness, he is repeatedly described as water. Thus in Isaiah
"Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters." Again, "I
will pour water upon him that is thirsty, and floods upon the dry
ground." Corresponding to this are the words of our Savior, to which
I lately referred, "If any man thirst, let him come unto me and
drink." Sometimes, indeed, he receives this name from his energy in
cleansing and purifying, as in Ezekiel, where the Lord promises,
"Then will I sprinkle you with clean water, and ye shall be clean."
As those sprinkled with the Spirit are restored to the full vigor of
life, he hence obtains the names of "Oil" and "Unction." On the
other hand, as he is constantly employed in subduing and destroying
the vices of our concupiscence, and inflaming our hearts with the
love of God and piety, he hence receives the name of Fire. In fine,
he is described to us as a Fountain, whence all heavenly riches flow
to us; or as the Hand by which God exerts his power, because by his
divine inspiration he so breathes divine life into us, that we are
no longer acted upon by ourselves, but ruled by his motion and
agency, so that everything good in us is the fruit of his grace,
while our own endowments without him are mere darkness of mind and
perverseness of heart. Already, indeed, it has been clearly shown,
that until our minds are intent on the Spirit, Christ is in a manner
unemployed, because we view him coldly without us, and so at a
distance from us. Now we know that he is of no avail save only to
those to whom he is a head and the first-born among the brethren, to
those, in fine, who are clothed with him. To this union alone it is
owing that in regard to us, the Savior has not come in vain. To this
is to be referred that sacred marriage, by which we become bone of
his bone, and flesh of his flesh, and so one with him, (Eph. 5: 30,)
for it is by the Spirit alone that he unites himself to us. By the
same grace and energy of the Spirit we become his members, so that
he keeps us under him, and we in our turn possess him.
    4. But as faith is his principal work, all those passages which
express his power and operations are, in a great measure, referred
to it, as it is, only by faith that he brings us to the light of the
Gospel, as John teaches, that to those who believe in Christ is
given the privilege "to become the sons of God, even to them that
believe in his name, which were born not of blood, nor of the will
of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God," (John 1: 12.)
Opposing God to flesh and blood, he declares it to be a supernatural
gift, that those who would otherwise remain in unbelief, receive
Christ by faith. Similar to this is our Savior's reply to Peter,
"Flesh and blood has not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which
is in heaven," (Matt. 16: 17.) These things I now briefly advert to,
as I have fully considered them elsewhere. To the same effect Paul
says to the Ephesians, "Ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of
promise," (Eph. 1: 13;) thus showing that he is the internal
teacher, by whose agency the promise of salvation, which would
otherwise only strike the air or our ears, penetrates into our
minds. In like manner, he says to the Thessalonians, "God has from
the beginning chosen you to salvation, through sanctification of the
Spirit and belief of the truth," (2 Thess. 2: 13;) by this passage
briefly reminding us, that faith itself is produced only by the
Spirit. This John explains more distinctly, "We know that he abideth
in us, by the Spirit which he has given us;" again, "Hereby know we
that we dwell in him and he in us, because he has given us of his
Spirit," (1 John 3: 24; 4: 13.) Accordingly to make his disciples
capable of heavenly wisdom, Christ promised them "the Spirit of
truth, whom the world cannot receive," (John 14: 17.) And he assigns
it to him, as his proper office, to bring to remembrance the things
which he had verbally taught; for in vain were light offered to the
blind, did not that Spirit of understanding open the intellectual
eye; so that he himself may be properly termed the key by which the
treasures of the heavenly kingdom are unlocked, and his
illumination, the eye of the mind by which we are enabled to see:
hence Paul so highly commends the ministry of the Spirit, (2 Cor. 3:
6,) since teachers would cry aloud to no purpose, did not Christ,
the internal teacher, by means of his Spirit, draw to himself those
who are given him of the Father. Therefore, as we have said that
salvation is perfected in the person of Christ, so, in order to make
us partakers of it, he baptizes us "with the Holy Spirit and with
fire," (Luke 3: 16,) enlightening us into the faith of his Gospel,
and so regenerating us to be new creatures. Thus cleansed from all
pollution, he dedicates us as holy temples to the Lord.

Chapter 2.

2. Of faith. The definition of it. Its peculiar properties.

    This chapter consists of three principal parts. - I. A brief
explanation of certain matters pertaining to the doctrine of Faith,
sec. 1-14. First, of the object of faith, sec. 1. Second, of
Implicit Faith, sec. 2-6. Third, Definition of Faith, sec. 7.
Fourth, the various meanings of the term Faith, sec. 8-13. II. A
full exposition of the definition given in the seventh section, sec.
14-40. III. A brief confirmation of the definition by the authority
of an Apostle. The mutual relation between faith, hope, and charity,
sec. 41-43.

Sections.

1. A brief recapitulation of the leading points of the whole
    discussion. The scope of this chapter. The necessity of the
    doctrine of faith. This doctrine obscured by the Schoolmen, who
    make God the object of faith, without referring to Christ. The
    Schoolmen refuted by various passages.
2. The dogma of implicit faith refuted. It destroys faith, which
    consists in a knowledge of the divine will. What this will is,
    and how necessary the knowledge of it.
3. Many things are and will continue to be implicitly believed.
    Faith, however, consists in the knowledge of God and Christ,
    not in a reverence for the Church. Another refutation from the
    absurdities to which this dogma leads.
4. In what sense our faith may be said to be implicit. Examples in
    the Apostles, in the holy women, and in all believers.
5. In some, faith is implicit, as being a preparation for faith.
    This, however, widely different from the implicit faith of the
    Schoolmen.
6. The word of God has a similar relation to faith, the word being,
    as it were, the source and basis of faith, and the mirror in
    which it beholds God. Confirmation from various passages of
    Scripture. Without the knowledge of the word there can be no
    faith. Sum of the discussion of the Scholastic doctrine of
    implicit faith.
7. What faith properly has respect to in the word of God, namely,
    the promise of grace offered in Christ, provided it be embraced
    with faith. Proper definition of faith.
8. Scholastic distinction between faith formed and unformed, refuted
    by a consideration of the nature of faith, which, as the gift
    of the Spirit, cannot possibly be disjoined from pious
    affection.
9. Objection from a passage of Paul. Answer to it. Error of the
    Schoolmen in giving only one meaning to faith, whereas it has
    many meanings. The testimony of faith improperly ascribed to
    two classes of men.
10. View to be taken of this. Who those are that believe for a time.
    The faith of hypocrites. With whom they may be compared.
11. Why faith attributed to the reprobate. Objection. Answer. What
    perception of grace in the reprobate. How the elect are
    distinguished from the reprobate.
12. Why faith is temporary in the reprobate, firm and perpetual in
    the elect. Reason in the case of the reprobate. Example. Why
    God is angry with his children. In what sense many are said to
    fall from faith.
13. Various meanings of the term faith. 1. Taken for soundness in
    the faith. 2. Sometimes restricted to a particular object. 3.
    Signifies the ministry or testimony by which we are instructed
    in the faith.
14. Definition of faith explained under six principal heads. 1. What
    meant by Knowledge in the definition.
15. Why this knowledge must be sure and firm. Reason drawn from the
    consideration of our weakness. Another reason from the
    certainty of the promises of God.
16. The leading point in this certainty. Its fruits. A description
    of the true believer.
17. An objection to this certainty. Answer. Confirmation of the
    answer from the example of David. This enlarged upon from the
    opposite example of Ahab. Also from the uniform experience and
    the prayers of believers.
18. For this reason the conflict between the flesh and the Spirit in
    the soul of the believer described. The issue of this conflict,
    the victory of faith.
19. On the whole, the faith of the elect certain and indubitable.
    Conformation from analogy.
20. Another confirmation from the testimony of an Apostle, making it
    apparent, that, though the faith of the elect is as yet
    imperfect, it is nevertheless firm and sure.
21. A fuller explanation of the nature of faith. 1. When the
    believer is shaken with fear, he retakes himself to the bosom
    of a merciful God. 2. He does not even shun God when angry, but
    hopes in him. 3. He does not suffer unbelief to reign in his
    heart. 4. He opposes unbelief, and is never finally lost. 5.
    Faith, however often assailed, at length comes off victorious.
22. Another species of fear, arising from a consideration of the
    judgment of God against the wicked. This also faith overcomes.
    Examples of this description, placed before the eyes of
    believers, repress presumption, and fix their faith in God.
23. Nothing contrary to this in the exhortation of the Apostle to
    work out our salvation with fear and trembling. Fear and faith
    mutually connected. Confirmation from the words of a Prophet.
24. This doctrine gives no countenance to the error of those who
    dream of a confidence mingled with incredulity. Refutation of
    this error, from a consideration of the dignity of Christ
    dwelling in us. The argument retorted. Refutation confirmed by
    the authority of an Apostle. What we ought to hold on this
    question.
25. Confirmation of the preceding conclusion by a passage from
    Bernard.
26. True fear caused in two ways, viz., when we are required to
    reverence God as a Father, and also to fear him as Lord.
27. Objection from a passage in the Apostle John. Answer founded on
    the distinction between filial and servile fear.
28. How faith is said to have respect to the divine benevolence.
    What comprehended under this benevolence. Confirmation from
    David and Paul.
29. Of the Free Promise which is the foundation of Faith. Reason.
    Confirmation.
30. Faith not divided in thus seeking a Free Promise in the Gospel.
    Reason. Conclusion confirmed by another reason.
31. The word of God the prop and root of faith. The word attests the
    divine goodness and mercy. In what sense faith has respect to
    the power of God. Various passages of Isaiah, inviting the
    godly to behold the power of God, explained. Other passages
    from David. We must beware of going beyond the limits
    prescribed by the word, lest false zeal lead us astray, as it
    did Sarah, Rebekah, and Isaac. In this way faith is obscured,
    though not extinguished. We must not depart one iota from the
    word of God.
32. All the promises included in Christ. Two objections answered. A
    third objection drawn from example. Answer explaining the faith
    of Naaman, Cornelius, and the Eunuch.
33. Faith revealed to our minds, and sealed on our hearts, by the
    Holy Spirit. 1. The mind is purified so as to have a relish for
    divine truth. 2. The mind is thus established in the truth by
    the agency of the Holy Spirit.
34. Proof of the former. 1. By reason. 2. By Scripture. 3. By
    example. 4. By analogy.
35. 5. By the excellent qualities of faith. 6. By a celebrated
    passage from Augustine.
36. Proof of the latter by the argument a minore ad majus. Why the
    Spirit is called a seal, an earnest, and the Spirit of promise.
37. Believers sometimes shaken, but not so as to perish finally.
    They ultimately overcome their trials, and remain steadfast.
    Proofs from Scripture.
38. Objection of the Schoolmen. Answer. Attempt to support the
    objection by a passage in Ecclesiastes. Answer, explaining the
    meaning of the passage.
39. Another objection, charging the elect in Christ with rashness
    and presumption. Answer. Answer confirmed by various passages
    from the Apostle Paul. Also from John and Isaiah.
40. A third objection, impugning the final perseverance of the
    elect. Answer by an Apostle. Summary of the refutation.
41. The definition of faith accords with that given by the Apostle
    in the Hebrews. Explanation of this definition. Refutation of
    the scholastic error, that charity is prior to faith and hope.
42. Hope the inseparable attendant of true faith. Reason. Connection
    between faith and hope. Mutually support each other. Obvious
    from the various forms of temptation, that the aid of hope
    necessary to establish faith.
43. The terms faith and hope sometimes confounded. Refutation of the
    Schoolmen, who attribute a twofold foundation to hope, viz.,
    the grace of God and the merit of works.

    1. All these things will be easily understood after we have
given a clearer definition of faith, so as to enable the readers to
apprehend its nature and power. Here it is of importance to call to
mind what was formerly taught, first, That since God by his Law
prescribes what we ought to do, failure in any one respect subjects
us to the dreadful judgment of eternal death, which it denounces.
Secondly, Because it is not only difficult, but altogether beyond
our strength and ability, to fulfill the demands of the Law, if we
look only to ourselves and consider what is due to our merits, no
ground of hope remains, but we lie forsaken of God under eternal
death. Thirdly, That there is only one method of deliverance which
can rescue us from this miserable calamity, viz., when Christ the
Redeemer appears, by whose hand our heavenly Father, out of his
infinite goodness and mercy, has been pleased to succor us, if we
with true faith embrace this mercy, and with firm hope rest in it.
It is now proper to consider the nature of this faith, by means of
which, those who are adopted into the family of God obtain
possession of the heavenly kingdom. For the accomplishment of so
great an end, it is obvious that no mere opinion or persuasion is
adequate. And the greater care and diligence is necessary in
discussing the true nature of faith, from the pernicious delusions
which many, in the present day, labour under with regard to it.
Great numbers, on hearing the term, think that nothing more is meant
than a certain common assent to the Gospel History; nay, when the
subject of faith is discussed in the Schools, by simply representing
God as its object, they by empty speculation, as we have elsewhere
said, (Book 2, chap. 6, sec. 4,) hurry wretched souls away from the
right mark instead of directing them to it. For seeing that God
dwells in light that is inaccessible, Christ must intervene. Hence
he calls himself "the light of the world;" and in another passage,
"the way, the truth, and the life." None cometh to the Father (who
is the fountain of life) except by him; for "no man knoweth who the
Father is but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him." For
this reason, Paul declares, "I count all things as loss for the
excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord." In the
twentieth chapter of the Acts, he states that he preached "faith
towards our Lord Jesus Christ;" and in another passage, he
introduces Christ as thus addressing him: "I have appeared unto thee
for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness;"
"delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom
now I send thee," - "that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and
inheritance among them which are sanctified through faith which is
in me." Paul further declares, that in the person of Christ the
glory of God is visibly manifested to us, or, which is the same
thing, we have "the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in
the face of Jesus Christ." It is true, indeed, that faith has
respect to God only; but to this we should add, that it acknowledges
Jesus Christ whom he has sent. God would remain far off, concealed
from us, were we not irradiated by the brightness of Christ. All
that the Father had, he deposited with his only begotten Son, in
order that he might manifest himself in him, and thus by the
communication of blessings express the true image of his glory.
Since, as has been said, we must be led by the Spirit, and thus
stimulated to seek Christ, so must we also remember that the
invisible Father is to be sought nowhere but in this image. For
which reason Augustine treating of the object of faith, (De Civitate
Dei, lib. 11, ch. 2,) elegantly says, "The thing to be known is,
whither we are to go, and by what way;" and immediately after
infers, that "the surest way to avoid all errors is to know him who
is both God and man. It is to God we tend, and it is by man we go,
and both of these are found only in Christ." Paul, when he preaches
faith towards God, surely does not intend to overthrow what he so
often inculcates, viz., that faith has all its stability in Christ.
Peter most appropriately connects both, saying, that by him "we
believe in God," (1 Pet. 1: 21.)
    2. This evil, therefore, must, like innumerable others, be
attributed to the Schoolmen, who have in a manner drawn a veil over
Christ, to whom, if our eye is not directly turned, we must always
wander through many labyrinths. But besides impairing, and almost
annihilating, faith by their obscure definition, they have invented
the fiction of implicit faith, with which name decking the grossest
ignorance, they delude the wretched populace to their great
destruction. Nay, to state the fact more truly and plainly, this
fiction not only buries true faith, but entirely destroys it. Is it
faith to understand nothing, and merely submit your convictions
implicitly to the Church? Faith consists not in ignorance, but in
knowledge - knowledge not of God merely, but of the divine will. We
do not obtain salvation either because we are prepared to embrace
every dictate of the Church as true, or leave to the Church the
province of inquiring and determining; but when we recognize God as
a propitious Father through the reconciliation made by Christ, and
Christ as given to us for righteousness, sanctification, and life.
By this knowledge, I say, not by the submission of our
understanding, we obtain an entrance into the kingdom of heaven. For
when the Apostle says, "With the heart man believeth unto
righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto
salvation," (Rom. 10: 10;) he intimates, that it is not enough to
believe implicitly without understanding, or even inquiring. The
thing requisite is an explicit recognition of the divine goodness,
in which our righteousness consists.
    3. I indeed deny not, (so enveloped are we in ignorance,) that
to us very many things now are and will continue to be completely
involved until we lay aside this weight of flesh, and approach
nearer to the presence of God. In such cases the fittest course is
to suspend our judgment, and resolve to maintain unity with the
Church. But under this pretext, to honor ignorance tempered with
humility with the name of faith, is most absurd. Faith consists in
the knowledge of God and Christ, (John 17: 3,) not in reverence for
the Church. And we see what a labyrinth they have formed out of this
implicit faith - every thing, sometimes even the most monstrous
errors, being received by the ignorant as oracles without any
discrimination, provided they are prescribed to them under the name
of the Church. This inconsiderate facility, though the surest
precipice to destruction, is, however, excused on the ground that it
believes nothing definitely, but only with the appended condition,
if such is the faith of the Church. Thus they pretend to find truth
in error, light in darkness, true knowledge in ignorance. Not to
dwell longer in refuting these views, we simply advise the reader to
compare them with ours. The clearness of truth will itself furnish a
sufficient refutation. For the question they raise is not, whether
there may be an implicit faith with many remains of ignorance, but
they maintain, that persons living and even indulging in a stupid
ignorance duly believe, provided, in regard to things unknown, they
assent to the authority and judgment of the Church: as if Scripture
did not uniformly teach, that with faith understanding is conjoined.
    4. We grant, indeed, that so long as we are pilgrims in the
world faith is implicit, not only because as yet many things are
hidden from us, but because, involved in the mists of error, we
attain not to all. The highest wisdom, even of him who has attained
the greatest perfection, is to go forward, and endeavor in a calm
and teachable spirit to make further progress. Hence Paul exhorts
believers to wait for further illumination in any matter in which
they differ from each other, Phil. 3: 15.) And certainly experience
teaches, that so long as we are in the flesh, our attainments are
less than is to be desired. In our daily reading we fall in with
many obscure passages which convict us of ignorance. With this curb
God keeps us modest, assigning to each a measure of faith, that
every teacher, however excellent, may still be disposed to learn.
Striking examples of this implicit faith may be observed in the
disciples of Christ before they were fully illuminated. We see with
what difficulty they take in the first rudiments, how they hesitate
in the minutest matters, how, though hanging on the lips of their
Master, they make no great progress; nay, even after running to the
sepulchre on the report of the women, the resurrection of their
Master appears to them a dream. As Christ previously bore testimony
to their faith, we cannot say that they were altogether devoid of
it; nay, had they not been persuaded that Christ would rise again,
all their zeal would have been extinguished. Nor was it superstition
that led the women to prepare spices to embalm a dead body of whose
revival they had no expectation; but, although they gave credit to
the words of one whom they knew to be true, yet the ignorance which
still possessed their minds involved their faith in darkness, and
left them in amazement. Hence they are said to have believed only
when, by the reality, they perceive the truth of what Christ had
spoken; not that they then began to believe, but the seed of a
hidden faith, which lay as it were dead in their hearts, then burst
forth in vigor. They had, therefore, a true but implicit faith,
having reverently embraced Christ as the only teacher. Then, being
taught by him, they felt assured that he was the author of
salvation: in fine, believed that he had come from heaven to gather
disciples, and take them thither through the grace of the Father.
There cannot be a more familiar proof of this, than that in all men
faith is always mingled with incredulity.
    5. We may also call their faith implicit, as being properly
nothing else than a preparation for faith. The Evangelists describe
many as having believed, although they were only roused to
admiration by the miracles, and went no farther than to believe that
Christ was the promised Messiah, without being at all imbued with
Evangelical doctrine. The reverence which subdued them, and made
them willingly submit to Christ, is honored with the name of faith,
though it was nothing but the commencement of it. Thus the nobleman
who believed in the promised cure of his son, on returning home, is
said by the Evangelist (John 4: 53) to have again believed; that is,
he had first received the words which fell from the lips of Christ
as an oracular response, and thereafter submitted to his authority
and received his doctrine. Although it is to be observed that he was
docile and disposed to learn, yet the word "believed" in the former
passage denotes a particular faith, and in the latter gives him a
place among those disciples who had devoted themselves to Christ.
Not unlike this is the example which John gives of the Samaritans
who believed the women, and eagerly hastened to Christ; but, after
they had heard him, thus express themselves, "Now we believe, not
because of thy saying, for we have heard him ourselves, and know
that this is indeed the Christ, the Savior of the world," (John 4:
42.) From these passages it is obvious, that even those who are not
yet imbued with the first principles, provided they are disposed to
obey, are called believers, not properly indeed, but inasmuch as God
is pleased in kindness so highly to honor their pious feeling. But
this docility, with a desire of further progress, is widely
different from the gross ignorance in which those sluggishly indulge
who are contented with the implicit faith of the Papists. If Paul
severely condemns those who are "ever learning, and never able to
come to the knowledge of the truth," how much more sharply ought
those to be rebuked who avowedly affect to know nothing?
    6. The true knowledge of Christ consists in receiving him as he
is offered by the Father, namely, as invested with his Gospel. For,
as he is appointed as the end of our faith, so we cannot directly
tend towards him except under the guidance of the Gospel. Therein
are certainly unfolded to us treasures of grace. Did these continue
shut, Christ would profit us little. Hence Paul makes faith the
inseparable attendant of doctrine in these words, "Ye have not so
learned Christ; if so be that ye have heard him, and have been
taught by him, as the truth is in Jesus," (Eph. 4: 20, 21.) Still I
do not confine faith to the Gospel in such a sense as not to admit
that enough was delivered to Moses and the Prophets to form a
foundation of faith; but as the Gospel exhibits a fuller
manifestation of Christ, Paul justly terms it the doctrine of faith,
(1 Tim. 4: 6.) For which reason, also he elsewhere says, that, by
the coming of faith, the Law was abolished, (Rom. 10: 4,) including
under the expression a new and unwonted mode of teaching, by which
Christ, from the period of his appearance as the great Master, gave
a fuller illustration of the Father's mercy, and testified more
surely of our salvation. But an easier and more appropriate method
will be to descend from the general to the particular. First, we
must remember, that there is an inseparable relation between faith
and the word, and that these can no more be disconnected from each
other than rays of light from the sun. Hence in Isaiah the Lord
exclaims, "Hear, and your soul shall live," (Is. 4: 3.) And John
points to this same fountain of faith in the following words, "These
are written that ye might believe," (John 20: 31.) The Psalmist also
exhorting the people to faith says, "To-day, if ye will hear his
voice," (Ps. 95: 7,) to hear being uniformly taken for to believe.
In fine, in Isaiah the Lord distinguishes the members of the Church
from strangers by this mark, "All thy children shall be taught of
the Lord," (Is. 54: 13;) for if the benefit was indiscriminate, why
should he address his words only to a few? Corresponding with this,
the Evangelists uniformly employ the terms believers and disciples
as synonymous. This is done especially by Luke in several passages
of the Acts. He even applies the term disciple to a woman, (Acts 9:
36.) Wherefore, if faith declines in the least degree from the mark
at which it ought to aim, it does not retain its nature, but becomes
uncertain credulity and vague wandering of mind. The same word is
the basis on which it rests and is sustained. Declining from it, it
falls. Take away the word, therefore, and no faith will remain. We
are not here discussing, whether, in order to propagate the word of
God by which faith is engendered, the ministry of man is necessary,
(this will be considered elsewhere;) but we say that the word
itself, whatever be the way in which it is conveyed to us, is a kind
of mirror in which faith beholds God. In this, therefore, whether
God uses the agency of man, or works immediately by his own power,
it is always by his word that he manifests himself to those whom he
designs to draw to himself. Hence Paul designates faith as the
obedience which is given to the Gospel, (Rom. 1: 5;) and writing to
the Philippians, he commends them for the obedience of faith, (Phil.
2: 17.) For faith includes not merely the knowledge that God is, but
also, nay chiefly, a perception of his will toward us. It concerns
us to know not only what he is in himself, but also in what
character he is pleased to manifest himself to us. We now see,
therefore, that faith is the knowledge of the divine will in regard
to us, as ascertained from his word. And the foundation of it is a
previous persuasion of the truth of God. So long as your mind
entertains any misgivings as to the certainty of the word, its
authority will be weak and dubious, or rather it will have no
authority at all. Nor is it sufficient to believe that God is true,
and cannot lie or deceive, unless you feel firmly persuaded that
every word which proceeds from him is sacred, inviolable truth.
    7. But since the heart of man is not brought to faith by every
word of God, we must still consider what it is that faith properly
has respect to in the word. The declaration of God to Adam was,
"Thou shalt surely die," (Gen. 2: 17;) and to Cain, "The voice of
thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground," (Gen. 4: 10;)
but these, so far from being fitted to establish faith, tend only to
shake it. At the same time, we deny not that it is the office of
faith to assent to the truth of God whenever, whatever, and in
whatever way he speaks: we are only inquiring what faith can find in
the word of God to lean and rest upon. When conscience sees only
wrath and indignation, how can it but tremble and be afraid? and how
can it avoid shunning the God whom it thus dreads? But faith ought
to seek God, not shun him. It is evident, therefore, that we have
not yet obtained a full definition of faith, it being impossible to
give the name to every kind of knowledge of the divine will. Shall
we, then, for "will", which is often the messenger of bad news and
the herald of terror, substitute the benevolence or mercy of God? In
this way, doubtless, we make a nearer approach to the nature of
faith. For we are allured to seek God when told that our safety is
treasured up in him; and we are confirmed in this when he declares
that he studies and takes an interest in our welfare. Hence there is
need of the gracious promise, in which he testifies that he is a
propitious Father; since there is no other way in which we can
approach to him, the promise being the only thing on which the heart
of man can recline. For this reason, the two things, mercy and
truth, are uniformly conjoined in the Psalms as having a mutual
connection with each other. For it were of no avail to us to know
that God is true, did He not in mercy allure us to himself; nor
could we of ourselves embrace his mercy did not He expressly offer
it. "I have declared thy faithfulness and thy salvation: I have not
concealed thy loving-kindness and thy truth. Withhold not thy tender
mercies from me, O Lord: let thy loving-kindness and thy truth
continually preserve me," (Ps. 40: 10,11.) "Thy mercy, O Lord, is in
the heavens; and thy faithfulness reacheth unto the clouds," (Ps.
36: 5.) "All the paths of the Lord are mercy and truth unto such as
keep his covenant and his testimonies," (Ps. 25: 10.) "His merciful
kindness is great toward us: and the truth of the Lord endureth for
ever," (Ps. 117: 2.) "I will praise thy name for thy loving-kindness
and thy truth," (Ps. 138: 2.) I need not quote what is said in the
Prophets, to the effect that God is merciful and faithful in his
promises. It were presumptuous in us to hold that God is propitious
to us, had we not his own testimony, and did he not prevent us by
his invitation, which leaves no doubt or uncertainty as to his will.
It has already been seen that Christ is the only pledge of love, for
without him all things, both above and below speak of hatred and
wrath. We have also seen, that since the knowledge of the divine
goodness cannot be of much importance unless it leads us to confide
in it, we must exclude a knowledge mingled with doubt, - a knowledge
which, so far from being firm, is continually wavering. But the
human mind, when blinded and darkened, is very far from being able
to rise to a proper knowledge of the divine will; nor can the heart,
fluctuating with perpetual doubt, rest secure in such knowledge.
Hence, in order that the word of God may gain full credit, the mind
must be enlightened, and the heart confirmed, from some other
quarter. We shall now have a full definition of faith, if we say
that it is a firm and sure knowledge of the divine favor toward us,
founded on the truth of a free promise in Christ, and revealed to
our minds, and sealed on our hearts, by the Holy Spirit.
    8. But before I proceed farther, it will be necessary to make
some preliminary observations for the purpose of removing
difficulties which might otherwise obstruct the reader. And first, I
must refute the nugatory distinction of the Schoolmen as to formed
and unformed faith. For they imagine that persons who have no fear
of God, and no sense of piety, may believe all that is necessary to
be known for salvation; as if the Holy Spirit were not the witness
of our adoption by enlightening our hearts unto faith. Still,
however, though the whole Scripture is against them, they
dogmatically give the name of faith to a persuasion devoid of the
fear of God. It is unnecessary to go farther in refuting their
definition, than simply to state the nature of faith as declared in
the word of God. From this it will clearly appear how unskillfully
and absurdly they babble, rather than discourse, on this subject. I
have already done this in part, and will afterwards add the
remainder in its proper place. At present, I say that nothing can be
imagined more absurd than their fiction. They insist that faith is
an assent with which any despiser of God may receive what is
delivered by Scripture. But we must first see whether any one can by
his own strength acquire faith, or whether the Holy Spirit, by means
of it, becomes the witness of adoption. Hence it is childish
trifling in them to inquire whether the faith formed by the
supervening quality of love be the same, or a different and new
faith. By talking in this style, they show plainly that they have
never thought of the special gift of the Spirit; since one of the
first elements of faith is reconciliation implied in man's drawing
near to God. Did they duly ponder the saying of Paul, "With the
heart man believeth unto righteousness," (Rom. 10: 10,) they would
cease to dream of that frigid quality. There is one consideration
which ought at once to put an end to the debate, viz., that assent
itself (as I have already observed, and will afterwards more fully
illustrate) is more a matter of the heart than the head, of the
affection than the intellect. For this reason, it is termed "the
obedience of faith," (Rom. 1: 5,) which the Lord prefers to all
other service, and justly, since nothing is more precious to him
than his truth, which, as John Baptist declares, is in a manner
signed and sealed by believers, (John 3: 33.) As there can be no
doubt on the matter, we in one word conclude, that they talk
absurdly when they maintain that faith is formed by the addition of
pious affection as an accessory to assent, since assent itself, such
at least as the Scriptures describe, consists in pious affection.
But we are furnished with a still clearer argument. Since faith
embraces Christ as he is offered by the Father, and he is offered
not only for justification, for forgiveness of sins and peace, but
also for sanctification, as the fountain of living waters, it is
certain that no man will ever know him aright without at the same
time receiving the sanctification of the Spirit; or, to express the
matter more plainly, faith consists in the knowledge of Christ;
Christ cannot be known without the sanctification of his Spirit:
therefore faith cannot possibly be disjoined from pious affection.
    9. In their attempt to mar faith by divesting it of love, they
are wont to insist on the words of Paul, "Though I have all faith,
so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am
nothing," (1 Cor. 13: 2.) But they do not consider what the faith is
of which the Apostle there speaks. Having, in the previous chapter,
discoursed of the various gifts of the Spirit, (1 Cor. 12: 10,)
including diversity of tongues, miracles, and prophecy, and exhorted
the Corinthians to follow the better gifts, in other words, those
from which the whole body of the Church would derive greater
benefit, he adds, "Yet show I unto you a more excellent way," (1
Cor. 12: 30.) All other gifts, how excellent soever they may be in
themselves, are of no value unless they are subservient to charity.
They were given for the edification of the Church, and fail of their
purpose if not so applied. To prove this he adopts a division,
repeating the same gifts which he had mentioned before, but under
different names. Miracles and faith are used to denote the same
thing, viz., the power of working miracles. Seeing, then, that this
miraculous power or faith is the particular gift of God, which a
wicked man may possess and abuse, as the gift of tongues, prophecy,
or other gifts, it is not strange that he separates it from charity.
Their whole error lies in this, that while the term faith has a
variety of meanings, overlooking this variety, they argue as if its
meaning were invariably one and the same. The passage of James, by
which they endeavor to defend their error, will be elsewhere
discussed, (infra, chap. 17, sec. 11.) Although, in discoursing of
faith, we admit that it has a variety of forms; yet, when our object
is to show what knowledge of God the wicked possess, we hold and
maintain, in accordance with Scripture, that the pious only have
faith. Multitudes undoubtedly believe that God is, and admit the
truth of the Gospel History, and the other parts of Scripture, in
the same way in which they believe the records of past events, or
events which they have actually witnessed. There are some who go
even farther: they regard the Word of God as an infallible oracle;
they do not altogether disregard its precepts, but are moved to some
degree by its threatening and promises. To such the testimony of
faith is attributed, but by catachresis; because they do not with
open impiety impugn, reject, or condemn, the Word of God, but rather
exhibit some semblance of obedience.
    10. But as this shadow or image of faith is of no moment, so it
is unworthy of the name. How far it differs from true faith will
shortly be explained at length. Here, however, we may just indicate
it in passing. Simon Magus is said to have believed, though he soon
after gave proof of his unbelief, (Acts 8: 13-18.) In regard to the
faith attributed to him, we do not understand with some, that he
merely pretended a belief which had no existence in his heart: we
rather think that, overcome by the majesty of the Gospel, he yielded
some kind of assent, and so far acknowledged Christ to be the author
of life and salvation, as willingly to assume his name. In like
manner, in the Gospel of Luke, those in whom the seed of the word is
choked before it brings forth fruit, or in whom, from having no
depth of earth, it soon withereth away, are said to believe for a
time. Such, we doubt not, eagerly receive the word with a kind of
relish, and have some feeling of its divine power, so as not only to
impose upon men by a false semblance of faith, but even to impose
upon themselves. They imagine that the reverence which they give to
the word is genuine piety, because they have no idea of any impiety
but that which consists in open and avowed contempt. But whatever
that assent may be, it by no means penetrates to the heart, so as to
have a fixed seat there. Although it sometimes seems to have planted
its roots, these have no life in them. The human heart has so many
recesses for vanity, so many lurking places for falsehood, is so
shrouded by fraud and hypocrisy, that it often deceives itself. Let
those who glory in such semblances of faith know that, in this
respect, they are not a whit superior to devils. The one class,
indeed, is inferior to them, inasmuch as they are able without
emotion to hear and understand things, the knowledge of which makes
devils tremble, (James 2: 19.) The other class equals them in this,
that whatever be the impression made upon them, its only result is
terror and consternation.
    11. I am aware it seems unaccountable to some how faith is
attributed to the reprobate, seeing that it is declared by Paul to
be one of the fruits of election; and yet the difficulty is easily
solved: for though none are enlightened into faith, and truly feel
the efficacy of the Gospel, with the exception of those who are
fore-ordained to salvation, yet experience shows that the reprobate
are sometimes affected in a way so similar to the elect, that even
in their own judgment there is no difference between them. Hence it
is not strange, that by the Apostle a taste of heavenly gifts, and
by Christ himself a temporary faith, is ascribed to them. Not that
they truly perceive the power of spiritual grace and the sure light
of faith; but the Lord, the better to convict them, and leave them
without excuse, instills into their minds such a sense of his
goodness as can be felt without the Spirit of adoption. Should it be
objected, that believers have no stronger testimony to assure them
of their adoption, I answer, that though there is a great
resemblance and affinity between the elect of God and those who are
impressed for a time with a fading faith, yet the elect alone have
that full assurance which is extolled by Paul, and by which they are
enabled to cry, Abba, Father. Therefore, as God regenerates the
elect only for ever by incorruptible seed, as the seed of life once
sown in their hearts never perishes, so he effectually seals in them
the grace of his adoption, that it may be sure and steadfast. But in
this there is nothing to prevent an inferior operation of the Spirit
from taking its course in the reprobate. Meanwhile, believers are
taught to examine themselves carefully and humbly, lest carnal
security creep in and take the place of assurance of faith. We may
add, that the reprobate never have any other than a confused sense
of grace, laying hold of the shadow rather than the substance,
because the Spirit properly seals the forgiveness of sins in the
elect only, applying it by special faith to their use. Still it is
correctly said, that the reprobate believe God to be propitious to
them, inasmuch as they accept the gift of reconciliation, though
confusedly and without due discernment; not that they are partakers
of the same faith or regeneration with the children of God; but
because, under a covering of hypocrisy, they seem to have a
principle of faith in common with them. Nor do I even deny that God
illumines their minds to this extent, that they recognize his grace;
but that conviction he distinguishes from the peculiar testimony
which he gives to his elect in this respect, that the reprobate
never attain to the full result or to fruition. When he shows
himself propitious to them, it is not as if he had truly rescued
them from death, and taken them under his protection. He only gives
them a manifestation of his present mercy. In the elect alone he
implants the living root of faith, so that they persevere even to
the end. Thus we dispose of the objection, that if God truly
displays his grace, it must endure for ever. There is nothing
inconsistent in this with the fact of his enlightening some with a
present sense of grace, which afterwards proves evanescent.
    12. Although faith is a knowledge of the divine favor towards
us, and a full persuasion of its truth, it is not strange that the
sense of the divine love, which though akin to faith differs much
from it, vanishes in those who are temporarily impressed. The will
of God is, I confess, immutable, and his truth is always consistent
with itself; but I deny that the reprobate ever advance so far as to
penetrate to that secret revelation which Scripture reserves for the
elect only. I therefore deny that they either understand his will
considered as immutable, or steadily embrace his truth, inasmuch as
they rest satisfied with an evanescent impression; just as a tree
not planted deep enough may take root, but will in process of time
wither away, though it may for several years not only put forth
leaves and flowers, but produce fruit. In short, as by the revolt of
the first man, the image of God could be effaced from his mind and
soul, so there is nothing strange in His shedding some rays of grace
on the reprobate, and afterwards allowing these to be extinguished.
There is nothing to prevent His giving some a slight knowledge of
his Gospel, and imbuing others thoroughly. Meanwhile, we must
remember that however feeble and slender the faith of the elect may
be, yet as the Spirit of God is to them a sure earnest and seal of
their adoption, the impression once engraven can never be effaced
from their hearts, whereas the light which glimmers in the reprobate
is afterwards quenched. Nor can it be said that the Spirit therefore
deceives, because he does not quicken the seed which lies in their
hearts so as to make it ever remain incorruptible as in the elect. I
go farther: seeing it is evident, from the doctrine of Scripture and
from daily experience, that the reprobate are occasionally impressed
with a sense of divine grace, some desire of mutual love must
necessarily be excited in their hearts. Thus for a time a pious
affection prevailed in Saul, disposing him to love God. Knowing that
he was treated with paternal kindness, he was in some degree
attracted by it. But as the reprobate have no rooted conviction of
the paternal love of God, so they do not in return yield the love of
sons, but are led by a kind of mercenary affection. The Spirit of
love was given to Christ alone, for the express purpose of
conferring this Spirit upon his members; and there can be no doubt
that the following words of Paul apply to the elect only: "The love
of God is shed abroad in our hearts, by the Holy Ghost which is
given unto us," (Rom. 5: 5;) namely, the love which begets that
confidence in prayer to which I have above adverted. On the other
hand, we see that God is mysteriously offended with his children,
though he ceases not to love them. He certainly hates them not, but
he alarms them with a sense of his anger, that he may humble the
pride of the flesh, arouse them from lethargy, and urge them to
repentance. Hence they, at the same instant, feel that he is angry
with them or their sins, and also propitious to their persons. It is
not from fictitious dread that they deprecate his anger, and yet
they retake themselves to him with tranquil confidence. It hence
appears that the faith of some, though not true faith, is not mere
pretence. They are borne along by some sudden impulse of zeal, and
erroneously impose upon themselves, sloth undoubtedly preventing
them from examining their hearts with due care. Such probably was
the case of those whom John describes as believing on Christ; but of
whom he says, "Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he
knew all men, and needed not that any should testify of man: for he
knew what was in man," (John 2: 24, 25.) Were it not true that many
fall away from the common faith, (I call it common, because there is
a great resemblance between temporary and living, everduring faith,)
Christ would not have said to his disciples, "If ye continue in my
word, then are ye my disciples indeed; and ye shall know the truth,
and the truth shall make you free," (John 8: 31, 32.) He is
addressing those who had embraced his doctrine, and urging them to
progress in the faith, lest by their sluggishness they extinguish
the light which they have received. Accordingly, Paul claims faith
as the peculiar privilege of the elect, intimating that many, from
not being properly rooted, fall away, (Tit. 1: 1.) In the same way,
in Matthew, our Savior says, "Every plant which my heavenly Father
has not planted shall be rooted up," (Matth. 16: 13.) Some who are
not ashamed to insult God and man are more grossly false. Against
this class of men, who profane the faith by impious and lying
pretence, James inveighs, (James 2: 14.) Nor would Paul require the
faith of believers to be unfeigned, (1 Tim. 1: 5,) were there not
many who presumptuously arrogate to themselves what they have not,
deceiving others, and sometimes even themselves, with empty show.
Hence he compares a good conscience to the ark in which faith is
preserved, because many, by falling away, have in regard to it made
shipwreck.
    13. It is necessary to attend to the ambiguous meaning of the
term: for faith is often equivalent in meaning to sound doctrine, as
in the passage which we lately quoted, and in the same epistle where
Paul enjoins the deacons to hold "the mystery of the faith in a pure
conscience;" in like manner, when he denounces the defection of
certain from the faith. The meaning again is the same, when he says
that Timothy had been brought up in the faith; and in like manner,
when he says that profane babblings and oppositions of science,
falsely so called, lead many away from the faith. Such persons he
elsewhere calls reprobate as to the faith. On the other hand, when
he enjoins Titus, "Rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in
the faith;" by soundness he means purity of doctrine, which is
easily corrupted, and degenerates through the fickleness of men. And
indeed, since in Christ, as possessed by faith, are "hid all the
treasures of wisdom and knowledge," (Col. 1: 2, 3,) the term faith
is justly extended to the whole sum of heavenly doctrine, from which
it cannot be separated. On the other hand, it is sometimes confined
to a particular object, as when Matthew says of those who let down
the paralytic through the roof, that Jesus saw their faith, (Matth.
9: 2;) and Jesus himself exclaims in regard to the centurion, "I
have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel," (Matth. 8: 10.)
Now, it is probable that the centurion was thinking only of the cure
of his son, by whom his whole soul was engrossed; but because he is
satisfied with the simple answer and assurance of Christ, and does
not request his bodily presence, this circumstance calls forth the
eulogium on his faith. And we have lately shown how Paul uses the
term faith for the gift of miracles - a gift possessed by persons
who were neither regenerated by the Spirit of God, nor sincerely
reverenced him. In another passage, he uses faith for the doctrine
by which we are instructed in the faith. For when he says, that
"that which is in part shall be done away," (1 Cor. 13: 10,) there
can be no doubt that reference is made to the ministry of the
Church, which is necessary in our present imperfect state; in these
forms of expression the analogy is obvious. But when the name of
faith is improperly transferred to a false profession or lying
assumption, the catachresis ought not to seem harsher than when the
fear of God is used for vicious and perverse worship; as when it is
repeatedly said in sacred history, that the foreign nations which
had been transported to Samaria and the neighbouring districts,
feared false gods and the God of Israel: in other words, confounded
heaven with earth. But we have now been inquiring what the faith is,
which distinguishes the children of God from unbelievers, the faith
by which we invoke God the Father, by which we pass from death unto
life, and by which Christ our eternal salvation and life dwells in
us. Its power and nature have, I trust, been briefly and clearly
explained.
    14. Let us now again go over the parts of the definition
separately: I should think that, after a careful examination of
them, no doubt will remain. By knowledge we do not mean
comprehension, such as that which we have of things falling under
human sense. For that knowledge is so much superior, that the human
mind must far surpass and go beyond itself in order to reach it. Nor
even when it has reached it does it comprehend what it feels, but
persuaded of what it comprehends not, it understands more from mere
certainty of persuasion than it could discern of any human matter by
its own capacity. Hence it is elegantly described by Paul as ability
"to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and
depth, and height; and to know the love of Christ, which passeth
knowledge," (Eph. 3: 18, 19.) His object was to intimate, that what
our mind embraces by faith is every way infinite, that this kind of
knowledge far surpasses all understanding. But because the "mystery
which has been hid from ages and from generations" is now "made
manifest to the saints," (Col. 1: 26,) faith is, for good reason,
occasionally termed in Scripture understanding, (Col. 2: 2;) and
knowledge, as by John, (1 John 3: 2,) when he declares that
believers know themselves to be the sons of God. And certainly they
do know, but rather as confirmed by a belief of the divine veracity
than taught by any demonstration of reason. This is also indicated
by Paul when he says, that "whilst we are at home in the body, we
are absent from the Lord: (For we walk by faith, not by sight,)" (2
Cor. 5: 6, 7:) thus showing, that what we understand by faith is yet
distant from us and escapes our view. Hence we conclude that the
knowledge of faith consists more of certainty than discernment.
    15. We add, that it is sure and firm, the better to express
strength and constancy of persuasion. For as faith is not contented
with a dubious and fickle opinion, so neither is it contented with
an obscure and ill-defined conception. The certainty which it
requires must be full and decisive, as is usual in regard to matters
ascertained and proved. So deeply rooted in our hearts is unbelief,
so prone are we to it, that while all confess with the lips that God
is faithful, no man ever believes it without an arduous struggle.
Especially when brought to the test, we by our wavering betray the
vice which lurked within. Nor is it without cause that the Holy
Spirit bears such distinguished testimony to the authority of God,
in order that it may cure the disease of which I have spoken, and
induce us to give full credit to the divine promises: "The words of
the Lord" (says David, Ps. 12: 6) "are pure words, as silver tried
in a furnace of earth purified seven times:" "The word of the Lord
is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him," (Ps. 18:
30.) And Solomon declares the same thing almost in the same words,
"Every word of God is pure," (Prov. 30: 5.) But further quotation is
superfluous, as the 119th Psalm is almost wholly occupied with this
subject. Certainly, whenever God thus recommends his word, he
indirectly rebukes our unbelief, the purport of all that is said
being to eradicate perverse doubt from our hearts. There are very
many also who form such an idea of the divine mercy as yields them
very little comfort. For they are harassed by miserable anxiety
while they doubt whether God will be merciful to them. They think,
indeed, that they are most fully persuaded of the divine mercy, but
they confine it within too narrow limits. The idea they entertain
is, that this mercy is great and abundant, is shed upon many, is
offered and ready to be bestowed upon all; but that it is uncertain
whether it will reach to them individually, or rather whether they
can reach to it. Thus their knowledge stopping short leaves them
only mid-way; not so much confirming and tranquilizing the mind as
harassing it with doubt and disquietude. Very different is that
feeling of full assurance ("pleroforia") which the Scriptures
uniformly attribute to faith - an assurance which leaves no doubt
that the goodness of God is clearly offered to us. This assurance we
cannot have without truly perceiving its sweetness, and experiencing
it in ourselves. Hence from faith the Apostle deduces confidence,
and from confidence boldness. His words are, "In whom (Christ) we
have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him," (Eph.
3: 12:) thus undoubtedly showing that our faith is not true unless
it enables us to appear calmly in the presence of God. Such boldness
springs only from confidence in the divine favor and salvation. So
true is this, that the term faith is often used as equivalent to
confidence.
    16. The principal hinge on which faith turns is this: We must
not suppose that any promises of mercy which the Lord offers are
only true out of us, and not at all in us: we should rather make
them ours by inwardly embracing them. In this way only is engendered
that confidence which he elsewhere terms peace, (Rom. 5: 1;) though
perhaps he rather means to make peace follow from it. This is the
security which quiets and calms the conscience in the view of the
judgment of God, and without which it is necessarily vexed and
almost torn with tumultuous dread, unless when it happens to slumber
for a moment, forgetful both of God and of itself. And verily it is
but for a moment. It never long enjoys that miserable obliviousness,
for the memory of the divine judgment, ever and anon recurring,
stings it to the quick. In one word, he only is a true believer who,
firmly persuaded that God is reconciled, and is a kind Father to
him, hopes everything from his kindness, who, trusting to the
promises of the divine favor, with undoubting confidence anticipates
salvation; as the Apostle shows in these words, "We are made
partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence
steadfast unto the end," (Heb. 3: 14.) He thus holds, that none hope
well in the Lord save those who confidently glory in being the heirs
of the heavenly kingdom. No man, I say, is a believer but he who,
trusting to the security of his salvation, confidently triumphs over
the devil and death, as we are taught by the noble exclamation of
Paul, "I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor
principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to
separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our
Lord," (Rom. 8: 38.) In like manner, the same Apostle does not
consider that the eyes of our understanding are enlightened unless
we know what is the hope of the eternal inheritance to which we are
called, (Eph. 1: 18.) Thus he uniformly intimates throughout his
writings, that the goodness of God is not properly comprehended when
security does not follow as its fruit.
    17. But it will be said that this differs widely from the
experience of believers, who, in recognizing the grace of God toward
them, not only feel disquietude, (this often happens,) but sometimes
tremble, overcome with terror, so violent are the temptations which
assail their minds. This scarcely seems consistent with certainty of
faith. It is necessary to solve this difficulty, in order to
maintain the doctrine above laid down. When we say that faith must
be certain and secure, we certainly speak not of an assurance which
is never affected by doubt, nor a security which anxiety never
assails; we rather maintain that believers have a perpetual struggle
with their own distrust, and are thus far from thinking that their
consciences possess a placid quiet, uninterrupted by perturbation.
On the other hand, whatever be the mode in which they are assailed,
we deny that they fall off and abandon that sure confidence which
they have formed in the mercy of God. Scripture does not set before
us a brighter or more memorable example of faith than in David,
especially if regard be had to the constant tenor of his life. And
yet how far his mind was from being always at peace is declared by
innumerable complaints, of which it will be sufficient to select a
few. When he rebukes the turbulent movements of his soul, what else
is it but a censure of his unbelief? "Why art thou cast down, my
soul? and why art thou disquieted in me? hope thou in God," (Psalm
42: 6.) His alarm was undoubtedly a manifest sign of distrust, as if
he thought that the Lord had forsaken him. In another passage we
have a fuller confession: "I said in my haste, I am cut off from
before thine eyes," (Psalm 31: 22.) In another passage, in anxious
and wretched perplexity, he debates with himself, nay, raises a
question as to the nature of God: "Has God forgotten to be gracious?
has he in anger shut up his tender mercies?" (Psalm 77: 9.) What
follows is still harsher: "I said this is my infirmity; but I will
remember the years of the right hand of the Most High." As if
desperate, he adjudges himself to destruction. He not only confesses
that he is agitated by doubt, but as if he had fallen in the
contest, leaves himself nothing in reserve, - God having deserted
him, and made the hand which was wont to help him the instrument of
his destruction. Wherefore, after having been tossed among
tumultuous waves, it is not without reason he exhorts his soul to
return to her quiet rest, (Psalm 116: 7.) And yet (what is strange)
amid those commotions, faith sustains the believer's heart, and
truly acts the part of the palm tree, which supports any weights
laid upon it, and rises above them; thus David, when he seemed to be
overwhelmed, ceased not by urging himself forward to ascend to God.
But he who anxiously contending with his own infirmity has recourse
to faith, is already in a great measure victorious. This we may
infer from the following passage, and others similar to it: "Wait on
the Lord: be of good courage, and he shall strengthen thine heart:
wait, I say, on the Lord," (Psalm 27: 14.) He accuses himself of
timidity, and repeating the same thing twice, confesses that he is
ever and anon exposed to agitation. Still he is not only
dissatisfied with himself for so feeling, but earnestly labors to
correct it. Were we to take a nearer view of his case, and compare
it with that of Ahaz, we should find a great difference between
them. Isaiah is sent to relieve the anxiety of an impious and
hypocritical king, and addresses him in these terms: "Take heed, and
be quiet; fear not," &c., (Isaiah 7: 4.) How did Ahab act? As has
already been said, his heart was shaken as a tree is shaken by the
wind: though he heard the promise, he ceased not to tremble. This,
therefore, is the proper hire and punishment of unbelief, so to
tremble as in the day of trial to turn away from God, who gives
access to himself only by faith. On the other hand, believers,
though weighed down and almost overwhelmed with the burden of
temptation, constantly rise up, though not without toil and
difficulty; hence, feeling conscious of their own weakness, they
pray with the Prophet, "Take not the word of truth utterly out of my
mouths" (Psalm 119: 43.) By these words, we are taught that they at
times become dumb, as if their faith were overthrown, and yet that
they do not withdraw or turn their backs, but persevere in the
contest, and by prayer stimulate their sluggishness, so as not to
fall into stupor by giving way to it. (See Calv. in Psalm 8: 16.)
    18. To make this intelligible, we must return to the
distinction between flesh and spirit, to which we have already
adverted, and which here becomes most apparent. The believer finds
within himself two principles: the one filling him with delight in
recognizing the divine goodness, the other filling him with
bitterness under a sense of his fallen state; the one leading him to
recline on the promise of the Gospel, the other alarming him by the
conviction of his iniquity; the one making him exult with the
anticipation of life, the other making him tremble with the fear of
death. This diversity is owing to imperfection of faith, since we
are never so well in the course of the present life as to be
entirely cured of the disease of distrust, and completely
replenished and engrossed by faith. Hence those conflicts: the
distrust cleaving to the remains of the flesh rising up to assail
the faith enlisting in our hearts. But if in the believer's mind
certainty is mingled with doubt, must we not always be carried back
to the conclusion, that faith consists not of a sure and clear, but
only of an obscure and confused, understanding of the divine will in
regard to us? By no means. Though we are distracted by various
thoughts, it does not follow that we are immediately divested of
faith. Though we are agitated and carried to and fro by distrust, we
are not immediately plunged into the abyss; though we are shaken, we
are not therefore driven from our place. The invariable issue of the
contest is, that faith in the long run surmounts the difficulties by
which it was beset and seemed to be endangered.
    19. The whole, then, comes to this: As soon as the minutest
particle of faith is instilled into our minds, we begin to behold
the face of God placid, serene, and propitious; far off, indeed, but
still so distinctly as to assure us that there is no delusion in it.
In proportion to the progress we afterwards make, (and the progress
ought to be uninterrupted,) we obtain a nearer and surer view, the
very continuance making it more familiar to us. Thus we see that a
mind illumined with the knowledge of God is at first involved in
much ignorance, - ignorance, however, which is gradually removed.
Still this partial ignorance or obscure discernment does not prevent
that clear knowledge of the divine favor which holds the first and
principal part in faith. For as one shut up in a prison, where from
a narrow opening he receives the rays of the sun indirectly and in a
manner divided, though deprived of a full view of the sun, has no
doubt of the source from which the light comes, and is benefited by
it; so believers, while bound with the fetters of an earthly body,
though surrounded on all sides with much obscurity, are so far
illumined by any slender light which beams upon them and displays
the divine mercy as to feel secure.
    20. The Apostle elegantly adverts to both in different
passages. When he says, "We know in part, and we prophesy in part;"
and "Now we see through a glass darkly," (1 Cor. 13: 9, 12,) he
intimates how very minute a portion of divine wisdom is given to us
in the present life. For although those expressions do not simply
indicate that faith is imperfect so long as we groan under a height
of flesh, but that the necessity of being constantly engaged in
learning is owing to our imperfection, he at the same time reminds
us, that a subject which is of boundless extent cannot be
comprehended by our feeble and narrow capacities. This Paul affirms
of the whole Church, each individual being retarded and impeded by
his own ignorance from making so near an approach as were to be
wished. But that the foretaste which we obtain from any minute
portion of faith is certain, and by no means fallacious, he
elsewhere shows, when he affirms that "We all, with open face
beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the
same image, from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord,"
(2 Cor. 3: 18.) In such degrees of ignorance much doubt and
trembling is necessarily implied, especially seeing that our heart
is by its own natural bias prone to unbelief. To this we must add
the temptations which, various in kind and infinite in number, are
ever and anon violently assailing us. In particular, conscience
itself, burdened with an incumbent load of sins, at one time
complains and groans, at another accuses itself; at one time murmurs
in secret, at another openly rebels. Therefore, whether adverse
circumstances betoken the wrath of God, or conscience finds the
subject and matter within itself, unbelief thence draws weapons and
engines to put faith to flight, the aim of all its efforts being to
make us think that God is adverse and hostile to us, and thus,
instead of hoping for any assistance from him, to make us dread him
as a deadly foe.
    21. To withstand these assaults, faith arms and fortifies
itself with the word of God. When the temptation suggested is, that
God is an enemy because he afflicts, faith replies, that while he
afflicts he is merciful, his chastening proceeding more from love
than anger. To the thought that God is the avenger of wickedness, it
opposes the pardon ready to be bestowed on all offences whenever the
sinner retakes himself to the divine mercy. Thus the pious mind, how
much soever it may be agitated and torn, at length rises superior to
all difficulties, and allows not its confidence in the divine mercy
to be destroyed. Nay, rather, the disputes which exercise and
disturb it tend to establish this confidence. A proof of this is,
that the saints, when the hand of God lies heaviest upon them, still
lodge their complaints with him, and continue to invoke him, when to
all appearance he is least disposed to hear. But of what use were it
to lament before him if they had no hope of solace? They never would
invoke him did they not believe that he is ready to assist them.
Thus the disciples, while reprimanded by their Master for the
weakness of their faith in crying out that they were perishing,
still implored his aid, (Matth. 8: 25.) And he, in rebuking them for
their want of faith, does not disown them or class them with
unbelievers, but urges them to shake off the vice. Therefore, as we
have already said, we again maintain, that faith remaining fixed in
the believer's breast never can be eradicated from it. However it
may seem shaken and bent in this direction or in that, its flame is
never so completely quenched as not at least to lurk under the
embers. In this way, it appears that the word, which is an
incorruptible seed, produces fruit similar to itself. Its germ never
withers away utterly and perishes. The saints cannot have a stronger
ground for despair than to feel, that, according to present
appearances, the hand of God is armed for their destruction; and yet
Job thus declares the strength of his confidence: "Though he slay
me, yet will I trust in him." The truth is, that unbelief reigns not
in the hearts of believers, but only assails them from without; does
not wound them mortally with its darts, but annoys them, or, at the
utmost, gives them a wound which can be healed. Faith, as Paul
(declares, (Eph. 6: 16,) is our shield, which receiving these darts,
either wards them off entirely, or at least breaks their force, and
prevents them from reaching the vitals. Hence when faith is shaken,
it is just as when, by the violent blow of a javelin, a soldier
standing firm is forced to step back and yield a little; and again
when faith is wounded, it is as if the shield were pierced, but not
perforated by the blow. The pious mind will always rise, and be able
to say with David, "Yea, though I walk through the valley of the
shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me," (Psalm
23: 4.) Doubtless it is a terrific thing to walk in the darkness of
death, and it is impossible for believers, however great their
strength may be, not to shudder at it; but since the prevailing
thought is that God is present and providing for their safety, the
feeling of security overcomes that of fear. As Augustine says, -
whatever be the engines which the devil erects against us, as he
cannot gain the heart where faith dwells, he is cast out. Thus, if
we may judge by the event, not only do believers come off safe from
every contest so as to be ready, after a short repose, to descend
again into the arena, but the saying of John, in his Epistle, is
fulfilled, "This is the victory that overcometh the world, even our
faith," (1 John 5: 4.) It is not said that it will be victorious in
a single fight, or a few, or some one assault, but that it will be
victorious over the whole world, though it should be a thousand
times assailed.
    22. There is another species of fear and trembling, which, so
far from impairing the security of faith, tends rather to establish
it; namely, when believers, reflecting that the examples of the
divine vengeance on the ungodly are a kind of beacons warning them
not to provoke the wrath of God by similar wickedness keep anxious
watch, or, taking a view of their own inherent wretchedness, learn
their entire dependence on God, without whom they feel themselves to
be fleeting and evanescent as the wind. For when the Apostle sets
before the Corinthians the scourges which the Lord in ancient times
inflicted on the people of Israel, that they might be afraid of
subjecting themselves to similar calamities, he does not in any
degree destroy the ground of their confidence; he only shakes off
their carnal torpor which suppresses faith, but does not strengthen
it. Nor when he takes occasion from the case of the Israelites to
exhort, "Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall,"
(1 Cor. 10: 12,) he does not bid us waver, as if we had no security
for our steadfastness: he only removes arrogance and rash confidence
in our strength, telling the Gentiles not to presume because the
Jews had been cast off, and they had been admitted to their place,
(Rom. 11: 20.) In that passage, indeed, he is not addressing
believers only, but also comprehends hypocrites, who gloried merely
in external appearance; nor is he addressing individuals, but
contrasting the Jews and Gentiles, he first shows that the rejection
of the former was a just punishment of their ingratitude and
unbelief, and then exhorts the latter to beware lest pride and
presumption deprive them of the grace of adoption which had lately
been transferred to them. For as in that rejection of the Jews there
still remained some who were not excluded from the covenant of
adoptions so there might be some among the Gentiles who, possessing
no true faith, were only puffed up with vain carnal confidence, and
so abused the goodness of God to their own destruction. But though
you should hold that the words were addressed to elect believers, no
inconsistency will follow. It is one thing, in order to prevent
believers from indulging vain confidence, to repress the temerity
which, from the remains of the flesh, sometimes gains upon them, and
it is another thing to strike terror into their consciences, and
prevent them from feeling secure in the mercy of God.
    23. Then, when he bids us work out our salvation with fear and
trembling, all he requires is, that we accustom ourselves to think
very meanly of our own strength, and confide in the strength of the
Lord. For nothing stimulates us so strongly to place all our
confidence and assurance on the Lord as self diffidence, and the
anxiety produced by a consciousness of our calamitous condition. In
this sense are we to understand the words of the Psalmist: "I will
come into thy house in the multitude of thy mercy: and in thy fear
will I worship toward thy holy temples" (Ps. 5: 7.) Here he
appropriately unites confident faith leaning on the divine mercy
with religious fear, which of necessity we must feel whenever coming
into the presence of the divine majesty we are made aware by its
splendor of the extent of our own impurity. Truly also does Solomon
declare: "Happy is the man that feareth alway; but he that hardeneth
his heart falleth into mischief," (Prov. 28: 14.) The fear he speaks
of is that which renders us more cautious, not that which produces
despondency, the fear which is felt when the mind confounded in
itself resumes its equanimity in God, downcast in itself, takes
courage in God, distrusting itself, breathes confidence in God.
Hence there is nothing inconsistent in believers being afraid, and
at the same time possessing secure consolation as they alternately
behold their own vanity, and direct their thoughts to the truth of
God. How, it will be asked, can fear and faith dwell in the same
mind? Just in the same way as sluggishness and anxiety can so dwell.
The ungodly court a state of lethargy that the fear of God may not
annoy them; and yet the judgment of God so urges that they cannot
gain their desire. In the same way God can train his people to
humility, and curb them by the bridle of modesty, while yet fighting
bravely. And it is plain, from the context, that this was the
Apostle's meaning, since he states, as the ground of fear and
trembling, that it is God who worketh in us to will and to do of his
good pleasure. In the same sense must we understand the words of the
Prophet, "The children of Israel" "shall fear the Lord and his
goodness in the latter days," (Hos. 3: 5.) For not only does piety
beget reverence to God, but the sweet attractiveness of grace
inspires a man, though desponding of himself, at once with fear and
admiration, making him feel his dependence on God, and submit humbly
to his power.
    24. Here, however, we give no countenance to that most
pestilential philosophy which some semi-papists are at present
beginning to broach in corners. Unable to defend the gross doubt
inculcated by the Schoolmen, they have recourse to another fiction,
that they may compound a mixture of faith and unbelief. They admit,
that whenever we look to Christ we are furnished with full ground
for hope; but as we are ever unworthy of all the blessings which are
offered us in Christ, they will have us to fluctuate and hesitate in
the view of our unworthiness. In short, they give conscience a
position between hope and fear, making it alternate, by successive
turns, to the one and the other. Hope and fear, again, they place in
complete contrast, - the one falling as the other rises, and rising
as the other falls. Thus Satan, finding the devices by which he was
wont to destroy the certainty of faith too manifest to be now of any
avail, is endeavoring, by indirect methods, to undermine it. But
what kind of confidence is that which is ever and anon supplanted by
despair? They tell you, if you look to Christ salvation is certain;
if you return to yourself damnation is certain. Therefore, your mind
must be alternately ruled by diffidence and hope; as if we were to
imagine Christ standing at a distance, and not rather dwelling in
us. We expect salvation from him - not because he stands aloof from
us, but because ingrafting us into his body he not only makes us
partakers of all his benefits, but also of himself. Therefore, I
thus retort the argument, If you look to yourself damnation is
certain: but since Christ has been communicated to you with all his
benefits, so that all which is his is made yours, you become a
member of him, and hence one with him. His righteousness covers your
sins - his salvation extinguishes your condemnation; he interposes
with his worthiness, and so prevents your unworthiness from coming
into the view of God. Thus it truly is. It will never do to separate
Christ from us, nor us from him; but we must, with both hands, keep
firm hold of that alliance by which he has riveted us to himself.
This the Apostle teaches us: "The body is dead because of sin; but
the spirit is life because of righteousness," (Rom. 8: 10.)
According to the frivolous trifling of these objectors, he ought to
have said, Christ indeed has life in himself, but you, as you are
sinners, remain liable to death and condemnation. Very different is
his language. He tells us that the condemnation which we of
ourselves deserve is annihilated by the salvation of Christ; and to
confirm this he employs the argument to which I have referred, viz.,
that Christ is not external to us, but dwells in us; and not only
unites us to himself by an undivided bond of fellowship, but by a
wondrous communion brings us daily into closer connection, until he
becomes altogether one with us. And yet I deny not, as I lately
said, that faith occasionally suffers certain interruptions when, by
violent assault, its weakness is made to bend in this direction or
in that; and its light is buried in the thick darkness of
temptation. Still happen what may, faith ceases not to long after
God.
    25. The same doctrine is taught by Bernard when he treats
professedly on this subject in his Fifth Homily on the Dedication of
the Temple: "By the blessing of God, sometimes meditating on the
soul, methinks, I find in it as it were two contraries. When I look
at it as it is in itself and of itself, the truest thing I can say
of it is, that it has been reduced to nothing. What need is there to
enumerate each of its miseries? how burdened with sin, obscured with
darkness, ensnared by allurements, teeming with lusts, ruled by
passion, filled with delusions, ever prone to evil, inclined to
every vice; lastly, full of ignominy and confusion. If all its
righteousnesses, when examined by the light of truth, are but as
filthy rags, (Is. 64: 6,) what must we suppose its unrighteousness
to be? 'If, therefore, the light that is in thee be darkness, how
great is that darkness?' (Matth. 6: 23.) What then? man doubtless
has been made subject to vanity - man here been reduced to nothing -
man is nothing. And yet how is he whom God exalts utterly nothing?
How is he nothing to whom a divine heart has been given? Let us
breathe again, brethren. Although we are nothing in our hearts,
perhaps something of us may lurk in the heart of God. O Father of
mercies! O Father of the miserable! how plantest thou thy heart in
us? Where thy heart is, there is thy treasure also. But how are we
thy treasure if we are nothing? All nations before thee are as
nothing. Observe, before thee; not within thee. Such are they in the
judgment of thy truth, but not such in regard to thy affection. Thou
callest the things which be not as though they were; and they are
not, because thou callest them 'things that be not:' and yet they
are because thou callest them. For though they are not as to
themselves, yet they are with thee according to the declaration of
Paul: 'Not of works, but of him that calleth,'" (Rom. 9: 11.) He
then goes on to say that the connection is wonderful in both points
of view. Certainly things which are connected together do not
mutually destroy each other. This he explains more clearly in his
conclusion in the following terms: "If, in both views, we diligently
consider what we are, - in the one view our nothingness, in the
other our greatness, - I presume our glorying will seem restrained;
but perhaps it is rather increased and confirmed, because we glory
not in ourselves, but in the Lord. Our thought is, if he determined
to save us we shall be delivered; and here we begin again to
breathe. But, ascending to a loftier height, let us seek the city of
God, let us seek the temple, let us seek our home, let us seek our
spouse. I have not forgotten myself when, with fear and reverence, I
say, We are, - are in the heart of God. We are, by his dignifying,
not by our own dignity."
    26. Moreover, the fear of the Lord, which is uniformly
attributed to all the saints, and which, in one passage, is called
"the beginning of wisdom," in another wisdom itself, although it is
one, proceeds from a twofold cause. God is entitled to the reverence
of a Father and a Lord. Hence he who desires duly to worship him,
will study to act the part both of an obedient son and a faithful
servant. The obedience paid to God as a Father he by his prophet
terms honor; the service performed to him as a master he terms fear.
"A son honoureth his father, and a servant his master. If then I be
a father, where is mine honor? and if I be a master, where is my
fear?" But while he thus distinguishes between the two, it is
obvious that he at the same time confounds them. The fear of the
Lord, therefore, may be defined reverence mingled with honor and
fear. It is not strange that the same mind can entertain both
feelings; for he who considers with himself what kind of a father
God is to us, will see sufficient reason, even were there no hell,
why the thought of offending him should seem more dreadful than any
death. But so prone is our carnal nature to indulgence in sin, that,
in order to curb it in every way, we must also give place to the
thought that all iniquity is abomination to the Master under whom we
live; that those who, by wicked lives, provoke his anger, will not
escape his vengeance.
    27. There is nothing repugnant to this in the observation of
John: "There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear:
because fear has torment," (1 John 4: 18.) For he is speaking of the
fear of unbelief, between which and the fear of believers there is a
wide difference. The wicked do not fear God from any unwillingness
to offend him, provided they could do so with impunity; but knowing
that he is armed with power for vengeance, they tremble in dismay on
hearing of his anger. And they thus dread his anger, because they
think it is impending over them, and they every moment expect it to
fall upon their heads. But believers, as has been said, dread the
offense even more than the punishment. They are not alarmed by the
fear of punishment, as if it were impending over them, but are
rendered the more cautious of doing anything to provoke it. Thus the
Apostle addressing believers says, "Let no man deceive you with vain
words; for because of these things, the wrath of God cometh upon the
children of disobedience," (Eph. 5: 6; Col. 3: 6.) He does not
threaten that wrath will descend upon them; but he admonishes them,
while they think how the wrath of God is prepared for the wicked, on
account of the crimes which he had enumerated, not to run the risk
of provoking it. It seldom happens that mere threatening have the
effect of arousing the reprobate; nay, becoming more callous and
hardened when God thunders verbally from heaven, they obstinately
persist in their rebellion. It is only when actually smitten by his
hand that they are forced, whether they will or not, to fear. This
fear the sacred writers term servile, and oppose to the free and
voluntary fear which becomes sons. Some, by a subtle distinction,
have introduced an intermediate species, holding that that forced
and servile fear sometimes subdues the mind, and leads spontaneously
to proper fear.
    28 The divine favor to which faith is said to have respect, we
understand to include in it the possession of salvation and eternal
life. For if, when God is propitious, no good thing can be wanting
to us, we have ample security for our salvation when assured of his
love. "Turn us again, 0 God, and cause thy face to shine," says the
Prophet, "and we shall be saved," (Ps. 80: 3.) Hence the Scriptures
make the sum of our salvation to consist in the removal of all
enmity, and our admission into favor; thus intimating, that when God
is reconciled all danger is past, and every thing good will befall
us. Wherefore, faith apprehending the love of God has the promise
both of the present and the future life, and ample security for all
blessings, (Eph. 2: 14.) The nature of this must be ascertained from
the word. Faith does not promise us length of days, riches and
honors, (the Lord not having been pleased that any of these should
be appointed us;) but is contented with the assurance, that however
poor we may be in regard to present comforts, God will never fail
us. The chief security lies in the expectation of future life, which
is placed beyond doubt by the word of God. Whatever be the miseries
and calamities which await the children of God in this world, they
cannot make his favor cease to be complete happiness. Hence, when we
were desirous to express the sum of blessedness, we designated it by
the favor of God, from which, as their source, all kinds of
blessings flow. And we may observe throughout the Scriptures, that
they refer us to the love of God, not only when they treat of our
eternal salvation, but of any blessing whatever. For which reason
David sings, that the loving-kindness of God experienced by the
pious heart is sweeter and more to be desired than life itself, (Ps.
63: 3.) In short, if we have every earthly comfort to a wish, but
are uncertain whether we have the love or the hatred of God, our
felicity will be cursed, and therefore miserable. But if God lift on
us the light of his fatherly countenance, our very miseries will be
blessed, inasmuch as they will become helps to our salvation. Thus
Paul, after bringing together all kinds of adversity, boasts that
they cannot separate us from the love of God: and in his prayers he
uniformly begins with the grace of God as the source of all
prosperity. In like manner, to all the terrors which assail us,
David opposes merely the favor of God, - "Yea, though I walk through
the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art
with me," (Ps. 23: 4.) And we feel that our minds always waver
until, contented with the grace of God, we in it seek peace, and
feel thoroughly persuaded of what is said in the psalm, "Blessed is
the nation whose God is the Lord, and the people whom he has chosen
for his own inheritance," (Ps. 33: 12.)
    29. Free promise we make the foundation of faith, because in it
faith properly consists. For though it holds that God is always
true, whether in ordering or forbidding, promising or threatening;
though it obediently receive his commands, observe his prohibitions,
and give heed to his threatening; yet it properly begins with
promise, continues with it, and ends with it. It seeks life in God,
life which is not found in commands or the denunciations of
punishment, but in the promise of mercy. And this promise must be
gratuitous; for a conditional promise, which throws us back upon our
works, promises life only in so far as we find it existing in
ourselves. Therefore, if we would not have faith to waver and
tremble, we must support it with the promise of salvation, which is
offered by the Lord spontaneously and freely, from a regard to our
misery rather than our worth. Hence the Apostle bears this testimony
to the Gospel, that it is the word of faith, (Rom. 10: 8.) This he
concedes not either to the precepts or the promises of the Law,
since there is nothing which can establish our faith, but that free
embassy by which God reconciles the world to himself. Hence he often
uses faith and the Gospel as correlative terms, as when he says,
that the ministry of the Gospel was committed to him for "obedience
to the faith;" that "it is the power of God unto salvation to every
one that believeth;" that "therein is the righteousness of God
revealed from faith to faith," (Rom. 1: 5, 16,17.) No wonder: for
seeing that the Gospel is "the ministry of reconciliation," (2 Cor.
5: 18,) there is no other sufficient evidence of the divine favor,
such as faith requires to know. Therefore, when we say, that faith
must rest on a free promise, we deny not that believers accept and
embrace the word of God in all its parts, but we point to the
promise of mercy as its special object. Believers, indeed, ought to
recognize God as the judge and avenger of wickedness; and yet mercy
is the object to which they properly look, since he is exhibited to
their contemplation as "good and ready to forgive," "plenteous in
mercy," "slow to anger," "good to all," and shedding "his tender
mercies over all his works". Ps. 86: 5; 103: 8; 145: 8, 9.)
    30. I stay not to consider the rabid objections of Pighius, and
others like-minded, who inveigh against this restriction, as rending
faith, and laying hold of one of its fragments. I admit, as I have
already said, that the general object of faith (as they express it)
is the truth of God, whether he threatens or gives hope of his
favor. Accordingly, the Apostle attributes it to faith in Noah, that
he feared the destruction of the world, when as yet it was not seen,
(Heb. 11: 17.) If fear of impending punishment was a work of faith,
threatening ought not to be excluded in defining it. This is indeed
true; but we are unjustly and calumniously charged with denying that
faith has respect to the whole word of God. We only mean to maintain
these two points, - that faith is never decided until it attain to a
free promise; and that the only way in which faith reconciles us to
God is by uniting us with Christ. Both are deserving of notice. We
are inquiring after a faith which separates the children of God from
the reprobate, believers from unbelievers. Shall every man, then,
who believes that God is just in what he commands, and true in what
he threatens, be on that account classed with believers? Very far
from it. Faith, then, has no firm footing until it stand in the
mercy of God. Then what end have we in view in discoursing of faith?
Is it not that we may understand the way of salvation? But how can
faith be saving, unless in so far as it in grafts us into the body
of Christ? There is no absurdity, therefore, when, in defining it,
we thus press its special object, and, by way of distinction, add to
the generic character the particular mark which distinguishes the
believer from the unbeliever. In short, the malicious have nothing
to carp at in this doctrine, unless they are to bring the same
censure against the Apostle Paul, who specially designates the
Gospel as "the word of faith," (Rom. 10: 8.)
    31. Hence again we infer, as has already been explained, that
faith has no less need of the word than the fruit of a tree has of a
living root; because, as David testifies, none can hope in God but
those who know his name, (Ps. 9: 10.) This knowledge, however, is
not left to every man's imagination, but depends on the testimony
which God himself gives to his goodness. This the same Psalmist
confirms in another passage, "Thy salvation according to thy word,"
(Ps. 119: 41.) Again, "Save me," "I hoped in thy word," (Ps. 119:
146, 147.) Here we must attend to the relation of faith to the word,
and to salvation as its consequence. Still, however, we exclude not
the power of God. If faith cannot support itself in the view of this
power, it never will give Him the honor which is due. Paul seems to
relate a trivial or very ordinary circumstance with regard to
Abraham, when he says, that he believed that God, who had given him
the promise of a blessed seed, was able also to perform it, (Rom. 4:
21.) And in like manner, in another passage, he says of himself, "I
know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep
that which I have committed unto him against that day," (2 Tim. 1:
12.) But let any one consider with himself, how he is ever and anon
assailed with doubts in regard to the power of God, and he will
readily perceive, that those who duly magnify it have made no small
progress in faith. We all acknowledge that God can do whatsoever he
pleases; but while every temptation, even the most trivial, fills us
with fear and dread, it is plain that we derogate from the power of
God, by attaching less importance to his promises than to Satan's
threatening against them.
    This is the reason why Isaiah, when he would impress on the
hearts of the people the certainty of faith, discourses so
magnificently of the boundless power of God. He often seems, after
beginning to speak of the hope of pardon and reconciliation, to
digress, and unnecessarily take a long circuitous course, describing
how wonderfully God rules the fabric of heaven and earth, with the
whole course of nature; and yet he introduces nothing which is not
appropriate to the occasion; because unless the power of God, to
which all things are possible is presented to our eye, our ears
malignantly refuse admission to the word, or set no just value upon
it. We may add, that an effectual power is here meant; for piety, as
it has elsewhere been seen, always makes a practical application of
the power of God; in particular, keeps those works in view in which
he has declared himself to be a Father. Hence the frequent mention
in Scripture of redemption; from which the Israelites might learn,
that he who had once been the author of salvation would be its
perpetual guardian. By his own example, also, David reminds us, that
the benefits which God has bestowed privately on any individual,
tend to confirm his faith for the time to come; nay, that when God
seems to have forsaken us, we ought to extend our view farther, and
take courage from his former favors, as is said in another psalm, "I
remember the days of old: I meditate on all thy works," (Ps. 143:
5.) Again "I will remember the works of the Lord; surely I will
remember thy wonders of old" (Ps. 77: 11.) But because all our
conceptions of the power and works of God are evanescent without the
word, we are not rash in maintaining, that there is no faith until
God present us with clear evidence of his grace.
    Here, however, a question might be raised as to the view to be
taken of Sarah and Rebekah, both of whom, impelled as it would seem
by zeal for the faith, went beyond the limits of the word. Sarah, in
her eager desire for the promised seed, gave her maid to her
husband. That she sinned in many respects is not to be denied; but
the only fault to which I now refer is her being carried away by
zeal, and not confining herself within the limits prescribed by the
Word. It is certain, however, that her desire proceeded from faith.
Rebekah, again, divinely informed of the election of her son Jacob,
procures the blessing for him by a wicked stratagem; deceives her
husband, who was a witness and minister of divine grace; forces her
son to lie; by various frauds and impostures corrupts divine truth;
in fine, by exposing his promise to scorn, does what in her lies to
make it of no effect. And yet this conduct, however vicious and
reprehensible, was not devoid of faith. She must have overcome many
obstacles before she obtained so strong a desire of that which,
without any hope of earthly advantage, was full of difficulty and
danger. In the same way, we cannot say that the holy patriarch Isaac
was altogether void of faith, in that, after he had been similarly
informed of the honor transferred to the younger son, he still
continues his predilection in favor of his first-born, Esau. These
examples certainly show that error is often mingled with faith; and
yet that when faith is real, it always obtains the preeminence. For
as the particular error of Rebekah did not render the blessing of no
effect, neither did it nullify the faith which generally ruled in
her mind, and was the principle and cause of that action. In this,
nevertheless, Rebekah showed how prone the human mind is to turn
aside whenever it gives itself the least indulgence. But though
defect and infirmity obscure faith, they do not extinguish it. Still
they admonish us how carefully we ought to cling to the word of God,
and at the same time confirm what we have taught, viz., that faith
gives way when not supported by the word, just as the minds of
Sarah, Isaac, and Rebekah, would have lost themselves in devious
paths, had not the secret restraint of Providence kept them obedient
to the word.
    32. On the other hand, we have good ground for comprehending
all the promises in Christ, since the Apostle comprehends the whole
Gospel under the knowledge of Christ, and declares that all the
promises of God are in him yea, and amen. The reason for this is
obvious. Every promise which God makes is evidence of his good will.
This is invariably true, and is not inconsistent with the fact, that
the large benefits which the divine liberality is constantly
bestowing on the wicked are preparing them for heavier judgment. As
they neither think that these proceed from the hand of the Lord, nor
acknowledge them as his, or if they do so acknowledge them, never
regard them as proofs of his favor, they are in no respect more
instructed thereby in his mercy than brute beasts, which, according
to their condition, enjoy the same liberality, and yet never look
beyond it. Still it is true, that by rejecting the promises
generally offered to them, they subject themselves to severer
punishment. For though it is only when the promises are received in
faith that their efficacy is manifested, still their reality and
power are never extinguished by our infidelity or ingratitude.
Therefore, when the Lord by his promises invites us not only to
enjoy the fruits of his kindness, but also to meditate upon them, he
at the same time declares his love. Thus we are brought back to our
statement, that every promise is a manifestation of the divine favor
toward us. Now, without controversy, God loves no man out of Christ.
He is the beloved Son, in whom the love of the Father dwells, and
from whom it afterwards extends to us. Thus Paul says "In whom he
has made us accepted in the Beloved," (Eph. 1: 6.) It is by his
intervention, therefore, that love is diffused so as to reach us.
Accordingly, in another passage, the Apostle calls Christ "our
peace," (Eph. 2: 14,) and also represents him as the bond by which
the Father is united to us in paternal affection, (Rom. 8: 3.) It
follows, that whenever any promise is made to us, we must turn our
eyes toward Christ. Hence, with good reasons Paul declares that in
him all the promises of God are confirmed and completed, (Rom. 15:
8.) Some examples are brought forward as repugnant to this view.
When Naaman the Syrian made inquiry at the prophet as to the true
mode of worshipping God, we cannot (it is said) suppose that he was
informed of the Mediator, and yet he is commended for his piety, (2
Kings 5: 17-19.) Nor could Cornelius, a Roman heathen, be acquainted
with what was not known to all the Jews, and at best known
obscurely. And yet his alms and prayers were acceptable to God,
(Acts 10: 31,) while the prophet by his answer approved of the
sacrifices of Naaman. In both, this must have been the result of
faith. In like manner, the eunuch to whom Philip was sent, had he
not been endued with some degree of faith, never would have incurred
the fatigue and expense of a long and difficult journey to obtain an
opportunity of worship, (Acts 8: 27, 31;) and yet we see how, when
interrogated by Philip, he betrays his ignorance of the Mediator. I
admit that, in some respect, their faith was not explicit either as
to the person of Christ, or the power and office assigned him by the
Father. Still it is certain that they were imbued with principles
which might give some, though a slender, foretaste of Christ. This
should not be thought strange; for the eunuch would not have
hastened from a distant country to Jerusalem to an unknown God; nor
could Cornelius, after having once embraced the Jewish religion,
have lived so long in Judea without becoming acquainted with the
rudiments of sound doctrine. In regard to Naaman, it is absurd to
suppose that Elisha, while he gave him many minute precepts, said
nothing of the principal matter. Therefore, although their knowledge
of Christ may have been obscure, we cannot suppose that they had no
such knowledge at all. They used the sacrifices of the Law, and must
have distinguished them from the spurious sacrifices of the
Gentiles, by the end to which they referred, viz., Christ.
    33. A simple external manifestation of the word ought to be
amply sufficient to produce faith, did not our blindness and
perverseness prevent. But such is the proneness of our mind to
vanity, that it can never adhere to the truth of God, and such its
dullness, that it is always blind even in his light. Hence without
the illumination of the Spirit the word has no effect; and hence
also it is obvious that faith is something higher than human
understanding. Nor were it sufficient for the mind to be illumined
by the Spirit of God unless the heart also were strengthened and
supported by his power. Here the Schoolmen go completely astray,
dwelling entirely in their consideration of faith, on the bare
simple assent of the understanding, and altogether overlooking
confidence and security of heart. Faith is the special gift of God
in both ways, - in purifying the mind so as to give it a relish for
divine truth, and afterwards in establishing it therein. For the
Spirit does not merely originate faith, but gradually increases it,
until by its means he conducts us into the heavenly kingdom. "That
good thing which was committed unto thee," says Paul, "keep by the
Holy Ghost which dwelleth in us," (2 Tim. 1: 14.) In what sense Paul
says, (Gal. 3: 2,) that the Spirit is given by the hearing of faith,
may be easily explained. If there were only a single gift of the
Spirit, he who is the author and cause of faith could not without
absurdity be said to be its effect; but after celebrating the gifts
with which God adorns his church, and by successive additions of
faith leads it to perfection, there is nothing strange in his
ascribing to faith the very gifts which faith prepares us for
receiving. It seems to some paradoxical, when it is said that none
can believe Christ save those to whom it is given; but this is
partly because they do not observe how recondite and sublime
heavenly wisdom is, or how dull the mind of man in discerning divine
mysteries, and partly because they pay no regard to that firm and
stable constancy of heart which is the chief part of faith.
    34. But as Paul argues, "What man knoweth the things of a man,
save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God
knoweth no man but the Spirit of God," (1 Cor. 2: 11.) If in regard
to divine truth we hesitate even as to those things which we see
with the bodily eye, how can we be firm and steadfast in regard to
those divine promises which neither the eye sees nor the mind
comprehends? Here human discernment is so defective and lost, that
the first step of advancement in the school of Christ is to renounce
it, (Matth. 11: 25; Luke 10: 21.) Like a veil interposed, it
prevents us from beholding divine masteries, which are revealed only
to babes. "Flesh and blood" does not reveal them, (Matth. 16: 17.)
"The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for
they are foolishness unto him; neither can he know them, for they
are spiritually discerned," (I Cor. 2: 14.) The supplies of the Holy
Spirit are therefore necessary, or rather his agency is here the
only strength. "For who has known the mind of the Lord? or who has
been his counselor?" (Rom. 11: 34;) but "The Spirit searcheth all
things, yea, the deep things of God," (1 Cor. 2: 10.) Thus it is
that we attain to the mind of Christ: "No man can come to me, except
the Father which has sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at
the last day." "Every man therefore that has heard, and learned of
the Father, cometh unto me. Not that any man has seen the Father,
save he which is of God, he has seen the Father," (John 6: 44, 45,
46.) Therefore, as we cannot possibly come to Christ unless drawn by
the Spirit, so when we are drawn we are both in mind and spirit
exalted far above our own understanding. For the soul, when
illumined by him, receives as it were a new eye, enabling it to
contemplate heavenly mysteries, by the splendor of which it was
previously dazzled. And thus, indeed, it is only when the human
intellect is irradiated by the light of the Holy Spirit that it
begins to have a taste of those things which pertain to the kingdom
of God; previously it was too stupid and senseless to have any
relish for them. Hence our Savior, when clearly declaring the
mysteries of the kingdom to the two disciples, makes no impression
till he opens their minds to understand the Scriptures, (Luke 24:
27, 45.) Hence also, though he had taught the Apostles with his own
divine lips, it was still necessary to send the Spirit of truth to
instill into their minds the same doctrine which they had heard with
their ears. The word is, in regard to those to whom it is preached,
like the sun which shines upon all, but is of no use to the blind.
In this matter we are all naturally blind; and hence the word cannot
penetrate our mind unless the Spirit, that internal teacher, by his
enlightening power make an entrance for it.
    35. Having elsewhere shown more fully, when treating of the
corruption of our nature, how little able men are to believe, (Book
2, c. 2, 3,) I will not fatigue the reader by again repeating it.
Let it suffice to observe, that the spirit of faith is used by Paul
as synonymous with the very faith which we receive from the Spirit,
but which we have not naturally, (2 Cor. 4: 13.) Accordingly, he
prays for the Thessalonians, "that our God would count you worthy of
this calling, and fulfill all the good pleasure of his goodness, and
the work of faith with power," (2 Thess. 1: 2.) Here, by designating
faith the work of God, and distinguishing it by way of epithet,
appropriately calling it his good pleasure, he declares that it is
not of man's own nature; and not contented with this, he adds, that
it is an illustration of divine power. In addressing the
Corinthians, when he tells them that faith stands not "in the wisdom
of man, but in the power of God," (1 Cor. 2: 4,) he is no doubt
speaking of external miracles; but as the reprobate are blinded when
they behold them, he also includes that internal seal of which he
elsewhere makes mention. And the better to display his liberality in
this most excellent gift, God does not bestow it upon all
promiscuously, but, by special privilege, imparts it to whom he
will. To this effect we have already quoted passages of Scripture,
as to which Augustine, their faithful expositor, exclaims, (De Verbo
Apost. Serm. 2) "Our Savior, to teach that faith in him is a gift,
not a merit, says, 'No man can come to me, except the Father, which
has sent me, draw him,' (John 6: 44.) It is strange when two persons
hear, the one despises, the other ascends. Let him who despises
impute it to himself; let him who ascends not arrogate it to
himself' In another passage he asks, "Wherefore is it given to the
one, and not to the other? I am not ashamed to say, This is one of
the deep things of the cross. From some unknown depth of the
judgments of God, which we cannot scrutinize, all our ability
proceeds. I see that I am able; but how I am able I see not: - this
far only I see, that it is of God. But why the one, and not the
other? This is too great for me: it is an abyss a depth of the
cross. I can cry out with wonder; not discuss and demonstrate." The
whole comes to this, that Christ, when he produces faith in us by
the agency of his Spirit, at the same time ingrafts us into his
body, that we may become partakers of all blessings.
    36. The next thing necessary is, that what the mind has imbibed
be transferred into the heart. The word is not received in faith
when it merely flutters in the brain, but when it has taken deep
root in the heart, and become an invincible bulwark to withstand and
repel all the assaults of temptation. But if the illumination of the
Spirit is the true source of understanding in the intellect, much
more manifest is his agency in the confirmation of the heart;
inasmuch as there is more distrust in the heart than blindness in
the mind; and it is more difficult to inspire the soul with security
than to imbue it with knowledge. Hence the Spirit performs the part
of a seal, sealing upon our hearts the very promises, the certainty
of which was previously impressed upon our minds. It also serves as
an earnest in establishing and confirming these promises. Thus the
Apostle says, "In whom also, after that ye believed, ye were sealed
with that holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of our
inheritance," (Eph. 1: 13, 14.) You see how he teaches that the
hearts of believers are stamped with the Spirit as with a seal, and
calls it the Spirit of promise, because it ratifies the gospel to
us. In like manner he says to the Corinthians, "God has also sealed
us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts," (2 Cor. 1:
22.) And again, when speaking of a full and confident hope, he
founds it on the "earnest of the Spirit," (2 Cor. 5: 5.)
    37. I am not forgetting what I formerly said, and experience
brings daily to remembrance; viz., that faith is subject to various
doubts, so that the minds of believers are seldom at rest, or at
least are not always tranquil. Still, whatever be the engines by
which they are shaken, they either escape from the whirlpool of
temptation, or remain steadfast in their place. Faith finds security
and protection in the words of the Psalm, "God is our refuge and
strength, a very present help in trouble; therefore will not we
fear, though the earth be removed, and the mountains be carried into
the midst of the sea," (Ps. 46: 1, 2.) This delightful tranquillity
is elsewhere described: "I laid me down and slept; I awaked, for the
Lord sustained me," (Ps. 3: 5.) Not that David was uniformly in this
joyful frame; but in so far as the measure of his faith made him
sensible of the divine favor, he glories in intrepidly despising
every thing that could disturb his peace of mind. Hence the
Scripture, when it exhorts us to faith, bids us be at peace. In
Isaiah it is said, "In quietness and in confidence shall be your
strength," (Is. 30: 15;) and in the psalm, "Rest in the Lord, and
wait patiently for him." Corresponding to this is the passage in the
Hebrews, "Ye have need of patience," &c., (Heb. 10: 36.)
    38. Hence we may judge how pernicious is the scholastic dogma,
that we can have no stronger evidence of the divine favor toward us
than moral conjecture, according as each individual deems himself
not unworthy of it. Doubtless, if we are to determine by our works
in what way the Lord stands affected towards us, I admit that we
cannot even get the length of a feeble conjecture: but since faith
should accord with the free and simple promise, there is no room
left for ambiguity. With what kind of confidence, pray, shall we be
armed if we reason in this way - God is propitious to us, provided
we deserve it by the purity of our lives? But since we have reserved
this subject for discussion in its proper place, we shall not
prosecute it farther at present, especially seeing it is already
plain that nothing is more adverse to faith than conjecture, or any
other feeling akin to doubt. Nothing can be worse than their
perversion of the passage of Ecclesiastes, which is ever in their
mouths: "No man knoweth either love or hatred by all that is before
them," (Eccl. 9: 1.) For without insisting that the passage is
erroneously rendered in the common version - even a child cannot
fail to perceive what Solomon's meaning is, - viz., that any one who
would ascertain, from the present state of things, who are in the
favor or under the displeasure of God, labors in vain, and torments
himself to no useful purpose, since "All things come alike to all;"
"to him that sacrificeth, and to him that sacrificeth not:" and
hence God does not always declare his love to those on whom he
bestows uninterrupted prosperity, nor his hatred against those whom
he afflicts. And it tends to prove the vanity of the human
intellect, that it is so completely in the dark as to matters which
it is of the highest importance to know. Thus Solomon had said a
little before, "That which befalleth the sons of men befalleth
beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth
the other," (Eccl. 3: 19.) Were any one thence to infer that we hold
the immortality of the soul by conjecture merely, would he not
justly be deemed insane? Are those then sane who cannot obtain any
certainty of the divine favor, because the carnal eye is now unable
to discern it from the present appearance of the world?
    39. But, they say, it is rash and presumptuous to pretend to an
undoubted knowledge of the divine will. I would grant this, did we
hold that we were able to subject the incomprehensible counsel of
God to our feeble intellect. But when we simply say with Paul, "We
have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is
of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of
God," (1 Cor. 2: 12,) what can they oppose to this, without offering
insult to the Spirit of God? But if it is Sacrilege to charge the
revelation which he has given us with falsehood, or uncertainty, or
ambiguity, how can we be wrong in maintaining its certainty? But
they still exclaim, that there is great temerity in our presuming to
glory in possessing the Spirit of God. Who could believe that these
men, who desire to be thought the masters of the world, could be so
stupid as to err thus grossly in the very first principles of
religion? To me, indeed, it would be incredible, did not their own
writings make it manifest. Paul declares that those only are the
sons of God who are led by his Spirit, (Rom. 8: 14;) these men would
have those who are the sons of God to be led by their own, and void
of the divine Spirit. He tells us that we call God our Father in
terms dictated by the Spirit, who alone bears witness with our
spirit that we are the sons of God, (Rom. 8: 16;) they, though they
forbid us not to invoke God, withdraw the Spirit, by whose guidance
he is duly invoked. He declares that those only are the servants of
Christ who are led by the Spirit of Christ, (Rom. 8: 9;) they
imagine a Christianity which has no need of the Spirit of Christ. He
holds out the hope of a blessed resurrection to those only who feel
His Spirit dwelling in them, (Rom. 8: 11;) they imagine hope when
there is no such feeling. But perhaps they will say, that they deny
not the necessity of being endued with the Spirit, but only hold it
to be the part of modesty and humility not to recognize it. What,
then, does Paul mean, when he says to the Corinthians, "Examine
yourselves whether ye be in the faith: prove your own selves. Know
ye not your own selves, that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be
reprobates?" (2 Cor. 13: 5.) John, moreover, says, "Hereby we know
that he abideth in us by the Spirit which he has given us," (1 John
3: 24.) And what else is it than to bring the promises of Christ
into doubt, when we would be deemed servants of Christ without
having his Spirit, whom he declared that he would pour out on all
his people? (Isa. 44: 3.) What! do we not insult the Holy Spirit,
when we separate faith, which is his peculiar work, from himself?
These being the first rudiments of religion, it is the most wretched
blindness to charge Christians with arrogance, for presuming to
glory in the presence of the Holy Spirit; a glorying without which
Christianity itself does not exist. The example of these men
illustrates the truth of our Savior's declaration, that his Spirit
"the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth
him; but ye know him, for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in
you," (John 14: 17.)
    40. That they may not attempt to undermine the certainty of
faith in one direction only, they attack it in another, viz., that
though it be lawful for the believer, from his actual state of
righteousness, to form a judgment as to the favor of God, the
knowledge of final perseverance still remains in suspense. An
admirable security, indeed, is left us, if, for the present moment
only, we can judge from moral conjecture that we are in grace, but
know not how we are to be to-morrow! Very different is the language
of the Apostle, "I am persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor
angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor
things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall
be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ
Jesus our Lord," (Rom. 8: 38.) They endeavor to evade the force of
this by frivolously pretending that the Apostle had this assurance
by special revelation. They are too well caught thus to escape; for
in that passage he is treating not of his individual experience, but
of the blessings which all believers in common derive from faith.
But then Paul in another passage alarms us by the mention of our
weakness and inconstancy, "Let him that thinketh he standeth take
heed lest he fall," (1 Cor. 10: 12.) True; but this he says not to
inspire us with terror, but that we may learn to humble ourselves
under the mighty hand of God, as Peter explains, (1 Pet. 5: 6.) Then
how preposterous is it to limit the certainty of faith to a point of
time; seeing it is the property of faith to pass beyond the whole
course of this life, and stretch forward to a future immortality?
Therefore since believers owe it to the favor of God, that,
enlightened by his Spirit, they, through faith, enjoy the prospect
of heavenly life; there is so far from an approach to arrogance in
each glorying, that any one ashamed to confess it, instead of
testifying modesty or submission, rather betrays extreme
ingratitude, by maliciously suppressing the divine goodness.
    41. Since the nature of faith could not be better or more
clearly evinced than by the substance of the promise on which it
leans as its proper foundation, and without which it immediately
falls or rather vanishes away, we have derived our definition from
it - a definition, however, not at all at variance with that
definition, or rather description, which the Apostle accommodates to
his discourse, when he says that faith is "the substance of things
hoped for, the evidence of things not seen," (Heb. 11: 1.) For by
the term substance, ("hupostasis",) he means a kind of prop on which
the pious mind rests and leans. As if he had said, that faith is a
kind of certain and secure possession of those things which are
promised to us by God; unless we prefer taking "hupostasis" for
confidence. I have no objection to this, though I am more inclined
to adopt the other interpretation, which is more generally received.
Again, to intimate that until the last day, when the books will be
opened, (Dan. 7: 10; Rev. 20: 12,) the things pertaining to our
salvation are too lofty to be perceived by our sense, seen by our
eyes, or handled by our hands, and that in the meantime there is no
possible way in which these can be possessed by us, unless we can
transcend the reach of our own intellect, and raise our eye above
all worldly objects; in short, surpass ourselves, he adds that this
certainty of possession relates to things which are only hoped for,
and therefore not seen. For as Paul says, (Rom. 8: 24,) "A hope that
is seen is not hope," that we "hope for that we see not." When he
calls it the evidence or proof, or, as Augustine repeatedly renders
it, (see Hom. in Joann. 79 and 95,) the conviction of things not
present, the Greek term being "elengchos", it is the same as if he
had called it the appearance of things not apparent, the sight of
things not seen, the clearness of things obscure, the presence of
things absent, the manifestation of things hid. For the mysteries of
God (and to this class belong the things which pertain to our
salvation) cannot be discerned in themselves, or, as it is
expressed, in their own nature; but we behold them only in his word,
of the truth of which we ought to be as firmly persuaded as if we
held that every thing which it says were done and completed. But how
can the mind rise to such a perception and foretaste of the divine
goodness, without being at the same time wholly inflamed with love
to God? The abundance of joy which God has treasured up for those
who fear him cannot be truly known without making a most powerful
impression. He who is thus once affected is raised and carried
entirely towards him. Hence it is not strange that no sinister
perverse heart ever experiences this feeling, by which, transported
to heaven itself, we are admitted to the most hidden treasures of
God, and the holiest recesses of his kingdom, which must not be
profaned by the entrance of a heart that is impure. For what the
Schoolmen say as to the priority of love to faith and hope is a mere
dream, (see Sent. Lib. 3 Dist. 25, &c.,) since it is faith alone
that first engenders love. How much better is Bernard, "The
testimony of conscience, which Paul calls 'the rejoicing' of
believers, I believe to consist in three things. It is necessary,
first of all, to believe that you cannot have remission of sins
except by the indulgence of God; secondly, that you cannot have any
good work at all unless he also give it; lastly, that you cannot by
any works merit eternal life unless it also be freely given,"
(Bernard, Serm. 1 in Annuntiatione.) Shortly after he adds, "These
things are not sufficient, but are a kind of commencement of faith;
for while believing that your sins can only be forgiven by God, you
must also hold that they are not forgiven until persuaded by the
testimony of the Holy Spirit that salvation is treasured up for us;
that as God pardons sins, and gives merits, and after merits
rewards, you cannot halt at that beginning." But these and other
topics will be considered in their own place; let it suffice at
present to understand what faith is.
    42. Wherever this living faith exists, it must have the hope of
eternal life as its inseparable companion, or rather must of itself
beget and manifest it; where it is wanting, however clearly and
elegantly we may discourse of faith, it is certain we have it not.
For if faith is (as has been said) a firm persuasion of the truth of
God - a persuasion that it can never be false, never deceive, never
be in vain, those who have received this assurance must at the same
time expect that God will perform his promises, which in their
conviction are absolutely true; so that in one word hope is nothing
more than the expectation of those things which faith previously
believes to have been truly promised by God. Thus, faith believes
that God is true; hope expects that in due season he will manifest
his truth. Faith believes that he is our Father; hope expects that
he will always act the part of a Father towards us. Faith believes
that eternal life has been given to us; hope expects that it will
one day be revealed. Faith is the foundation on which hope rests;
hope nourishes and sustains faith. For as no man can expect any
thing from God without previously believing his promises, so, on the
other hand, the weakness of our faith, which might grow weary and
fall away, must be supported and cherished by patient hope and
expectation. For this reason Paul justly says, "We are saved by
hope," (Rom. 8: 24.) For while hope silently waits for the Lord, it
restrains faith from hastening on with too much precipitation,
confirms it when it might waver in regard to the promises of God or
begin to doubt of their truth, refreshes it when it might be
fatigued, extends its view to the final goal, so as not to allow it
to give up in the middle of the course, or at the very outset. In
short, by constantly renovating and reviving, it is ever and anon
furnishing more vigor for perseverance. On the whole, how necessary
the reinforcements of hope are to establish faith will better appear
if we reflect on the numerous forms of temptation by which those who
have embraced the word of God are assailed and shaken. First, the
Lord often keeps us in suspense, by delaying the fulfillment of his
promises much longer than we could wish. Here the office of hope is
to perform what the prophet enjoins, "Though it tarry, wait for it,"
(Hab. 2: 3.) Sometimes he not only permits faith to grow languid,
but even openly manifests his displeasure. Here there is still
greater necessity for the aid of hope, that we may be able to say
with another prophet, "I will wait upon the Lord that hideth his
face from the house of Jacob, and I will look for him," (Isaiah 8:
17.) Scoffers also rise up, as Peter tells us, and asks where is the
promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things
continue as they were from the beginning of the creation," (2 Pet.
3: 4.) Nay, the world and the flesh insinuate the same thing. Here
faith must be supported by the patience of hope, and fixed on the
contemplation of eternity, consider that "one day is with the Lord
as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day," (2 Pet. 3: 8;
Ps. 90: 4.)
    43. On account of this connection and affinity Scripture
sometimes confounds the two terms faith and hope. For when Peter
says that we are "kept by the power of God through faith until
salvation, ready to be revealed in the last times" (1 Pet. 1: 5,) he
attributes to faith what more properly belongs to hope. And not
without cause, since we have already shown that hope is nothing else
than the food and strength of faith. Sometimes the two are joined
together, as in the same Epistles "That your faith and hope might be
in God," (1 Pet. 1: 21.) Paul, again, in the Epistle to the
Philippians, from hope deduces expectation, (Phil. 1: 20,) because
in hoping patiently we suspend our wishes until God manifest his own
time. The whole of this subject may be better understood from the
tenth chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews, to which I have already
adverted. Paul, in another passage, though not in strict propriety
of speech, expresses the same thing in these words, "For we through
the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith," (Gal. 5:
5;) that is, after embracing the testimony of the Gospel as to free
love, we wait till God openly manifest what is now only an object of
hope. It is now obvious how absurdly Peter Lombard lays down a
double foundation of hope, viz., the grace of God and the merit of
works, (Sent. Lib. 3, Dist. 26.) Hope cannot have any other object
than faith has. But we have already shown clearly that the only
object of faith is the mercy of God, to which, to use the common
expression, it must look with both eyes. But it is worth while to
listen to the strange reason which he adduces. If you presume, says
he, to hope for any thing without merit, it should be called not
hope, but presumption. Who, dear reader, does not execrate the gross
stupidity which calls, it rashness, and presumption to confide in
the truth of God? The Lord desires us to expect every thing from his
goodness and yet these men tell us, it is presumption to rest in it.
O teacher, worthy of the pupils, whom you found in these insane
raving schools! Seeing that, by the oracles of God, sinners are
enjoined to entertain the hope of salvation, let us willingly
presume so far on his truth as to cast away all confidence in our
works, and trusting in his mercy, venture to hope. He who has said,
"According to your faith be it unto you," (Matth. 9: 29,) will never
deceive.

Chapter 3.

3. Regeneration by faith. Of repentance.

    This chapter is divided into five parts. I. The title of the
chapter seems to promise a treatise on Faith, but the only subject
here considered is Repentance, the inseparable attendant of faith.
And, first, various opinions on the subject of repentance are
stated, sec. 1-4. II. An exposition of the orthodox doctrine of
Repentance, sec. 5-9. III. Reasons why repentance must be prolonged
to the last moment of life, sec. 10-14. IV. Of the fruits of
repentance, or its object and tendency, sec. 15-20. V. The source
whence repentance proceeds, sec. 21-24. Of the sin against the Holy
Spirit, and the impenitence of the reprobate, sec. 25.

Section.

1. Connection of this chapter with the previous one and the
    subsequent chapters. Repentance follows faith, and is produced
    by it. Reason. Error of those who take a contrary view.
2. Their First Objection. Answer. In what sense the origin of
    Repentance ascribed to Faith. Cause of the erroneous idea that
    faith is produced by repentance. Refutation of it. The
    hypocrisy of Monks and Anabaptists in assigning limits to
    repentance exposed.
3. A second opinion concerning repentance considered.
4. A third opinion, assigning two forms to repentance, a legal and
    an Evangelical. Examples of each.
5. The orthodox doctrine of Repentance. 1. Faith and Repentance to
    be distinguished, not confounded or separated. 2. A
    consideration of the name. 3. A definition of the thing, or
    what repentance is. Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles.
6. Explanation of the definition. This consists of three parts. 1.
    Repentance is a turning of our life unto God. This described
    and enlarged upon.
7. 2. Repentance produced by fear of God. Hence the mention of
    divine judgment by the Prophets and Apostles. Example.
    Exposition of the second branch of the definition from a
    passage in Paul. Why the fear of God is the first part of
    Repentance.
8. 3. Repentance consists in the mortification of the flesh and the
    quickening of the Spirit. These required by the Prophets. They
    are explained separately.
9. How this mortification and quickening are produced. Repentance
    just a renewal of the divine image in us. Not completed in a
    moment, but extends to the last moment of life.
10. Reasons why repentance must so extend. Augustine's opinion as to
    concupiscence in the regenerate examined. A passage of Paul
    which seems to confirm that opinion.
11. Answer. Confirmation of the answer by the Apostle himself.
    Another confirmation from a precept of the law. Conclusion.
12. Exception, that those desires only are condemned which are
    repugnant to the order of God. Desires not condemned in so far
    as natural, but in so far as inordinate. This held by
    Augustine.
13. Passages from Augustine to show that this was his opinion.
    Objection from a passage in James.
14. Another objection of the Anabaptists and Libertines to the
    continuance of repentance throughout the present life. An
    answer disclosing its impiety. Another answer, founded on the
    absurdities to which it leads. A third answer, contrasting
    sincere Christian repentance with the erroneous view of the
    objectors. Conformation from the example and declaration of an
    Apostle.
15. Of the fruits of repentance. Carefulness. Excuse. Indignation.
    Fear. Desire. Zeal. Revenge. Moderation to be observed, as most
    sagely counseled by Bernard.
16. Internal fruits of Repentance. 1. Piety towards God. 2. Charity
    towards man. 3. Purity of life. How carefully these fruits are
    commended by the Prophets. External fruits of repentance.
    Bodily exercises too much commended by ancient writers. Twofold
    excess in regard to them.
17. Delusion of some who consider these external exercises as the
    chief part of Repentance. Why received in the Jewish Church.
    The legitimate use of these exercises in the Christian Church.
18. The principal part of repentance consists in turning to God.
    Confession and acknowledgment of sins. What their nature should
    be. Distinction between ordinary and special repentance. Use of
    this distinction.
19. End of Repentance. Its nature shown by the preaching of John
    Baptist, our Savior, and his Apostles. The sum of this
    preaching.
20. Christian repentance terminates with our life.
21. Repentance has its origin in the grace of God, as communicated
    to the elect, whom God is pleased to save from death. The
    hardening and final impenitence of the reprobate. A passage of
    an Apostle as to voluntary reprobates, gives no countenance to
    the Novatians.
22. Of the sin against the Holy Ghost. The true definition of this
    sin as proved and explained by Scripture. Who they are that sin
    against the Holy Spirit. Examples: - 1. The Jews resisting
    Stephen. 2. The Pharisees. Definition confirmed by the example
    of Paul.
23. Why that sin unpardonable. The paralogism of the Novatians in
    wresting the words of the Apostle examined. Two passages from
    the same Apostle.
24. First objection to the above doctrine. Answer. Solution of a
    difficulty founded on the example of Esau and the threatening
    of a Prophet. Second objection.
25. Third objection, founded on the seeming approval of the feigned
    repentance of the ungodly, as Ahab. Answer. Confirmation from
    the example of Esau. Why God bears for a time with the ungodly,
    pretending repentance. Exception.

    1. Although we have already in some measure shown how faith
possesses Christ, and gives us the enjoyment of his benefits, the
subject would still be obscure were we not to add an exposition of
the effects resulting from it. The sum of the Gospel is, not without
good reason, made to consist in repentance and forgiveness of sins;
and, therefore, where these two heads are omitted, any discussion
concerning faith will be meager and defective, and indeed almost
useless. Now, since Christ confers upon us, and we obtain by faith,
both free reconciliation and newness of life, reason and order
require that I should here begin to treat of both. The shortest
transition, however, will be from faith to repentance; for
repentance being properly understood it will better appear how a man
is justified freely by faith alone, and yet that holiness of life,
real holiness, as it is called, is inseparable from the free
imputation of righteousness. That repentance not only always follows
faith, but is produced by it, ought to be without controversy, (see
Calvin in Joann. 1: 13.) For since pardon and forgiveness are
offered by the preaching of the Gospel, in order that the sinner,
delivered from the tyranny of Satan, the yoke of sin, and the
miserable bondage of iniquity, may pass into the kingdom of God, it
is certain that no man can embrace the grace of the Gospel without
retaking himself from the errors of his former life into the right
path, and making it his whole study to practice repentance. Those
who think that repentance precedes faith instead of flowing from, or
being produced by it, as the fruit by the tree, have never
understood its nature, and are moved to adopt that view on very
insufficient grounds.
    2. Christ and John, it is said, in their discourses first
exhort the people to repentance, and then add, that the kingdom of
heaven is at hand, (Matth. 3: 2; 4: 17.) Such too, is the message
which the Apostles received and such the course which Paul followed,
as is narrated by Luke, (Acts 20: 21.) But clinging superstitiously
to the juxtaposition of the syllables, they attend not to the
coherence of meaning in the words. For when our Lord and John begin
their preaching thus "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand,"
(Matth. 3: 2,) do they not deduce repentance as a consequence of the
offer of grace and promise of salvation? The force of the words,
therefore, is the same as if it were said, As the kingdom of heaven
is at hand, for that reason repent. For Matthew, after relating that
John so preached, says that therein was fulfilled the prophecy
concerning the voice of one crying in the desert, "Prepare ye the
way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God,"
(Isaiah 40: 3.) But in the Prophet that voice is ordered to commence
with consolation and glad tidings. Still, when we attribute the
origin of repentance to faith, we do not dream of some period of
time in which faith is to give birth to it: we only wish to show
that a man cannot seriously engage in repentance unless he know that
he is of God. But no man is truly persuaded that he is of God until
he have embraced his offered favor. These things will be more
clearly explained as we proceed. Some are perhaps misled by this,
that not a few are subdued by terror of conscience, or disposed to
obedience before they have been imbued with a knowledge, nay, before
they have had any taste of the divine favor, (see Calvin in Acts 20:
21.) This is that initial fear which some writers class among the
virtues, because they think it approximates to true and genuine
obedience. But we are not here considering the various modes in
which Christ draws us to himself, or prepares us for the study of
piety: All I say is, that no righteousness can be found where the
Spirit, whom Christ received in order to communicate it to his
members, reigns not. Then, according to the passage in the Psalms,
"There is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared," (Psalm
130: 4,) no man will ever reverence God who does not trust that God
is propitious to him, no man will ever willingly set himself to
observe the Law who is not persuaded that his services are pleasing
to God. The indulgence of God in tolerating and pardoning our
iniquities is a sign of paternal favor. This is also clear from the
exhortation in Hosea, "Come, and let us return unto the Lord: for he
has torn, and he will heal us; he has smitten, and he will bind us
up," (Hos. 6: 1;) the hope of pardon is employed as a stimulus to
prevent us from becoming reckless in sin. But there is no semblance
of reason in the absurd procedure of those who, that they may begin
with repentance, prescribe to their neophytes certain days during
which they are to exercise themselves in repentance, and after these
are elapsed, admit them to communion in Gospel grace. I allude to
great numbers of Anabaptists, those of them especially who plume
themselves on being spiritual, and their associates the Jesuits, and
others of the same stamp. Such are the fruits which their giddy
spirit produces, that repentance, which in every Christian man lasts
as long as life, is with them completed in a few short days.
    3. Certain learned men, who lived long before the present days
and were desirous to speak simply and sincerely according to the
rule of Scripture, held that repentance consists of two parts,
mortification and quickening. By mortification they mean, grief of
soul and terror, produced by a conviction of sin and a sense of the
divine judgment. For when a man is brought to a true knowledge of
sin, he begins truly to hate and abominate sin. He also is sincerely
dissatisfied with himself, confesses that he is lost and undone, and
wishes he were different from what he is. Moreover, when he is
touched with some sense of the divine justice, (for the one
conviction immediately follows the other,) he lies terrorstruck and
amazed, humbled and dejected, desponds and despairs. This, which
they regarded as the first part of repentance, they usually termed
contrition. By quickening they mean, the comfort which is produced
by faith, as when a man prostrated by a consciousness of sin, and
smitten with the fear of God, afterwards beholding his goodness, and
the mercy, grace, and salvation obtained through Christ, looks up,
begins to breathe, takes courage, and passes, as it were, from death
unto life. I admit that these terms, when rightly interpreted, aptly
enough express the power of repentance; only I cannot assent to
their using the term quickening, for the joy which the soul feels
after being calmed from perturbation and fear. It more properly
means, that desire of pious and holy living which springs from the
new birth; as if it were said, that the man dies to himself that he
may begin to live unto God.
    4. Others seeing that the term is used in Scripture in
different senses, have set down two forms of repentance, and, in
order to distinguish them, have called the one Legal repentance; or
that by which the sinner, stung with a sense of his sin, and
overwhelmed with fear of the divine anger, remains in that state of
perturbation, unable to escape from it. The other they term
Evangelical repentance; or that by which the sinner, though
grievously downcast in himself, yet looks up and sees in Christ the
cure of his wound, the solace of his terror; the haven of rest from
his misery. They give Cain, Saul and Judas, as examples of legal
repentance. Scripture, in describing what is called their
repentance, means that they perceived the heinousness of their sins,
and dreaded the divine anger; but, thinking only of God as a judge
and avenger, were overwhelmed by the thought. Their repentance,
therefore, was nothing better than a kind of threshold to hell, into
which having entered even in the present life, they began to endure
the punishment inflicted by the presence of an offended God.
Examples of evangelical repentance we see in all those who, first
stung with a sense of sin, but afterwards raised and revived by
confidence in the divine mercy, turned unto the Lord. Hezekiah was
frightened on receiving the message of his death, but praying with
tears, and beholding the divine goodness, regained his confidence.
The Ninevites were terrified at the fearful announcement of their
destruction; but clothing themselves in sackcloth and ashes, they
prayed, hoping that the Lord might relent and avert his anger from
them. David confessed that he had sinned greatly in numbering the
people, but added "Now, I beseech thee O Lord, take away the
iniquity of thy servant." When rebuked by Nathan, he acknowledged
the crime of adultery, and humbled himself before the Lord; but he,
at the same time, looked for pardon. Similar was the repentance of
those who, stung to the heart by the preaching of Peter, yet trusted
in the divine goodness, and added, "Men and brethren, what shall we
do?" Similar was the case of Peter himself, who indeed wept
bitterly, but ceased not to hope.
    5. Though all this is true, yet the term repentance (in so far
as I can ascertain from Scripture) must be differently taken. For in
comprehending faith under repentance, they are at variance with what
Paul says in the Acts, as to his "testifying both to the Jews and
also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord
Jesus Christ," (Acts 20: 21.) Here he mentions faith and repentance
as two different things. What then? Can true repentance exist
without faith? By no means. But although they cannot be separated,
they ought to be distinguished. As there is no faith without hope,
and yet faith and hope are different, so repentance and faith,
though constantly linked together, are only to be united, not
confounded. I am not unaware that under the term repentance is
comprehended the whole work of turning to God, of which not the
least important part is faith; but in what sense this is done will
be perfectly obvious, when its nature and power shall have been
explained. The term repentance is derived in the Hebrew from
conversion, or turning again; and in the Greek from a change of mind
and purpose; nor is the thing meant inappropriate to both
derivations, for it is substantially this, that withdrawing from
ourselves we turn to God, and laying aside the old, put on a new
mind. Wherefore, it seems to me, that repentance may be not
inappropriately defined thus: A real conversion of our life unto
God, proceeding from sincere and serious fear of God; and consisting
in the mortification of our flesh and the old man, and the
quickening of the Spirit. In this sense are to be understood all
those addresses in which the prophets first, and the apostles
afterwards, exhorted the people of their time to repentance. The
great object for which they labored was, to fill them with confusion
for their sins and dread of the divine judgment, that they might
fall down and humble themselves before him whom they had offended,
and, with true repentance, retake themselves to the right path.
Accordingly, they use indiscriminately in the same sense, the
expressions turning, or returning to the Lord; repenting, doing
repentance. Whence, also, the sacred history describes it as
repentance towards God, when men who disregarded him and wantoned in
their lusts begin to obey his word, and are prepared to go
whithersoever he may call them. And John Baptist and Paul, under the
expression, bringing forth fruits meet for repentance, described a
course of life exhibiting and bearing testimony, in all its actions,
to such a repentance.
    6. But before proceeding farther, it will be proper to give a
clearer exposition of the definition which we have adopted. There
are three things, then, principally to be considered in it. First,
in the conversion of the life to God, we require a transformation
not only in external works, but in the soul itself, which is able
only after it has put off its old habits to bring forth fruits
conformable to its renovation. The prophet, intending to express
this, enjoins those whom he calls to repentance to make them "a new
heart and a new spirit," (Ezek. 38: 31.) Hence Moses, on several
occasions, when he would show how the Israelites were to repent and
turn to the Lord, tells them that it must be done with the whole
heart, and the whole soul, (a mode of expression of frequent
recurrence in the prophets,) and by terming it the circumcision of
the heart, points to the internal affections. But there is no
passage better fitted to teach us the genuine nature of repentance
than the following: "If thou wilt return, O Israel, saith the Lord,
return unto me." "Break up your fallow ground, and sow not among
thorns. Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, and take away the
foreskins of your heart," (Jer. 4: 1-4.) See how he declares to them
that it will be of no avail to commence the study of righteousness
unless impiety shall first have been eradicated from their inmost
heart. And to malice the deeper impression, he reminds them that
they have to do with God, and can gain nothing by deceit, because he
hates a double heart. For this reason Isaiah derides the
preposterous attempts of hypocrites, who zealously aimed at an
external repentance by the observance of ceremonies, but in the
meanwhile cared not "to loose the bands of wickedness, to undo the
heavy burdens, and to let the oppressed go free," (Isaiah 58: 6.) In
these words he admirably shows wherein the acts of unfeigned
repentance consist.
    7. The second part of our definition is, that repentance
proceeds from a sincere fear of God. Before the mind of the sinner
can be inclined to repentance, he must be aroused by the thought of
divine judgment; but when once the thought that God will one day
ascend his tribunal to take an account of all words and actions has
taken possession of his mind, it will not allow him to rest, or have
one moment's peace, but will perpetually urge him to adopt a
different plan of life, that he may be able to stand securely at
that judgment-seat. Hence the Scripture, when exhorting to
repentance, often introduces the subject of judgment, as in
Jeremiah, "Lest my fury come forth like fire, and burn that none can
quench it, because of the evil of your doings," (Jer. 4: 4.) Paul,
in his discourse to the Athenians says, "The times of this ignorance
God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
because he has appointed a day in the which he will judge the world
in righteousness," (Acts 17: 30, 31.) The same thing is repeated in
several other passages. Sometimes God is declared to be a judge,
from the punishments already inflicted, thus leading sinners to
reflect that worse awaits them if they do not quickly repent. There
is an example of this in the 29th chapter of Deuteronomy. As
repentance begins with dread and hatred of sin, the Apostle sets
down godly sorrow as one of its causes, (2 Cor. 7: 10.) By godly
sorrow he means when we not only tremble at the punishment, but hate
and abhor the sin, because we know it is displeasing to God. It is
not strange that this should be, for unless we are stung to the
quick, the sluggishness of our carnal nature cannot be corrected;
nay, no degree of pungency would suffice for our stupor and sloth,
did not God lift the rod and strike deeper. There is, moreover, a
rebellious spirit which must be broken as with hammers. The stern
threatening which God employs are extorted from him by our depraved
dispositions. For while we are asleep it were in vain to allure us
by soothing measures. Passages to this effect are everywhere to be
met with, and I need not quote them. But there is another reason why
the fear of God lies at the root of repentance, viz., that though
the life of man were possessed of all kinds of virtue, still if they
do not bear reference to God, how much soever they may be lauded in
the world, they are mere abomination in heaven, inasmuch as it is
the principal part of righteousness to render to God that service
and honor of which he is impiously defrauded, whenever it is not our
express purpose to submit to his authority.
    8. We must now explain the third part of the definition, and
show what is meant when we say that repentance consists of two
parts, viz., the mortification of the flesh, and the quickening of
the Spirit. The prophets, in accommodation to a carnal people,
express this in simple and homely terms, but clearly, when they say,
"Depart from evil, and do good," (Ps. 34: 14.) "Wash you, make you
clean, put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease
to do evil; learn to do well; seek judgment; relieve the oppressed,"
&c., (Isaiah 1: 16, 17.) In dissuading us from wickedness they
demand the entire destruction of the flesh, which is full of
perverseness and malice. It is a most difficult and arduous
achievement to renounce ourselves, and lay aside our natural
disposition. For the flesh must not be thought to be destroyed
unless every thing that we have of our own is abolished. But seeing
that all the desires of the flesh are enmity against God, (Rom. 8:
7,) the first step to the obedience of his law is the renouncement
of our own nature. Renovation is afterwards manifested by the fruits
produced by it, viz., justice, judgment, and mercy. Since it were
not sufficient duly to perform such acts, were not the mind and
heart previously endued with sentiments of justice, judgment, and
mercy this is done when the Holy Spirit, instilling his holiness
into our souls, so inspired them with new thoughts and affections,
that they may justly be regarded as new. And, indeed, as we are
naturally averse to God, unless self-denial precede, we shall never
tend to that which is right. Hence we are so often enjoined to put
off the old man, to renounce the world and the flesh, to forsake our
lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of our mind. Moreover, the very
name mortification reminds us how difficult it is to forget our
former nature, because we hence infer that we cannot be trained to
the fear of God, and learn the first principles of piety, unless we
are violently smitten with the sword of the Spirit and annihilated,
as if God were declaring, that to be ranked among his sons there
must be a destruction of our ordinary nature.
    9. Both of these we obtain by union with Christ. For if we have
true fellowship in his death, our old man is crucified by his power,
and the body of sin becomes dead, so that the corruption of our
original nature is never again in full vigor, (Rom. 6: 5, 6.) If we
are partakers in his resurrection, we are raised up by means of it
to newness of life, which conforms us to the righteousness of God.
In one word, then, by repentance I understand regeneration, the only
aim of which is to form in us anew the image of God, which was
sullied, and all but effaced by the transgression of Adam. So the
Apostle teaches when he says, "We all with open face beholding as in
a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from
glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord." Again, "Be renewed in
the spirit of your minds" and "put ye on the new man, which after
God is created in righteousness and true holiness." Again, "Put ye
on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him
that created him." Accordingly through the blessing of Christ we are
renewed by that regeneration into the righteousness of God from
which we had fallen through Adam, the Lord being pleased in this
manner to restore the integrity of all whom he appoints to the
inheritance of life. This renewal, indeed, is not accomplished in a
moment, a day, or a year, but by uninterrupted, sometimes even by
slow progress God abolishes the remains of carnal corruption in his
elect, cleanses them from pollution, and consecrates them as his
temples, restoring all their inclinations to real purity, so that
during their whole lives they may practice repentance, and know that
death is the only termination to this warfare. The greater is the
effrontery of an impure raver and apostate, named Staphylus, who
pretends that I confound the condition of the present life with the
celestial glory, when, after Paul, I make the image of God to
consist in righteousness and true holiness; as if in every
definition it were not necessary to take the thing defined in its
integrity and perfection. It is not denied that there is room for
improvement; but what I maintain is, that the nearer any one
approaches in resemblance to God, the more does the image of God
appear in him. That believers may attain to it, God assigns
repentance as the goal towards which they must keep running during
the whole course of their lives.
    10. By regeneration the children of God are delivered from the
bondage of sin, but not as if they had already obtained full
possession of freedom, and no longer felt any annoyance from the
flesh. Materials for an unremitting contest remain, that they may be
exercised, and not only exercised, but may better understand their
weakness. All writers of sound judgment agree in this, that, in the
regenerate man, there is still a spring of evil which is perpetually
sending forth desires that allure and stimulate him to sin. They
also acknowledge that the saints are still so liable to the disease
of concupiscence, that, though opposing it, they cannot avoid being
ever and anon prompted and incited to lust, avarice, ambition, or
other vices. It is unnecessary to spend much time in investigating
the sentiments of ancient writers. Augustine alone may suffice, as
he has collected all their opinions with great care and fidelity.
Any reader who is desirous to know the sense of antiquity may obtain
it from him. There is this difference apparently between him and us,
that while he admits that believers, so long as they are in the
body, are so liable to concupiscence that they cannot but feel it,
he does not venture to give this disease the name of sin. He is
contented with giving it the name of infirmity, and says, that it
only becomes sin when either external act or consent is added to
conception or apprehension; that is, when the will yields to the
first desire. We again regard it as sin whenever man is influenced
in any degree by any desire contrary to the law of God; nay, we
maintain that the very gravity which begets in us such desires is
sin. Accordingly, we hold that there is always sin in the saints
until they are freed from their mortal frame, because depraved
concupiscence resides in their flesh, and is at variance with
rectitude. Augustine himself dose not always refrain from using the
name of sin, as when he says, "Paul gives the name of sin to that
carnal concupiscence from which all sins arise. This in regard to
the saints loses its dominion in this world, and is destroyed in
heaven." In these words he admits that believers, in so far as they
are liable to carnal concupiscence, are chargeable with sin.
    11. When it is said that God purifies his Church, so as to be
"holy and without blemish," (Eph. 5: 26, 27,) that he promises this
cleansing by means of baptism, and performs it in his elect, I
understand that reference is made to the guilt rather than to the
matter of sin. In regenerating his people God indeed accomplishes
this much for them; he destroys the dominion of sin, by supplying
the agency of the Spirit, which enables them to come off victorious
from the contest. Sin, however, though it ceases to reign, ceases
not to dwell in them. Accordingly, though we say that the old man is
crucified, and the law of sin is abolished in the children of God,
(Rom. 6: 6,) the remains of sin survive, not to have dominion, but
to humble them under a consciousness of their infirmity. We admit
that these remains, just as if they had no existence, are not
imputed, but we, at the same time, contend that it is owing to the
mercy of God that the saints are not charged with the guilt which
would otherwise make them sinners before God. It will not be
difficult for us to confirm this view, seeing we can support it by
clear passages of Scripture. How can we express our view more
plainly than Paul does in Rom. 7: 6? We have elsewhere shown and
Augustine by solid reasons proves, that Paul is there speaking in
the person of a regenerated man. I say nothing as to his use of the
words evil and sin. However those who object to our view may quibble
on these words, can any man deny that aversion to the law of God is
an evil, and that hindrance to righteousness is sin? In short, who
will not admit that there is guilt where there is spiritual misery?
But all these things Paul affirms of this disease. Again, the law
furnishes us with a clear demonstration by which the whole question
may be quickly disposed of. We are enjoined to love God with all our
heart, with all our soul, with all our strength. Since all the
faculties of our soul ought thus to be engrossed with the love of
God, it is certain that the commandment is not fulfilled by those
who receive the smallest desire into their heart, or admit into
their minds any thought whatever which may lead them away from the
love of God to vanity. What then? Is it not through the faculties of
mind that we are assailed with sudden motions, that we perceive
sensual, or form conceptions of mental objects? Since these
faculties give admission to vain and wicked thoughts, do they not
show that to that extent they are devoid of the love of God? He,
then, who admits not that all the desires of the flesh are sins, and
that that disease of concupiscence, which they call a stimulus, is a
fountain of sin, must of necessity deny that the transgression of
the law is sin.
    12. If any one thinks it absurd thus to condemn all the desires
by which man is naturally affected, seeing they have been implanted
by God the author of nature, we answer, that we by no means condemn
those appetites which God so implanted in the mind of man at his
first creation, that they cannot be eradicated without destroying
human nature itself, but only the violent lawless movements which
war with the order of God. But as, in consequence of the corruption
of nature, all our faculties are so vitiated and corrupted, that a
perpetual disorder and excess is apparent in all our actions, and as
the appetites cannot be separated from this excess, we maintain that
therefore they are vicious; or, to give the substance in fewer
words, we hold that all human desires are evil, and we charge them
with sin not in as far as they are natural, but because they are
inordinate, and inordinate because nothing pure and upright can
proceed from a corrupt and polluted nature. Nor does Augustine
depart from this doctrine in reality so much as in appearance. From
an excessive dread of the invidious charge with which the Pelagians
assailed him, he sometimes refrains from using the term sin in this
sense; but when he says (ad Bonif.) that the law of sin remaining in
the saints, the guilt only is taken away, he shows clearly enough
that his view is not very different from ours.
    13. We will produce some other passages to make it more
apparent what his sentiments were. In his second book against
Julian, he says, "This law of sin is both remitted in spiritual
regeneration and remains in the mortal flesh; remitted, because the
guilt is forgiven in the sacrament by which believers are
regenerated, and yet remains, inasmuch as it produces desires
against which believers fight." Again, "Therefore the law of sin
(which was in the members of this great Apostle also) is forgiven in
baptism, not ended." Again, "The law of sin, the guilt of which,
though remaining, is forgiven in baptism, Ambrose called iniquity,
for it is iniquitous for the flesh to lust against the Spirit."
Again, "Sin is dead in the guilt by which it bound us; and until it
is cured by the perfection of burial, though dead it rebels." In the
fifth book he says still more plainly, "As blindness of heart is the
sin by which God is not believed; and the punishment of sin, by
which a proud heart is justly punished; and the cause of sin, when
through the error of a blinded heart any evil is committed: so the
lust of the flesh, against which the good Spirit wars, is also sin,
because disobedient to the authority of the mind; and the punishment
of sin, because the recompense rendered for disobedience; and the
cause of sin, consenting by revolt or springing up through
contamination." He here without ambiguity calls it sin, because the
Pelagian heresy being now refuted, and the sound doctrine confirmed,
he was less afraid of calumny. Thus, also, in his forty-first Homily
on John, where he speaks his own sentiments without controversy, he
says, "If with the flesh you serve the law of sin, do what the
Apostle himself says, 'Let not sin, therefore, reign in your mortal
body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof,' (Rom. 6: 12.) He
does not say, Let it not be, but Let it not reign. As long as you
live there must be sin in your members; but at least let its
dominion be destroyed; do not what it orders." Those who maintain
that concupiscence is not sin, are wont to found on the passage of
James, "Then, when lust has conceived, it bringeth forth sin,"
(James 1: 15.) But this is easily refuted: for unless we understand
him as speaking only of wicked works or actual sins, even a wicked
inclination will not be accounted sin. But from his calling crimes
and wicked deeds the fruits of lust, and also giving them the name
of sins, it does not follow that the lust itself is not an evil, and
in the sight of God deserving of condemnation.
    14. Some Anabaptists in the present age mistake some
indescribable sort of frenzied excess for the regeneration of the
Spirit, holding that the children of God are restored to a state of
innocence, and, therefore, need give themselves no anxiety about
curbing the lust of the flesh; that they have the Spirit for their
guide, and under his agency never err. It would be incredible that
the human mind could proceed to such insanity, did they not openly
and exultingly give utterance to their dogma. It is indeed
monstrous, and yet it is just, that those who have resolved to turn
the word of God into a lie, should thus be punished for their
blasphemous audacity. Is it indeed true, that all distinction
between base and honorable, just and unjust, good and evil, virtue
and vice, is abolished? The distinction, they say, is from the curse
of the old Adam, and from this we are exempted by Christ. There will
be no difference, then, between whoredom and chastity, sincerity and
craft, truth and falsehood, justice and robbery. Away with vain
fear! (they say,) the Spirit will not bid you do any thing that is
wrong, provided you sincerely and boldly leave yourself to his
agency. Who is not amazed at such monstrous doctrines? And yet this
philosophy is popular with those who, blinded by insane lusts, have
thrown off common sense. But what kind of Christ, pray, do they
fabricate? what kind of Spirit do they belch forth? We acknowledge
one Christ, and his one Spirit, whom the prophets foretold and the
Gospel proclaims as actually manifested, but we hear nothing of this
kind respecting him. That Spirit is not the patron of murder,
adultery, drunkenness, pride, contention, avarice, and fraud, but
the author of love, chastity, sobriety, modesty, peace, moderation,
and truth. He is not a Spirit of giddiness, rushing rashly and
precipitately, without regard to right and wrong, but full of wisdom
and understanding, by which he can duly distinguish between justice
and injustice. He instigates not to lawless and unrestrained
licentiousness, but, discriminating between lawful and unlawful,
teaches temperance and moderation. But why dwell longer in refuting
that brutish frenzy? To Christians the Spirit of the Lord is not a
turbulent phantom, which they themselves have produced by dreaming,
or received ready-made by others; but they religiously seek the
knowledge of him from Scripture, where two things are taught
concerning him; first, that he is given to us for sanctification,
that he may purge us from all iniquity and defilement, and bring us
to the obedience of divine righteousness, an obedience which cannot
exist unless the lusts to which these men would give loose reins are
tamed and subdued; secondly that though purged by his
sanctification, we are still beset by many vices and much weakness,
so long as we are enclosed in the prison of the body. Thus it is,
that placed at a great distance from perfection, we must always be
endeavoring to make some progress, and daily struggling with the
evil by which we are entangled. Hence, too, it follows, that,
shaking off sloth and security, we must be intently vigilant, so as
not to be taken unawares in the snares of our flesh; unless, indeed,
we presume to think that we have made greater progress than the
Apostle, who was buffeted by a messenger of Satan, in order that his
strength might be perfected in weakness,, and who gives in his own
person a true, not a fictitious representation, of the strife
between the Spirit and the flesh, (2 Cor. 12: 7, 9; Rom. 7: 6.)
    15. The Apostle, in his description of repentance, (2 Cor. 7:
2,) enumerates seven causes, effects, or parts belonging to it, and
that on the best grounds. These are carefulness, excuse, indignation
fear, desire, zeal, revenge. It should not excite surprise that I
venture not to determine whether they ought to be regarded as causes
or effects: both views may be maintained. They may also be called
affections conjoined with repentance; but as Paul's meaning may be
ascertained without entering into any of these questions, we shall
be contented with a simple exposition. He says then that godly
sorrow produces carefulness. He who is really dissatisfied with
himself for sinning against his God, is, at the same time,
stimulated to care and attention, that he may completely disentangle
himself from the chains of the devil, and keep a better guard
against his snares, so as not afterwards to lose the guidance of the
Holy Spirit, or be overcome by security. Next comes excuse, which in
this place means not defense, in which the sinner to escape the
judgment of God either denies his fault or extenuates it, but
apologizing, which trusts more to intercession than to the goodness
of the cause; just as children not altogether abandoned, while they
acknowledge and confess their errors yet employ deprecation; and to
make room for it, testify, by every means in their power, that they
have by no means cast off the reverence which they owe to their
parents; in short, endeavor by excuse not to prove themselves
righteous and innocent, but only to obtain pardon. Next follows
indignation, under which the sinner inwardly murmurs expostulates,
and is offended with himself on recognizing his perverseness and
ingratitude to God. By the term fear is meant that trepidation which
takes possession of our minds whenever we consider both what we have
deserved, and the fearful severity of the divine anger against
sinners. Accordingly, the exceeding disquietude which we must
necessarily feel, both trains us to humility and makes us more
cautious for the future. But if the carefulness or anxiety which he
first mentioned is the result of fear, the connection between the
two becomes obvious. Desire seems to me to be used as equivalent to
diligence in duty, and alacrity in doing service, to which the sense
of our misdeeds ought to be a powerful stimulus. To this also
pertains zeal, which immediately follows; for it signifies the ardor
with which we are inflamed when such goads as these are applied to
us. "What have I done? Into what abyss had I fallen had not the
mercy of God prevented?" The last of all is revenge, for the
stricter we are with ourselves, and the severer the censure we pass
upon our sins, the more ground we have to hope for the divine favor
and mercy. And certainly when the soul is overwhelmed with a dread
of divine judgment, it cannot but act the part of an avenger in
inflicting punishment upon itself. Pious men, doubtless, feel that
there is punishment in the shame, confusion, groans,
self-displeasure, and other feelings produced by a serious review of
their sins. Let us remember, however, that moderation must be used,
so that we may not be overwhelmed with sadness, there being nothing
to which trembling consciences are more prone than to rush into
despair. This, too, is one of Satan's artifices. Those whom he sees
thus overwhelmed with fear he plunges deeper and deeper into the
abyss of sorrow, that they may never again rise. It is true that the
fear which ends in humility without relinquishing the hope of pardon
cannot be in excess. And yet we must always beware, according to the
apostolic injunction, of giving way to extreme dread, as this tends
to make us shun God while he is calling us to himself by repentance.
Wherefore, the advice of Bernard is good, "Grief for sins is
necessary, but must not be perpetual. My advice is to turn back at
times from sorrow and the anxious remembrance of your ways, and
escape to the plain, to a calm review of the divine mercies. Let us
mingle honey with wormwood, that the salubrious bitter may give
health when we drink it tempered with a mixture of sweetness: while
you think humbly of yourselves, think also of the goodness of the
Lord," (Bernard in Cant. Serm. 11.)
    16. We can now understand what are the fruits of repentance;
viz., offices of piety towards God, and love towards men, general
holiness and purity of life. In short, the more a man studies to
conform his life to the standard of the divine law, the surer signs
he gives of his repentance. Accordingly, the Spirit, in exhorting us
to repentance, brings before us at one time each separate precept of
the law; at another the duties of the second table; although there
are also passages in which, after condemning impurity in its
fountain in the heart, he afterwards descends to external marks, by
which repentance is proved to be sincere. A portraiture of this I
will shortly set before the eye of the reader when I come to
describe the Christian life, (infra, chapter 6) I will not here
collect the passages from the prophets in which they deride the
frivolous observances of those who labour to appease God with
ceremonies, and show that they are mere mockery; or those in which
they show that outward integrity of conduct is not the chief part of
repentance, seeing that God looks at the heart. Any one moderately
versant in Scripture will understand by himself, without being
reminded by others, that when he has to do with God, nothing is
gained without beginning with the internal affections of the heart.
There is a passage of Joel which will avail not a little for the
understanding of others: "Rend your heart, and not your garments,"
(Joel 2: 13.) Both are also briefly expressed by James in these
words: "Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye
double-minded," (James 4: 8.) Here, indeed, the accessory is set
down first; but the source and principle is afterwards pointed out,
- viz., that hidden defilements must be wiped away, and an altar
erected to God in the very heart. There are, moreover, certain
external exercises which we employ in private as remedies to humble
us and tame our flesh, and in public, to testify our repentance.
These have their origin in that revenge of which Paul speaks, (2
Cor. 7: 2,) for when the mind is distressed, it naturally expresses
itself in sackcloth, groans, and tears, shuns ornament and every
kind of show, and abandons all delights. Then he who feels how great
an evil the rebellion of the flesh is, tries every means of curbing
it. Besides, he who considers aright how grievous a thing it is to
have offended the justice of God, cannot rest until, in his
humility, he have given glory to God. Such exercises are often
mentioned by ancient writers when they speak of the fruits of
repentance. But although they by no means place the power of
repentance in them, yet my readers must pardon me for saying what I
think - they certainly seem to insist on them more than is right.
Any one who judiciously considers the matter will, I trust, agree
with me that they have exceeded in two ways; first, by so strongly
urging and extravagantly commending that corporal discipline, they
indeed succeeded in making the people embrace it with greater zeal;
but they in a manner obscured what they should have regarded as of
much more serious moment. Secondly, the inflictions which they
enjoined were considerably more rigorous than ecclesiastical
mildness demands, as will be elsewhere shown.
    17. But as there are some who, from the frequent mention of
sackcloth, fasting, and tears, especially in Joel, (2: 12,) think
that these constitute the principal part of repentance, we must
dispel their delusion. In that passage the proper part of repentance
is described by the words, "turn ye even to me with your whole
heart;" "rend your heart, and not your garments." The "fastings",
"weeping," and "mourning," are introduced not as invariable or
necessary effects, but as special circumstances. Having foretold
that most grievous disasters were impending over the Jews, he
exhorts them to turn away the divine anger not only by repenting,
but by giving public signs of sorrow. For as a criminal, to excite
the commiseration of the judge, appears in a supplicating posture,
with a long beard, uncombed hair, and coarse clothing, so should
those who are charged at the judgment-seat of God deprecate his
severity in a garb of wretchedness. But although sackcloth and ashes
were perhaps more conformable to the customs of these times, yet it
is plain that weeping and fasting are very appropriate in our case
whenever the Lord threatens us with any defeat or calamity. In
presenting the appearance of danger, he declares that he is
preparing, and, in a manner, arming himself for vengeance. Rightly,
therefore, does the Prophet exhort those, on whose crimes he had
said a little before that vengeance was to be executed, to weeping
and fasting, - that is, to the mourning habit of criminals. Nor in
the present day do ecclesiastical teachers act improperly when,
seeing ruin hanging over the necks of their people, they call aloud
on them to hasten with weeping and fasting: only they must always
urge, with greater care and earnestness, "rend your hearts, and not
your garments." It is beyond doubt that fasting is not always a
concomitant of repentance, but is specially destined for seasons of
calamity. Hence our Savior connects it with mourning, (Matth. 9:
15,) and relieves the Apostles of the necessity of it until, by
being deprived of his presence, they were filled with sorrow. I
speak of formal fasting. For the life of Christians ought ever to be
tempered with frugality and sobriety, so that the whole course of it
should present some appearance of fasting. As this subject will be
fully discussed when the discipline of the Church comes to be
considered, I now dwell less upon it.
    18. This much, however, I will add: when the name repentance is
applied to the external profession, it is used improperly, and not
in the genuine meaning as I have explained it. For that is not so
much a turning unto God as the confession of a fault accompanied
with deprecation of the sentence and punishment. Thus to repent in
sackcloth and ashes, (Matth. 11: 21; Luke 10: 13,) is just to
testify self dissatisfaction when God is angry with us for having
grievously offended him. It is, indeed, a kind of public confession
by which, condemning ourselves before angels and the world, we
prevent the judgment of God. For Paul, rebuking the sluggishness of
those who indulge in their sins, says, "If we would judge ourselves,
we should not be judged," (1 Cor. 11: 31.) It is not always
necessary, however, openly to inform others, and make them the
witnesses of our repentance; but to confess privately to God is a
part of true repentance which cannot be omitted. Nothing were more
incongruous than that God should pardon the sins in which we are
flattering ourselves, and hypocritically cloaking that he may not
bring them to light. We must not only confess the sins which we
daily commit, but more grievous lapses ought to carry us farther,
and bring to our remembrance things which seemed to have been long
ago buried. Of this David sets an example before us in his own
person, (Ps. 51.) Filled with shame for a recent crime he examines
himself, going back to the womb, and acknowledging that even then he
was corrupted and defiled. This he does not to extenuate his fault,
as many hide themselves in the crowd, and catch at impunity by
involving others along with them. Very differently does David, who
ingenuously makes it an aggravation of his sin, that being corrupted
from his earliest infancy he ceased not to add iniquity to iniquity.
In another passage, also, he takes a survey of his past life, and
implores God to pardon the errors of his youth, (Ps. 25: 7.) And,
indeed, we shall not prove that we have thoroughly shaken off our
stupor until, groaning under the burden, and lamenting our sad
condition, we seek relief from God. It is, moreover to be observed,
that the repentance which we are enjoined assiduously to cultivate,
differs from that which raises, as it were, from death those who had
fallen more shamefully, or given themselves up to sin without
restraint, or by some kind of open revolt, had thrown off the
authority of God. For Scripture, in exhorting to repentance, often
speaks of it as a passage from death unto life, and when relating
that a people had repented, means that they had abandoned idolatry,
and other forms of gross wickedness. For which reason Paul denounces
woe to sinners, "who have not repented of the uncleanness, and
fornication, and lasciviousness which they have committed," (2 Cor.
12: 21.) This distinction ought to be carefully observed, lest when
we hear of a few individuals having been summoned to repent we
indulge in supine security, as if we had nothing to do with the
mortification of the flesh; whereas, in consequence of the depraved
desires which are always enticing us, and the iniquities which are
ever and anon springing from them, it must engage our unremitting
care. The special repentance enjoined upon those whom the devil has
entangled in deadly snares, and withdrawn from the fear of God, does
not abolish that ordinary repentance which the corruption of nature
obliges us to cultivate during the whole course of our lives.
    19. Moreover if it is true, and nothing can be more certain,
than that a complete summary of the Gospel is included under these
two heads, viz., repentance and the remission of sins, do we not see
that the Lord justifies his people freely, and at the same time
renews them to true holiness by the sanctification of his Spirit?
John, the messenger sent before the face of Christ to prepare his
ways, proclaimed, "repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand,"
(Matth. 11: 10; 3: 2.) By inviting them to repentance, he urged them
to acknowledge that they were sinners, and in all respects condemned
before God, that thus they might be induced earnestly to seek the
mortification of the flesh, and a new birth in the Spirit. By
announcing the kingdom of God he called for faith, since by the
kingdom of God which he declared to be at hand, he meant forgiveness
of sins, salvation, life, and every other blessing which we obtain
in Christ; wherefore we read in the other Evangelists, "John did
baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for
the remission of sins," (Mark 1: 4; Luke 3: 3.) What does this mean,
but that, weary and oppressed with the burden of sin, they should
turn to the Lord, and entertain hopes of forgiveness and salvation?
Thus, too, Christ began his preaching, "The kingdom of God is at
hand: repent ye, and believe the Gospel," (Mark 1: 10.) First, he
declares that the treasures of the divine mercy were opened in him;
next, he enjoins repentance; and, lastly, he encourages confidence
in the promises of God. Accordingly, when intending to give a brief
summary of the whole Gospel, he said that he behaved "to suffer, and
to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and
remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations,"
(Luke 24: 26, 46.) In like manner, after his resurrection the
Apostles preached, "Him has God exalted with his right hand, to be a
Prince and a Savior, for to give repentance to Israel and
forgiveness of sins," (Acts 5: 31.) repentance is preached in the
name of Christ, when men learn, through the doctrines of the Gospel,
that all their thoughts, affections, and pursuits, are corrupt and
vicious; and that, therefore, if they would enter the kingdom of God
they must be born again. Forgiveness of sins is preached when men
are taught that Christ "is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness,
and sanctification, and redemption," (1 Cor. 1: 30,) that on his
account they are freely deemed righteous and innocent in the sight
of God. Though both graces are obtained by faith, (as has been shown
elsewhere,) yet as the goodness of God, by which sins are forgiven,
is the proper object of faith, it was proper carefully to
distinguish it from repentance.
    20. Moreover, as hatred of sin, which is the beginning of
repentance, first gives us access to the knowledge of Christ, who
manifests himself to none but miserable and afflicted sinners,
groaning, laboring, burdened, hungry, and thirsty, pining away with
grief and wretchedness, so if we would stand in Christ, we must aim
at repentance, cultivate it during our whole lives, and continue it
to the last. Christ came to call sinners, but to call them to
repentance. He was sent to bless the unworthy, but by "turning away
every one" "from his iniquities." The Scripture is full of similar
passages. Hence, when God offers forgiveness of sins, he in return
usually stipulates for repentance, intimating that his mercy should
induce men to repent. "Keep ye judgment," saith he, "and do justice:
for my salvation is near to come." Again, "The Redeemer shall come
to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob."
Again, "Seek ye the Lord while he may be found, call ye upon him
while he is near. Let the wicked forsake his way, and the
unrighteous man his thoughts, and let him return unto the Lord, and
he will have mercy upon him." "Repent ye, therefore, and be
converted, that your sins may be blotted out." Here, however, it is
to be observed, that repentance is not made a condition in such a
sense as to be a foundation for meriting pardon; nay, it rather
indicates the end at which they must aim if they would obtain favor,
God having resolved to take pity on men for the express purpose of
leading them to repent. Therefore, so long as we dwell in the prison
of the body, we must constantly struggle with the vices of our
corrupt nature, and so with our natural disposition. Plato sometimes
says, that the life of the philosopher is to meditate on death. More
truly may we say, that the life of a Christian man is constant study
and exercise in mortifying the flesh, until it is certainly slain,
and the Spirit of God obtains dominion in us. Wherefore, he seems to
me to have made most progress who has learned to be most
dissatisfied with himself. He does not, however, remain in the miry
clay without going forward; but rather hastens and sighs after God,
that, ingrafted both into the death and the life of Christ, he may
constantly meditate on repentance. Unquestionably those who have a
genuine hatred of sin cannot do otherwise: for no man ever hated sin
without being previously enamored of righteousness. This view, as it
is the simplest of all, seemed to me also to accord best with
Scripture truth.
    21. Moreover, that repentance is a special gift of God, I trust
is too well understood from the above doctrine to require any
lengthened discourse. Hence the Church' extols the goodness of God,
and looks on in wonder, saying, "Then has God also to the Gentiles
granted repentance unto life," (Acts 11: 18;) and Paul enjoining
Timothy to deal meekly and patiently with unbelievers, says, "If God
per adventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the
truth, and that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the
devil," (2 Tim. 2: 25, 26.) God indeed declares, that he would have
all men to repent, and addresses exhortations in common to all;
their efficacy, however, depends on the Spirit of regeneration. It
were easier to create us at first, than for us by our own strength
to acquire a more excellent nature. Wherefore, in regard to the
whole process of regeneration, it is not without cause we are called
God's "workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which
God has before ordained that we should walk in them," (Eph. 2: 10.2)
Those whom God is pleased to rescue from death, he quickens by the
Spirit of regeneration; not that repentance is properly the cause of
salvation, but because, as already seen, it is inseparable from the
faith and mercy of God; for, as Isaiah declares, "The Redeemer shall
come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob."
This, indeed, is a standing truth, that wherever the fear of God is
in vigor, the Spirit has been carrying on his saving work. Hence, in
Isaiah, while believers complain and lament that they have been
forsaken of God, they set down the supernatural hardening of the
heart as a sign of reprobation. The Apostle, also, intending to
exclude apostates from the hope of salvation, states, as the reason,
that it is impossible to renew them to repentance, (Heb. 6: 6;) that
is, God by renewing those whom he wills not to perish, gives them a
sign of paternal favor, and in a manner attracts them to himself, by
the beams of a calm and reconciled countenance; on the other hand,
by hardening the reprobate, whose impiety is not to be forgiven, he
thunders against them. This kind of vengeance the Apostle denounces
against voluntary apostates, (Heb. 10: 29,) who, in falling away
from the faith of the gospel, mock God, insultingly reject his
favor, profane and trample under foot the blood of Christ, nay, as
far as in them lies, crucify him afresh. Still, he does not, as some
austere persons preposterously insist, leave no hope of pardon to
voluntary sins, but shows that apostasy being altogether without
excuse, it is not strange that God is inexorably rigorous in
punishing sacrilegious contempt thus shown to himself. For, in the
same Epistle, he says, that "it is impossible for those who were
once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were
made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted the good word of
God, and the powers of the world to come, if they shall fall away to
renew them again to repentance, seeing they crucify the Son of God
afresh, and put him to an open shame," (Heb. 7: 4-6.) And in another
passage, "If we sin willingly, after that we have received the
knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
but a certain fearful looking for of judgment," &c. (Heb. 11: 25,
26.) There are other passages, from a misinterpretation of which the
Novatians of old extracted materials for their heresy; so much so,
that some good men taking offense at their harshness, have deemed
the Epistle altogether spurious, though it truly savors in every
part of it of the apostolic spirit. But as our dispute is only with
those who receive the Epistle, it is easy to show that those
passages give no support to their error. First, the Apostle must of
necessity agree with his Master, who declares, that "all manner of
sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men, but the blasphemy
against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men," "neither in
this world, neither in the world to come," (Matth. 12: 31; Luke 12:
10.) We must hold that this was the only exception which the Apostle
recognized, unless we would set him in opposition to the grace of
God. Hence it follows, that to no sin is pardon denied save to one,
which proceeding from desperate fury cannot be ascribed to
infirmity, and plainly shows that the man guilty of it is possessed
by the devil.
    22. Here, however, it is proper to consider what the dreadful
iniquity is which is not to be pardoned. The definition which
Augustine somewhere gives, - viz., that it is obstinate
perverseness, with distrust of pardon, continued till death, -
scarcely agrees with the words of Christ, that it shall not be
forgiven in this world. For either this is said in vain, or it may
be committed in this world. But if Augustine's definition is
correct, the sin is not committed unless persisted in till death.
Others say, that the sin against the Holy Spirit consists in envying
the grace conferred upon a brother; but I know not on what it is
founded. Here, however, let us give the true definition, which, when
once it is established by sound evidence, will easily of itself
overturn all the others. I say therefore that he sins against the
Holy Spirit who, while so constrained by the power of divine truth
that he cannot plead ignorance, yet deliberately resists, and that
merely for the sake of resisting. For Christ, in explanation of what
he had said, immediately adds, "Whosoever speaketh a word against
the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever speaketh
against the holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him," (Matth. 12:
31.) And Matthew uses the term spirit of blasphemy for blasphemy
against the Spirit. How can any one insult the Son, without at the
same time attacking the Spirit? In this way. Those who in ignorance
assail the unknown truth of God, and yet are so disposed that they
would be unwilling to extinguish the truth of God when manifested to
them, or utter one word against him whom they knew to be the Lord's
Anointed, sin against the Father and the Son. Thus there are many in
the present day who have the greatest abhorrence to the doctrine of
the Gospel, and yet, if they knew it to be the doctrine of the
Gospel, would be prepared to venerate it with their whole heart. But
those who are convinced in conscience that what they repudiate and
impugn is the word of God, and yet cease not to impugn it, are said
to blaspheme against the Spirit, inasmuch as they struggle against
the illumination which is the work of the Spirit. Such were some of
the Jews, who, when they could not resist the Spirit speaking by
Stephen, yet were bent on resisting, (Acts 6: 10.) There can be no
doubt that many of them were carried away by zeal for the law; but
it appears that there were others who maliciously and impiously
raged against God himself, that is, against the doctrine which they
knew to be of God. Such, too, were the Pharisees, on whom our Lord
denounced woe. To depreciate the power of the Holy Spirit, they
defamed him by the name of Beelzebub, (Matth. 9: 3, 4; 12: 24.) The
spirit of blasphemy, therefore, is, when a man audaciously, and of
set purpose, rushes forth to insult his divine name. This Paul
intimates when he says, "but I obtained mercy, because I did it
ignorantly in unbelief;" otherwise he had deservedly been held
unworthy of the grace of God. If ignorance joined with unbelief made
him obtain pardon, it follows, that there is no room for pardon when
knowledge is added to unbelief.
    23. If you attend properly, you will perceive that the Apostle
speaks not of one particular lapse or two, but of the universal
revolt by which the reprobate renounce salvation. It is not strange
that God should be implacable to those whom John, in his Epistle,
declares not to have been of the elect, from whom they went out, (1
John 2: 19.) For he is directing his discourse against those who
imagined that they could return to the Christian religion though
they had once revolted from it. To divest them of this false and
pernicious opinion, he says, as is most true, that those who had
once knowingly and willingly cast off fellowship with Christ, had no
means of returning to it. It is not, however so cast off by those
who merely, by the dissoluteness of their lives, transgress the word
of the Lord, but by those who avowedly reject his whole doctrine.
There is a paralogism in the expression casting off and sinning.
Casting off, as interpreted by the Novatians, is when any one,
notwithstanding of being taught by the Law of the Lord not to steal
or commit adultery, refrains not from theft or adultery. On the
contrary, I hold that there is a tacit antithesis, in which all the
things, contrary to those which had been said, must be held to be
repeated, so that the thing expressed is not some particular vice,
but universal aversion to God, and (so to speak) the apostasy of the
whole man. Therefore, when he speaks of those falling away "who were
once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were
made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted of the good word
of God, and the powers of the world to come," we must understand him
as referring to those who, with deliberate impiety, have quenched
the light of the Spirit, tasted of the heavenly word and spurned it,
alienated themselves from the sanctification of the Spirit, and
trampled under foot the word of God and the powers of a world to
come. The better to show that this was the species of impiety
intended, he afterwards expressly adds the term willfully. For when
he says, "If we sin willfully, after that we have received the
knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,"
he denies not that Christ is a perpetual victim to expiate the
transgressions of saints, (this the whole Epistle, in explaining the
priesthood of Christ, distinctly proclaims,) but he says that there
remains no other sacrifice after this one is abandoned. And it is
abandoned when the truth of the Gospel is professedly abjured.
    24. To some it seems harsh, and at variance with the divine
mercy, utterly to deny forgiveness to any who retake themselves to
it. This is easily disposed of. It is not said that pardon will be
refused if they turn to the Lord, but it is altogether denied that
they can turn to repentance, inasmuch as for their ingratitude they
are struck by the just judgment of God with eternal blindness. There
is nothing contrary to this in the application which is afterwards
made of the example of Esau, who tried in vain, by crying and tears,
to recover his lost birthright; nor in the denunciation of the
Prophet, "They cried, and I would not hear." Such modes of
expression do not denote true conversion or calling upon God, but
that anxiety with which the wicked, when in calamity, are compelled
to see what they before securely disregarded, viz., that nothing can
avail but the assistance of the Lord. This, however, they do not so
much implore as lament the loss of. Hence all that the Prophet means
by crying, and the apostle by tears, is the dreadful torment which
stings and excruciates the wicked in despair. It is of consequence
carefully to observe this: for otherwise God would be inconsistent
with himself when he proclaims through the Prophet, that "If the
wicked will turn from all his sins that he has committed," - "he
shall surely live, he shall not die," (Ezek. 18: 21, 22.) And (as I
have already said) it is certain that the mind of man cannot be
changed for the better unless by his preventing grace. The promise
as to those who call upon him will never fail; but the names of
conversion and prayer are improperly given to that blind torment by
which the reprobate are distracted when they see that they must seek
God if they would find a remedy for their calamities, and yet shun
to approach him.
    25. But as the Apostle declares that God is not appeased by
feigned repentance, it is asked how Ahab obtained pardon, and
averted the punishment denounced against him, (1 Kings 21: 28, 29,)
seeing, it appears, he was only amazed on the sudden, and afterwards
continued his former course of life. He, indeed, clothed himself in
sackcloth, covered himself with ashes, lay on the ground, and (as
the testimony given to him bears) humbled himself before God. It was
a small matter to rend his garments while his heart continued
obstinate and swollen with wickedness, and yet we see that God was
inclined to mercy. I answer, that though hypocrites are thus
occasionally spared for a time, the wrath of God still lies upon
them, and that they are thus spared not so much on their own account
as for a public example. For what did Ahab gain by the mitigation of
his punishment except that he did not suffer it alive on the earth?
The curse of God, though concealed, was fixed on his house, and he
himself went to eternal destruction. We may see the same thing in
Esau, (Gen. 27: 38, 39.) For though he met with a refusal, a
temporal blessing was granted to his tears. But as, according to the
declaration of God, the spiritual inheritance could be possessed
only by one of the brothers, when Jacob was selected instead of
Esau, that event excluded him from the divine mercy; but still there
was given to him, as a man of a groveling nature, this consolation,
that he should be filled with the fulness of the earth and the dew
of heaven. And this, as I lately said, should be regarded as done
for the example of others, that we may learn to apply our minds, and
exert ourselves with greater alacrity, in the way of sincere
repentance, as there cannot be the least doubt that God will be
ready to pardon those who turn to him truly and with the heart,
seeing his mercy extends even to the unworthy though they bear marks
of his displeasure. In this way also, we are taught how dreadful the
judgment is which awaits all the rebellious who with audacious brow
and iron heart make it their sport to despise and disregard the
divine threatening. God in this way often stretched forth his hand
to deliver the Israelites from their calamities, though their cries
were pretended, and their minds double and perfidious, as he himself
complains in the Psalms, that they immediately returned to their
former course, (Psalm 78: 36, 37.) But he designed thus by kindness
and forbearance to bring them to true repentance, or leave them
without excuse. And yet by remitting the punishment for a time, he
does not lay himself under any perpetual obligation. He rather at
times rises with greater severity against hypocrites, and doubles
their punishment, that it may thereby appear how much hypocrisy
displeases him. But, as I have observed, he gives some examples of
his inclination to pardon, that the pious may thereby be stimulated
to amend their lives, and the pride of those who petulantly kick
against the pricks be more severely condemned.

Chapter 4.

4. Penitence, as explained in the sophistical jargon of the
Schoolmen, widely different from the purity required by the Gospel.
Of confession and satisfaction.
    
    The divisions of this chapter are, - I. The orthodox doctrine
of repentance being already expounded, the false doctrine is refuted
in the present chapter; a general summary survey being at the same
time taken of the doctrine of the Schoolmen, sec. 1, 2. II. Its
separate parts are afterwards examined. Contrition, sec. 2 and 3.
Confession, sec. 4-20. Sanctification, from sec. 20 to the end of
the chapter.
    
Sections.

1. Errors of the Schoolmen in delivering the doctrine of repentance.
    1. Errors in defining it. Four different definitions
    considered. 2. Absurd division. 3. Vain and puzzling questions.
    4. Mode in which they entangle themselves.
2. The false doctrine of the Schoolmen necessary to be refuted. Of
    contrition. Their view of it examined.
3. True and genuine contrition.
4. Auricular confession. Whether or not of divine authority.
    Arguments of Canonists and Schoolmen. Allegorical argument
    founded on Judaism. Two answers. Reason why Christ sent the
    lepers to the priests.
5. Another allegorical argument. Answer.
G. A third argument from two passages of Scripture. These passages
    expounded.
7. Confession proved not to be of divine authority. The use of it
    free for almost twelve hundred years after Christ. Its nature.
    When enacted into a law. Confirmation from the history of the
    Church. A representation of the ancient auricular confession
    still existing among the Papists, to bear judgment against
    them. Confession abolished in the Church of Constantinople.
8. This mode of confession disapproved by Chrysostom, as shown by
    many passages.
9. False confession being thus refuted, the confession enjoined by
    the word of God is considered. Mistranslation in the old
    version. Proof from Scripture that confession should be
    directed to God alone.
10. Effect of secret confession thus made to God. Another kind of
    confession made to men.
11. Two forms of the latter confession, viz., public and private.
    Public confession either ordinary or extraordinary. Use of
    each. Objection to confession and public prayer. Answer.
12. Private confession of two kinds. 1. On our own account. 2. On
    account of our neighbor. Use of the former. Great assistance to
    be obtained from faithful ministers of the Church. Mode of
    procedure. Caution to be used.
13. The use of the latter recommended by Christ. What comprehended
    under it. Scripture sanctions no other method of confession.
14. The power of the keys exercised in these three kinds of
    confession. The utility of this power in regard to public
    confession and absolution. Caution to be observed.
15. Popish errors respecting confession. 1. In enjoining on all the
    necessity of confessing every sin. 2. Fictitious keys. 3.
    Pretended mandate to loose and bind. 4. To whom the office of
    loosing and binding committed.
16. Refutation of the first error, from the impossibility of so
    confessing, as proved by the testimony of David.
17. Refuted farther from the testimony of conscience. Impossible to
    observe this most rigid obligation. Necessarily leads to
    despair or indifference. Confirmation of the preceding remarks
    by an appeal to conscience.
18. Another refutation of the first error from analogy. Sum of the
    whole refutation. Third refutation, laying down the surest rule
    of confession. Explanation of the rule. Three objections
    answered.
19. Fourth objection, viz., that auricular confession does no harm,
    and is even useful. Answer, unfolding the hypocrisy, falsehood,
    impiety, and monstrous abominations of the patrons of this
    error.
20. Refutation of the second error. 1. Priests not successors of the
    Apostles. 2. They have not the Holy Spirit, who alone is
    arbiter of the keys.
21. Refutation of the third error. 1. They are ignorant of the
    command and promise of Christ. By abandoning the word of God
    they run into innumerable absurdities.
22. Objection to the refutation of the third error. Answers,
    reducing the Papists to various absurdities.
23. Refutation of the fourth error. 1. Petitio principii. 2.
    Inversion of ecclesiastical discipline. Three objections
    answered.
24. Conclusion of the whole discussion against this fictitious
    confession.
25. Of satisfaction, to which the Sophists assign the third place in
    repentance. Errors and falsehoods. These views opposed by the
    terms, - 1. Forgiveness. 2. Free forgiveness. 3. God destroying
    iniquities. 4. By and on account of Christ. No need of our
    satisfaction.
26. Objection, confining the grace and efficacy of Christ within
    narrow limits. Answers by both John the Evangelist and John the
    Baptist. Consequence of these answers.
27. Two points violated by the fiction of satisfaction. First, the
    honor of Christ impaired. Secondly, the conscience cannot find
    peace. Objection, confining the forgiveness of sins to
    Catechumens, refuted.
28. Objection, founded on the arbitrary distinction between venial
    and mortal sins. This distinction insulting to God and
    repugnant to Scripture. Answer, showing the true distinction in
    regard to venial sin.
29. Objection, founded on a distinction between guilt and the
    punishment of it. Answer, illustrated by various passages of
    Scripture. Admirable saying of Augustine.
30. Answer, founded on a consideration of the efficacy of Christ's
    death, and the sacrifices under the law. Our true satisfaction.
31. An objection, perverting six passages of Scripture. Preliminary
    observations concerning a twofold judgment on the part of God.
    1. For punishment. 2. For correction.
32. Two distinctions hence arising. Objection, that God is often
    angry with his elect. Answer, God in afflicting his people does
    not take his mercy from them. This confirmed by his promise, by
    Scripture, and the uniform experience of the Church.
    Distinction between the reprobate and the elect in regard to
    punishment.
33. Second distinction. The punishment of the reprobate a
    commencement of the eternal punishment awaiting them; that of
    the elect designed to bring them to repentance. This confirmed
    by passages of Scripture and of the Fathers.
34. Two uses of this doctrine to the believer. In affliction he can
    believe that God, though angry, is still favourable to him. In
    the punishment of the reprobate, he sees a prelude to their
    final doom.
35. Objection, as to the punishment of David, answered. Why all men
    here subjected to chastisement.
36. Objections, founded on five other passages, answered.
37. Answer continued.
38. Objection, founded on passages in the Fathers. Answer, with
    passages from Chrysostom and Augustine.
39. These satisfactions had reference to the peace of the Church,
    and not to the throne of God. The Schoolmen have perverted the
    meaning of some absurd statements by obscure monks.

    1. I come now to an examination of what the scholastic sophists
teach concerning repentance. This I will do as briefly as possible;
for I leave no intention to take up every point, lest this work,
which I am desirous to frame as a compendium of doctrine, should
exceed all bounds. They have managed to envelop a matter, otherwise
not much involved, in so many perplexities, that it will be
difficult to find an outlet if once you get plunged but a little way
into their mire. And, first, in giving a definition, they plainly
show they never understood what repentance means. For they fasten on
some expressions in the writings of the Fathers which are very far
from expressing the nature of repentance. For instance, that to
repent is to deplore past sins and not commit what is to be
deplored. Again that it is to bewail past evils and not to sin to do
what is to be bewailed. Again, that it is a kind of grieving
revenge, punishing in itself what it grieves to have committed.
Again, that it is sorrow of heart and bitterness of soul for the
evils which the individual has committed, or to which he has
consented. Supposing we grant that these things were well said by
Fathers, (though, if one were inclined to dispute, it were not
difficult to deny it,) they were not, however said with the view of
describing repentance but only of exhorting penitents not again to
fall into the same faults from which they had been delivered. But if
all descriptions of this kind are to be converted into definitions,
there are others which have as good a title to be added. For
instance, the following sentence of Chrysostom: "Repentance is a
medicine for the cure of sin, a gift bestowed from above, an
admirable virtue, a grace surpassing the power of laws." Moreover,
the doctrine which they afterwards deliver is somewhat worse than
their definition. For they are so keenly bent on external exercises,
that all you can gather from immense volumes is, that repentance is
a discipline, and austerity, which serves partly to subdue the
flesh, partly to chasten and punish sins: of internal renovation of
mind, bringing with it true amendment of life, there is a strange
silence. No doubt, they talk much of contrition and attrition,
torment the soul with many scruples, and involve it in great trouble
and anxiety; but when they seem to have deeply wounded the heart,
they cure all its bitterness by a slight sprinkling of ceremonies.
Repentance thus shrewdly defined, they divide into contrition of the
heart, confession of the mouth, and satisfaction of works. This is
not more logical than the definition, though they would be thought
to have spent their whole lives in framing syllogisms. But if any
one argues from the definition (a mode of argument prevalent with
dialecticians) that a man may weep over his past sins and not commit
things that cause weeping; may bewail past evils, and not commit
things that are to be bewailed; may punish what he is grieved for
having committed, though he does not confess it with the mouth, -
how will they defend their division? For if he may be a true
penitent and not confess, repentance can exist without confession.
If they answer, that this division refers to repentance regarded as
a sacrament, or is to be understood of repentance in its most
perfect form, which they do not comprehend in their definitions, the
mistake does not rest with me: let them blame themselves for not
defining more purely and clearly. When any matter is discussed, I
certainly am dull enough to refer everything to the definition as
the hinge and foundation of the whole discussion. But granting that
this is a license which masters have, let us now survey the
different parts in their order. In omitting as frivolous several
things which they vend with solemn brow as mysteries, I do it not
from ignorance. It were not very difficult to dispose of all those
points which they plume themselves on their acuteness and subtilty
in discussing; but I consider it a sacred duty not to trouble the
reader to no purpose with such absurdities. It is certainly easy to
see from the questions which they move and agitate, and in which
they miserably entangle themselves, that they are pealing of things
they know not. Of this nature are the following: Whether repentance
of one sin is pleasing to God, while there is an obstinate adherence
to other sins. Again, whether punishments divinely indicted are
available for satisfaction. Again, whether repentance can be several
times repeated for mortal sins, whereas they grossly and wickedly
define that daily repentance has to do with none but venial sins. In
like manner, with gross error, they greatly torment themselves with
a saying of Jerome, that repentance is a second plank after
shipwreck. Herein they show that they have never awoke from brutish
stupor, so as to obtain a distant view of the thousandth part of
their sins.
    2. I would have my readers to observe, that the dispute here
relates not to a matter of no consequence; but to one of the most
important of all, viz., the forgiveness of sins. For while they
require three things in repentance, viz., compunction of heart,
confession of the mouth, and satisfaction of work, they at the same
time teach that these are necessary to obtain the pardon of sins. If
there is any thing in the whole compass of religion which it is of
importance to us to know, this certainly is one of the most
important, viz., to perceive and rightly hold by what means, what
rule, what terms, with what facility or difficulty, forgiveness of
sins may be obtained. Unless our knowledge here is clear and
certain, our conscience can have no rest at all, no peace with God,
no confidence or security, but is continually trembling,
fluctuating, boiling, and distracted; dreads, hates, and shuns the
presence of God. But if forgiveness of sins depends on the
conditions to which they bind it, nothing can be more wretched and
deplorable than our situation. Contrition they represent as the
first step in obtaining pardon; and they exact it as due, that is,
full and complete: meanwhile, they decide not when one may feel
secure of having performed this contrition in due measure. I admit
that we are bound strongly and incessantly to urge every man
bitterly to lament his sins, and thereby stimulate himself more and
more to dislike and hate them. For this is the "repentance to
salvation not to be repented of," (2 Cor. 7: 10.) But when such
bitterness of sorrow is demanded as may correspond to the magnitude
of the offense, and be weighed in the balance with confidence of
pardon, miserable consciences are sadly perplexed and tormented when
they see that the contrition due for sin is laid upon them, and yet
that they have no measure of what is due, so as to enable them to
determine that they have made full payment. If they say, we are to
do what in us lies, we are always brought back to the same point;
for when will any man venture to promise himself that he has done
his utmost in bewailing sin? Therefore, when consciences, after a
lengthened struggle and long contests with themselves, find no haven
in which they may rest, as a means of alleviating their condition in
some degree, they extort sorrow and wring out tears, in order to
perfect their contrition.
    3. If they say that this is calumny on my part, let them come
forward and point out a single individual who, by this doctrine of
contrition, has not either been driven to despair, or has not,
instead of true, opposed pretended fear to the justice of God. We
have elsewhere observed, that forgiveness of sins never can be
obtained without repentance, because none but the afflicted, and
those wounded by a consciousness of sins, can sincerely implore the
mercy of God; but we, at the same time, added, that repentance
cannot be the cause of the forgiveness of sins: and we also did away
with that torment of souls - the dogma that it must be performed as
due. Our doctrine was, that the soul looked not to its own
compunction or its own tears, but fixed both eyes on the mercy of
God alone. Only we observed, that those who labour and are heavy
laden are called by Christ, seeing he was sent "to preach good
tidings to the meek;" "to bind up the broken-hearted; to proclaim
liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that
are bound;" "to comfort all that mourn." Hence the Pharisees were
excluded, because, full of their own righteousness, they
acknowledged not their own poverty; and despisers, because,
regardless of the divine anger, they sought no remedy for their
wickedness. Such persons neither labour nor are heavy laden, are not
broken-hearted, bound, nor in prison. But there is a great
difference between teaching that forgiveness of sins is merited by a
full and complete contrition, (which the sinner never can give,) and
instructing him to hunger and thirst after the mercy of God, that
recognizing his wretchedness, his turmoil, weariness, and captivity,
you may show him where he should seek refreshment, rest, and
liberty; in fine, teach him in his humility to give glory to God.
    4. Confession has ever been a subject of keen contest between
the Canonists and the Scholastic Theologians; the former contending
that confession is of divine authority - the latter insisting, on
the contrary, that it is merely enjoined by ecclesiastical
constitution. In this contest great effrontery has been displayed by
the Theologians, who have corrupted and violently wrested every
passage of Scripture they have quoted in their favour. And when they
saw that even thus they could not gain their object, those who
wished to be thought particularly acute had recourse to the evasion
that confession is of divine authority in regard to the substance,
but that it afterwards received its form from positive enactment.
Thus the silliest of these quibblers refer the citation to divine
authority, from its being said, "Adam, where art thou?" (Gen. 3: 9,
12;) and also the exception from Adam having replied as if
excepting, "The women whom thou gavest to be with me," &c.; but say
that the form of both was appointed by civil law. Let us see by what
arguments they prove that this confession, formed or unformed, is a
divine commandment. The Lord, they say, sent the lepers to the
priests, (Matth. 8: 4.) What? did he send them to confession? Who
ever heard tell that the Levitical priests were appointed to hear
confession? Here they resort to allegory. The priests were appointed
by the Mosaic law to discern between leper and leper: sin is
spiritual leprosy; therefore it belongs to the priests to decide
upon it. Before I answer, I would ask, in passing, why, if this
passage makes them judges of spiritual leprosy, they claim the
cognizance of natural and carnal leprosy? This, for sooth, is not to
play upon Scripture! The law gives the cognizance of leprosy to the
Levitical priests: let us usurp this to ourselves. Sin is spiritual
leprosy: let us also have cognizance of sin. I now give my answer:
There being a change of the priesthood, there must of necessity be a
change of the law. All the sacerdotal functions were transferred to
Christ, and in him fulfilled and ended, (Heb. 7: 12.) To him alone,
therefore, all the rights and honors of the priesthood have been
transferred. If they are so fond then of hunting out allegories, let
them set Christ before them as the only priest, and place full and
universal jurisdiction on his tribunal: this we will readily admit.
Besides, there is an incongruity in their allegory: it classes a
merely civil enactment among ceremonies. Why, then, does Christ send
the lepers to the priests? Lest the priests should be charged with
violating the law, which ordained that the person cured of leprosy
should present himself before the priest, and be purified by the
offering of a sacrifice, he orders the lepers who had been cleansed
to do what the law required. "Go and show thyself to the priest, and
offer for thy cleansing according as Moses commanded for a testimony
unto them." (Luke 5: 17.) And assuredly this miracle would be a
testimony to them: they had pronounced them lepers; they now
pronounce them cured. Whether they would or not, they are forced to
become witnesses to the miracles of Christ. Christ allows them to
examine the miracle, and they cannot deny it: yet, as they still
quibble, they have need of a testimony. So it is elsewhere said,
"This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world, for
a witness unto all nations," (Matth. 24: 14.) Again, "Ye shall be
brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony
against them and the Gentiles," (Matth. 10: 18;) that is, in order
that, in the judgment of Gods they might be more filly convicted.
But if they prefer taking the view of Chrysostom, (Hom. 12 de
Muliere Cananaea,) he shows that this was done by Christ for the
sake of the Jews also, that he might not be regarded as a violator
of the law. But we are ashamed to appeal to the authority of any man
in a matter so clear, when Christ declares that he left the legal
right of the priests entire, as professed enemies of the Gospel, who
were always intent on making a clamour if their mouths were not
stopped. Wherefore, let the Popish priests, in order to retain this
privilege, openly make common cause with those whom it was necessary
to restrain, by forcible means, from speaking evil of Christ. For
there is here no reference to his true ministers.
    5. They draw their second argument from the same fountain, - I
mean allegory; as if allegories were of much avail in confirming any
doctrine. But, indeed, let them avail, if those which I am able to
produce are not more specious than theirs. They say, then, that the
Lord, after raising Lazarus, commanded his disciples to "loose him
and let him go," (John 11: 44.) Their first statement is untrue: we
nowhere read that the Lord said this to the disciples; and it is
much more probable that he spoke to the Jews who were standing by,
that from there being no suspicion of fraud the miracle might be
more manifest, and his power might be the more conspicuous from his
raising the dead without touching him, by a mere word. In the same
way, I understand that our Lord, to leave no ground of suspicion to
the Jews, wished them to roll back the stone, feel the stench,
perceive the sure signs of death, see him rise by the mere power of
a word, and first handle hint when alive. And this is the view of
Chrysostom, (Serm. C. Jud. Gent. et Haeret.) But granting that it
was said to the disciples, what can they gain by it? That the Lord
gave the apostles the power of loosing? How much more aptly and
dexterously might we allegorize and say, that by this symbol the
Lord designed to teach his followers to loose those whom he raises
up; that is, not to bring to remembrance the sins which he himself
had forgotten, not to condemn as sinners those whom he had
acquitted, not still to upbraid those whom he had pardoned, not to
be stern and severe in punishing, while he himself was merciful and
ready to forgive. Certainly nothing should more incline us to pardon
than the example of the Judge who threatens that he will be
inexorable to the rigid and inhumane. Let them go now and vend their
allegories.
    6. They now come to closer quarters, while they support their
view by passages of Scripture which they think clearly in their
favour. Those who came to John's baptism confessed their sins, and
James bids us confess our sins one to another, (James 5: 16.) It is
not strange that those who wished to be baptized confessed their
sins. It has already been mentioned, that John preached the baptism
of repentance, baptized with water unto repentance. Whom then could
he baptize, but those who confessed that they were sinners? Baptism
is a symbol of the forgiveness of sins; and who could be admitted to
receive the symbol but sinners acknowledging themselves as such?
They therefore confessed their sins that they might be baptized. Nor
without good reason does James enjoin us to confess our sins one to
another. But if they would attend to what immediately follows, they
would perceive that this gives them little support. The words are,
"Confess your sins one to another, and pray one for another." He
joins together mutual confession and mutual prayer. If, then, we are
to confess to priests only, we are also to pray for them only. What?
It would even follow from the words of James, that priests alone can
confess. In saying that we are to confess mutually, he must be
addressing those only who can hear the confession of others. He
says, "allelous", mutually, by turns, or, if they prefer it,
reciprocally. But those only can confess reciprocally who are fit to
hear confession. This being a privilege which they bestow upon
priests only, we also leave them the office of confessing to each
other. Have done then with such frivolous absurdities, and let us
receive the true meaning of the apostle, which is plain and simple;
first, That we are to deposit our infirmities in the breasts of each
other, with the view of receiving mutual counsel, sympathy, and
comfort; and, secondly, That mutually conscious of the infirmities
of our brethren we are to pray to the Lord for them. Why then quote
James against us who so earnestly insist on acknowledgment of the
divine mercy? No man can acknowledge the mercy of God without
previously confessing his own misery. Nay, we pronounce every man to
be anathema who does not confess himself a sinner before God, before
his angels, before the Church; in short, before all men. "The
Scripture has concluded all under sin," "that every mouth may be
stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God," that God
alone may be justified and exalted, (Gal. 3: 22; Rom. 3: 9, 19.)
    7. I wonder at their effrontery in venturing to maintain that
the confession of which they speak is of divine authority. We admit
that the use of it is very ancient; but we can easily prove that at
one time it was free. It certainly appears, from their own records,
that no law or constitution respecting it was enacted before the
days of Innocent III. Surely if there had been a more ancient law
they would have fastened on it, instead of being satisfied with the
decree of the Council of Lateral, and so making themselves
ridiculous even to children. In other matters, they hesitate not to
coin fictitious decrees, which they ascribe to the most ancient
Councils, that they may blind the eyes of the simple by veneration
for antiquity. In this instance it has not occurred to them to
practice this deception, and hence, themselves being witnesses,
three centuries have not yet elapsed since the bridle was put, and
the necessity of confession imposed by Innocent III. And to say
nothing of the time, the mere barbarism of the terms used destroys
the authority of the law. For when these worthy fathers enjoin that
every person of both sexes (utriusque sexus) must once a year
confess his sins to his own priest, men of wit humorously object
that the precept binds hermaphrodites only, and has no application
to any one who is either a male or a female. A still grosser
absurdity has been displayed by their disciples, who are unable to
explain what is meant by one's own priest, (proprius sacerdos.) Let
all the hired ravers of the Pope babble as they may, we hold that
Christ is not the author of this law, which compels men to enumerate
their sins; nay, that twelve hundred years elapsed after the
resurrection of Christ before any such law was made, and that,
consequently, this tyranny was not introduced until piety and
doctrine were extinct, and pretended pastors had usurped to
themselves unbridled license. There is clear evidence in historians,
and other ancient writers, to show that this was a politic
discipline introduced by bishops, not a law enacted by Christ or the
Apostles. Out of many I will produce only one passage, which will be
no obscure proof. Sozomen relates, that this constitution of the
bishops was carefully observed in the Western churches, but
especially at Rome; thus intimating that it was not the universal
custom of all churches. He also says, that one of the presbyters was
specially appointed to take charge of this duty. This abundantly
confutes their falsehood as to the keys being given to the whole
priesthood indiscriminately for this purpose, since the function was
not common to all the priests, but specially belonged to the one
priest whom the bishop had appointed to it. He it was (the same who
at present in each of the cathedral churches has the name of
penitentiary) who had cognizance of offenses which were more
heinous, and required to be rebuked for the sake of example. He
afterwards adds, that the same custom existed at Constantinople,
until a certain matron, while pretending to confess, was discovered
to have used it as a cloak to cover her intercourse with a deacon.
In consequence of that crime, Nectarius, the bishop of that church -
a man famous for learning and sanctity - abolished the custom of
confessing. Here, then, let these asses prick up their ears. If
auricular confession was a divine law, how could Nectarius have
dared to abolish or remodel it? Nectarius, a holy man of God,
approved by the suffrage of all antiquity, will they charge with
heresy and schism? With the same vote they will condemn the church
of Constantinople, in which Sozomen affirms that the custom of
confessing was not only disguised for a time, but even in his own
memory abolished. Nay, let them charge with defections not only
Constantinople but all the Eastern churches, which (if they say
true) disregarded an inviolable law enjoined on all Christians.
    8. This abrogation is clearly attested in so many passages by
Chrysostom, who lived at Constantinople, and was himself prelate of
the church, that it is strange they can venture to maintain the
contrary: "Tell your sins", says he, "that you may efface them: if
you blush to tell another what sins you have committed, tell them
daily in your soul. I say not, tell them to your fellow-servant who
may upbraid you, but tell them to God who cures them. Confess your
sins upon your bed, that your conscience may there daily recognize
its iniquities." Again, "Now, however, it is not necessary to
confess before witnesses; let the examination of your faults be made
in your own thought: let the judgment be without a witness: let God
alone see you confessing." Again, "I do not lead you publicly into
the view of your fellow servants; I do not force you to disclose
your sins to men; review and lay open your conscience before God.
Show your wounds to the Lord, the best of physicians, and seek
medicine from him. Show to him who upbraids not, but cures most
kindly." Again, "Certainly tell it not to man lest he upbraid you.
Nor must you confess to your fellow servant, who may make it public;
but show your wounds to the Lord, who takes care of you, who is kind
and can cure." He afterwards introduces God speaking thus: "I oblige
you not to come into the midst of a theatre, and have many
witnesses; tell your sins to me alone in private, that I may cure
the ulcer." Shall we say that Chrysostom, in writing these and
similar passages, carried his presumption so far as to free the
consciences of men from those chains with which they are bound by
the divine law? By no means; but knowing that it was not at all
prescribed by the word of God, he dares not exact it as necessary.
    9. But that the whole matter may be more plainly unfolded, we
shall first honestly state the nature of confession as delivered in
the word of God, and thereafter subjoin their inventions - not all
of them indeed, (who could drink up that boundless sea?) but those
only which contain summary of their secret confession. Here I am
grieved to mention how frequently the old interpreter has rendered
the word confess instead of praise, a fact notorious to the most
illiterate, were it not fitting to expose their effrontery in
transferring to their tyrannical edict what was written concerning
the praises of God. To prove that confession has the effect of
exhilarating the mind, they obtrude the passage in the psalm, "with
the voice of joy and praise," (Vulgate, confessionis,) (Ps. 42: 4.)
But if such a metamorphosis is valid, any thing may be made of any
thing. But, as they have lost all shame, let pious readers reflect
how, by the just vengeance of God, they have been given over to a
reprobate mind, that their audacity may be the more detestable. If
we are disposed to acquiesce in the simple doctrine of Scripture,
there will be no danger of our being misled by such glosses. There
one method of confessing is prescribed; since it is the Lord who
forgives, forgets and wipes away sins, to him let us confess them,
that we may obtain pardon. He is the physician, therefore let us
show our wounds to him. He is hurt and offended, let us ask peace of
him. He is the discerner of the heart, and knows all one thoughts;
let us hasten to pour out our hearts before him. He it is, in fine,
who invites sinners; let us delay not to draw near to him. "I
acknowledge my sin unto thee," says David; "and mine iniquity have I
not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and
thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin," (Ps. 32: 5.) Another
specimen of David's confessions is as follows: "Have mercy upon me,
O God, according to thy loving kindness," (Ps. 51: 1.) The following
is Daniel's confession: "We have sinned, and have committed
iniquity, and have done wickedly, and have rebelled, even by
departing from thy precepts and thy judgments," (Dan. 9: 5.) Other
examples every where occur in Scripture: the quotation of them would
almost fill a volume. "If we confess our sins," says John, "he is
faithful and just to forgive us our sins," (1 John 1: 9.) To whom
are we to confess? to Him surely; - that is, we are to fall down
before him with a grieved and humbled heart, and sincerely accusing
and condemning ourselves, seek forgiveness of his goodness and
mercy.
    10. He who has adopted this confession from the heart and as in
the presence of God, will doubtless have a tongue ready to confess
whenever there is occasion among men to publish the mercy of God. He
will not be satisfied to whisper the secret of his heart for once
into the ear of one individual, but will often, and openly, and in
the hearing of the whole world, ingenuously make mention both of his
own ignominy, and of the greatness and glory of the Lord. In this
way David, after he was accused by Nathan, being stung in his
conscience, confesses his sin before God and men. "I have sinned
unto the Lord," says he, (2 Sam. 12: 13;) that is, I have now no
excuse, no evasion; all must judge me a sinner; and that which I
wished to be secret with the Lord must also be made manifest to men.
Hence the secret confession which is made to God is followed by
voluntary confession to men, whenever that is conducive to the
divine glory or our humiliation. For this reason the Lord anciently
enjoined the people of Israel that they should repeat the words
after the priest, and make public confession of their iniquities in
the temple; because he foresaw that this was a necessary help to
enable each one to form a just idea of himself. And it is proper
that by confession of our misery, we should manifest the mercy of
our God both among ourselves and before the whole world.
    11. It is proper that this mode of confession should both be
ordinary in the Church, and also be specially employed on
extraordinary occasions, when the people in common happen to have
fallen into any fault. Of this latter description we have an example
in the solemn confession which the whole people made under the
authority and guidance of Ezra and Nehemiah, (Neh. 1: 6, 7.) For
their long captivity, the destruction of the temple, and suppression
of their religion, having been the common punishment of their
defection, they could not make meet acknowledgment of the blessing
of deliverance without previous confession of their guilt. And it
matters not though in one assembly it may sometimes happen that a
few are innocent, seeing that the members of a languid and sickly
body cannot boast of soundness. Nay, it is scarcely possible that
these few have not contracted some taint, and so bear part of the
blame. Therefore, as often as we are afflicted with pestilence, or
war, or famine, or any other calamity whatsoever, if it is our duty
to retake ourselves to mourning, fasting, and other signs of
guiltiness, confession also, on which all the others depend, is not
to be neglected. That ordinary confession which the Lord has
moreover expressly commended, no sober man, who has reflected on its
usefulness, will venture to disapprove. Seeing that in every sacred
assembly we stand in the view of God and angels, in what way should
our service begin but in acknowledging our own unworthiness? But
this you will say is done in every prayer; for as often as we pray
for pardon, we confess our sins. I admit it. But if you consider how
great is our carelessness, or drowsiness, or sloth, you will grant
me that it would be a salutary ordinance if the Christian people
were exercised in humiliation by some formal method of confession.
For though the ceremony which the Lord enjoined on the Israelites
belonged to the tutelage of the Law, yet the thing itself belongs in
some respect to us also. And, indeed, in all well ordered churches,
in observance of an useful custom, the minister, each Lord's day,
frames a formula of confession in his own name and that of the
people, in which he makes a common confession of iniquity, and
supplicates pardon from the Lord. In short, by this key a door of
prayer is opened privately for each, and publicly for all.
    12. Two other forms of private confession are approved by
Scripture. The one is made on our own account, and to it reference
is made in the passage in James, "Confess your sins one to another,"
(James 5: 16;) for the meaning is, that by disclosing our
infirmities to each other, we are to obtain the aid of mutual
counsel and consolation. The other is to be made for the sake of our
neighbor, to appease and reconcile him if by our fault he has been
in any respect injured. In the former, although James, by not
specifying any particular individual into whose bosom we are to
disburden our feelings, leaves us the free choice of confessing to
any member of the church who may seem fittest; yet as for the most
part pastors are to be supposed better qualified than others, our
choice ought chiefly to fall upon them. And the ground of preference
is, that the Lord, by calling them to the ministry, points them out
as the persons by whose lips we are to be taught to subdue and
correct our sins, and derive consolation from the hope of pardon.
For as the duty of mutual admonition and correction is committed to
all Christians, but is specially enjoined on ministers, so while we
ought all to console each other mutually and confirm each other in
confidence in the divine mercy, we see that ministers, to assure our
consciences of the forgiveness of fins, are appointed to be the
witnesses and sponsors of it, so that they are themselves said to
forgive sins and loose souls (Matth. 16: 19; 18: 18.) When you hear
this attributed to them, reflect that it is for your use. Let every
believer, therefore, remember, that if in private he is so agonized
and afflicted by a sense of his sins that he cannot obtain relief
without the aid of others, it is his duty not to neglect the remedy
which God provides for him, viz., to have recourse for relief to a
private confession to his own pastor, and for consolation privately
implore the assistance of him whose business it is, both in public
and private, to solace the people of God with Gospel doctrine. But
we are always to use moderation, lest in a matter as to which God
prescribes no certain rule, our consciences be burdened with a
certain yoke. Hence it follows first, that confession of this nature
ought to be free so as not to be exacted of all, but only
recommended to those who feel that they have need of it; and,
secondly, even those who use it according to their necessity must
neither be compelled by any precept, nor artfully induced to
enumerate all their sins, but only in so far as they shall deem it
for their interest, that they may obtain the full benefit of
consolation. Faithful pastors, as they would both eschew tyranny in
their ministry, and superstition in the people, must not only leave
this liberty to churches, but defend and strenuously vindicate it.
    13. Of the second form of confession, our Savior speaks in
Matthew. "If thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there remember
that thy brother has ought against thee; leave there thy gift before
the altar; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and
offer thy gift," (Matth. 5: 23, 24.) Thus love, which has been
interrupted by our fault, must be restored by acknowledging and
asking pardon for the fault. Under this head is included the
confession of those who by their sin have given offense to the whole
Church, (supra, sec. 10.) For if Christ attaches so much importance
to the offense of one individual, that he forbids the sacrifice of
all who have sinned in any respect against their brethren, until by
due satisfaction they have regained their favor, how much greater
reason is there that he, who by some evil example has offended the
Church should be reconciled to it by the acknowledgment of his
fault? Thus the member of the Church of Corinth was restored to
communion after he had humbly submitted to correction, (2 Cor. 2:
6.) This form of confession existed in the ancient Christian Church,
as Cyprian relates: "They practice repentance," says he, "for a
proper time, then they come to confession, and by the laying on of
the hands of the bishop and clergy, are admitted to communion."
Scripture knows nothing of any other form or method of confessing,
and it belongs not to us to bind new chains upon consciences which
Christ most strictly prohibits from being brought into bondage.
Meanwhile, that the flock present themselves before the pastor
whenever they would partake of the Holy Supper, I am so far from
disapproving, that I am most desirous it should be everywhere
observed. For both those whose conscience is hindered may thence
obtain singular benefit, and those who require admonition thus
afford an opportunity for it; provided always no countenance is
given to tyranny and superstition.
    14. The power of the keys has place in the three following
modes of confession, - either when the whole Church, in a formal
acknowledgment of its defects, supplicates pardon; or when a private
individual, who has given public offense by some notable
delinquency, testifies his repentance; or when he who from disquiet
of conscience needs the aid of his minister, acquaints him with his
infirmity. With regard to the reparation of offense, the case is
different. For though in this also provision is made for peace of
conscience, yet the principal object is to suppress hatred, and
reunite brethren in the bond of peace. But the benefit of which I
have spoken is by no means to be despised, that we may the more
willingly confess our sins. For when the whole Church stands as it
were at the bar of God, confesses her guilt, and finds her only
refuge in the divine mercy, it is no common or light solace to have
an ambassador of Christ present, invested with the mandate of
reconciliations by whom she may hear her absolution pronounced. Here
the utility of the keys is justly commended when that embassy is
duly discharged with becoming order and reverence. In like manner,
when he who has as it were become an alien from the Church receives
pardon, and is thus restored to brotherly unity, how great is the
benefit of understanding that he is pardoned by those to whom Christ
said, "Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them,"
(John 20: 23.) Nor is private absolution of less benefit or efficacy
when asked by those who stand in need of a special remedy for their
infirmity. It not seldom happens, that he who hears general promises
which are intended for the whole congregation of the faithful,
nevertheless remains somewhat in doubts, and is still disquieted in
mind, as if his own remission were not yet obtained. Should this
individual lay open the secret wound of his soul to his pastor, and
hear these words of the Gospel specially addressed to him, "Son, be
of good cheer, thy sins be forgiven thee," (Matth. 9: 2,) his mind
will feel secure, and escape from the trepidation with which it was
previously agitated. But when we treat of the keys, us must always
beware of dreaming of any power apart from the preaching of the
Gospel. This subject will be more fully explained when we come to
treat of the government of the Church, (Book 4 chap. 11, 12) There
we shall see, that whatever privilege of binding and loosing Christ
has bestowed on his Church is annexed to the word. This is
especially true with regard to the ministry of the keys, the whole
power of which consists in this, that the grace of the Gospel is
publicly and privately sealed on the minds of believers by means of
those whom the Lord has appointed; and the only method in which this
can be done is by preaching.
    15. What say the Roman theologians? That all persons of both
sexes, so soon as they shall have reached the years of discretion,
must, once a year at least, confess all their sins to their own
priest; that the sin is not discharged unless the resolution to
confess has been firmly conceived; that if this resolution is not
carried into effect when an opportunity offers, there is no entrance
into Paradise; that the priest, moreover has the power of the keys,
by which he can loose and bind the sinner; because the declaration
of Christ is not in vain: "Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall
be bound in heaven," (Matth. 18: 18.) Concerning this power, however
they wage a fierce war among themselves. Some say there is only one
key essentially, viz., the power of binding and loosing; that
knowledge, indeed, is requisite for the proper use of it, but only
as an accessory, not as essentially inherent in it. Others seeing
that this gave too unrestrained license, have imagined two keys,
viz., discernment and power. Others, again, seeing that the license
of priests was curbed by such restraint, have forged other keys,
(infra, sec. 21,) the authority of discerning to be used in
defining, and the power to carry their sentences into execution; and
to these they add knowledge as a counselor. This binding and
loosing, however, they do not venture to interpret simply, to
forgive and wipe away sins, because they hear the Lord proclaiming
by the prophet, "I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no
savior." "I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions,"
(Isaiah 43: 11, 25.) But they say it belongs to the priest to
declare who are bound or loosed, and whose sins are remitted or
retained; to declare, moreover, either by confession, when he
absolves and retains sins, or by sentence, when he excommunicates or
admits to communion in the Sacraments. Lastly, perceiving that the
knot is not yet untied, because it may always be objected that
persons are often undeservedly bound and loosed, and therefore not
bound or loosed in heaven; as their ultimate resource, they answer,
that the conferring of the keys must be taken with limitations
because Christ has promised that the sentence of the priest,
properly pronounced, will be approved at his judgment-seat according
as the bound or loosed asked what they merited. They say, moreover,
that those keys which are conferred by bishops at ordination were
given by Christ to all priests but that the free use of them is with
those only who discharge ecclesiastical functions; that with priests
excommunicated or suspended the keys themselves indeed remain, but
tied and rusty. Those who speak thus may justly be deemed modest and
sober compared with others, who on a new anvil have forged new keys,
by which they say that the treasury of heaven is locked up: these we
shall afterwards consider in their own place, (chap. 5 sec. 2.)
    16. To each of these views I will briefly reply. As to their
binding the souls of believers by their laws, whether justly or
unjustly, I say nothing at present, as it will be seen at the proper
place; but their enacting it as a law, that all sins are to be
enumerated; their denying that sin is discharged except under the
condition that the resolution to confess has been firmly conceived;
their pretence that there is no admission into Paradise if the
opportunity of confession has been neglected, are things which it is
impossible to bear. Are all sins to be enumerated? But David, who, I
presume, had honestly pondered with himself as to the confession of
his sins, exclaimed, "Who can understand his errors? Cleanse thou me
from secret faults," (Ps. 19: 12;) and in another passage, "Mine
iniquities are gone over my head: as a heavy burden they are too
heavy for me," (Ps. 38: 4.) He knew how deep was the abyss of our
sins, how numerous the forms of wickedness, how many heads the hydra
carried, how long a tail it drew. Therefore, he did not sit down to
make a catalogue, but from the depth of his distress cried unto the
Lord, "I am overwhelmed, and buried, and sore vexed; the gates of
hell have encircled me: let thy right hand deliver me from the abyss
into which I am plunged, and from the death which I am ready to
die." Who can now think of a computation of his sins when he sees
David's inability to number his?
    17. By this ruinous procedure, the souls of those who were
affected with some sense of God have been most cruelly racked.
First, they retook themselves to calculation, proceeding according
to the formula given by the Schoolmen, and dividing their sins into
boughs, branches, twigs, and leaves; then they weighed the
qualities, quantities, and circumstances; and in this way, for some
time, matters proceeded. But after they had advanced farther, when
they looked around, nought was seen but sea and sky; no road, no
harbor. The longer the space they ran over, a longer still met the
eye; nay, lofty mountains began to rise, and there seemed no hope of
escape; none at least till after long wanderings. They were thus
brought to a dead halt, till at length the only issue was found in
despair. Here these cruel murderers, to ease the wounds which they
had made, applied certain fomentations. Every one was to do his
best. But new cares again disturbed, nay, new torments excruciated
their souls. "I have not spent enough of time; I have not exerted
myself sufficiently: many things I have omitted through negligence:
forgetfulness proceeding from want of care is not excusable." Then
new drugs were supplied to alleviate their pains. "Repent of your
negligence; and provided it is not done supinely, it will be
pardoned." All these things, however, could not heal the wound,
being not so much alleviations of the sore as poison besmeared with
honey, that its bitterness might not at once offend the taste, but
penetrate to the vitals before it could be detected. The dreadful
voice, therefore, was always heard pealing in their ears, "Confess
all your sins," and the dread thus occasioned could not be pacified
without sure consolation. Here let my readers consider whether it be
possible to take an account of the actions of a whole year, or even
to collect the sins committed in a single day, seeing every man's
experience convinces him that at evening, in examining the faults of
that single day, memory gets confused, so great is the number and
variety presented. I am not speaking of dull and heartless
hypocrites, who, after animadverting on three or four of their
grosser offenses, think the work finished; but of the true
worshipers of God, who, after they have performed their examination,
feeling themselves overwhelmed, still add the words of John: "If our
heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all
things," (1 John 3: 20;) and, therefore, tremble at the thought of
that Judge whose knowledge far surpasses our comprehension.
    18. Though a good part of the world rested in these soothing
suggestions, by which this fatal poison was somewhat tempered, it
was not because they thought that God was satisfied, or they had
quite satisfied themselves; it was rather like an anchor cast out in
the middle of the deep, which for a little interrupts the
navigation, or a weary, worn-out traveler, who lies down by the way.
I give myself no trouble in proving the truth of this fact. Every
one can be his own witness. I will mention generally what the nature
of this law is. First. The observance of it is simply impossible;
and hence its only results to destroy, condemn, confound, to plunge
into ruin and despair. Secondly, By withdrawing sinners from a true
sense of their sins, it makes them hypocritical, and ignorant both
of God and themselves. For, while they are wholly occupied with the
enumeration of their sins, they lose sight of that lurking hydra,
their secret iniquities and internal defilements, the knowledge of
which would have made them sensible of their misery. But the surest
rule of confession is, to acknowledge and confess our sins to be an
abyss so great as to exceed our comprehension. On this rule we see
the confession of the publican was formed, "God be merciful to me, a
sinner," (Luke 18: 13;) as if he had said, How great, how very great
a sinner, how utterly sinful I am! the extent of my sins I can
neither conceive nor express. Let the depth of thy mercy engulf the
depth of sin! What! you will say, are we not to confess every single
sin? Is no confession acceptable to God but that which is contained
in the words, "I am a sinner"? Nay, our endeavor must rather be, as
much as in us lies, to pour out our whole heart before the Lord. Nor
are we only in one word to confess ourselves sinners, but truly and
sincerely acknowledge ourselves as such; to feel with our whole soul
how great and various the pollutions of our sins are; confessing not
only that we are impure, but what the nature of our impurity is, its
magnitude and its extent; not only that we are debtors, but what the
debts are which burden us, and how they were incurred; not only that
we are wounded, but how numerous and deadly are the wounds. When
thus recognizing himself, the sinner shall have poured out his whole
heart before God, let him seriously and sincerely reflect that a
greater number of sins still remains, and that their recesses are
too deep for him thoroughly to penetrate. Accordingly, let him
exclaim with David, "Who can understand his errors? cleanse thou me
from secret faults," (Ps. 19: 12.) But when the Schoolmen affirm
that sins are not forgiven, unless the resolution to confess has
been firmly conceived, and that the gate of Paradise is closed on
him who has neglected the opportunity of confessing when offered,
far be it from us to concede this to them. The remission of sins is
not different now from what it has ever been. In all the passages in
which we read that sinners obtained forgiveness from God, we read
not that they whispered into the ear of some priest. Indeed they
could not then confess, as priests were not then confessionaries,
nor did the confessional itself exist. And for many ages afterwards,
this mode of confession, by which sins were forgiven on this
condition, was unheard of: But not to enter into a long discussion,
as if the matter were doubtful, the word of God, which abideth for
ever, is plain, "When the wicked shall turn away from all his sins
that he has committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which
is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die," (Ezek.
18: 21.) He who presumes to add to this declaration binds not sins,
but the mercy of God. When they contend that judgment cannot be
given unless the case is known, the answer is easy, that they usurp
the right of judging, being only self-created judges. And it is
strange, how confidently they lay down principles, which no man of
sound mind will admit. They give out, that the office of binding and
loosing has been committed to them, as a kind of jurisdiction
annexed to the right of inquiry. That the jurisdiction was unknown
to the Apostles their whole doctrine proclaims. Nor does it belong
to the priest to know for certainty whether or not a sinner is
loosed, but to Him from whom acquittal is asked; since he who only
hears can ever know whether or not the enumeration is full and
complete. Thus there would be no absolution, without restricting it
to the words of him who is to be judged. We may add, that the whole
system of loosing depends on faith and repentance, two things which
no man can know of another, so as to pronounce sentence. It follows,
therefore, that the certainty of binding and loosing is not
subjected to the will of an earthly judge, because the minister of
the word, when he duly executes his office, can only acquit
conditionally, when, for the sake of the sinner, he repeats the
words, "Whose soever sins ye remit;" lest he should doubt of the
pardon, which, by the command and voice of God, is promised to be
ratified in heaven.
    19. It is not strange, therefore, that we condemn that
auricular confession, as a thing pestilent in its nature, and in
many ways injurious to the Church, and desire to see it abolished.
But if the thing were in itself indifferent, yet, seeing it is of no
use or benefit, and has given occasion to so much impiety,
blasphemy, and error, who does not think that it ought to be
immediately abolished? They enumerate some of its uses, and boast of
them as very beneficial, but they are either fictitious or of no
importance. One thing they specially commend, that the blush of
shame in the penitent is a severe punishment, which makes him more
cautious for the future, and anticipates divine punishment, by his
punishing himself. As if a man was not sufficiently humbled with
shame when brought under the cognizance of God at his supreme
tribunal. Admirable proficiency - if we cease to sin because we are
ashamed to make one man acquainted with it, and blush not at having
God as the witness of our evil conscience! The assertion, however,
as to the effect of shame, is most unfounded, for we may every where
see, that there is nothing which gives men greater confidence and
license in sinning than the idea, that after making confession to
priests, they can wipe their lip, and say, I have not done it. And
not only do they during the whole year become bolder in sin, but,
secure against confession for the remainder of it, they never sigh
after God, never examine themselves, but continue heaping sins upon
sins, until, as they suppose, they get rid of them all at once. And
when they have got rid of them, they think they are disburdened of
their load, and imagine they have deprived God of the right of
judging, by giving it to the priest; have made God forgetful, by
making the priest conscious. Moreover, who is glad when he sees the
day of confession approaching? Who goes with a cheerful mind to
confess, and does not rather, as if he were dragged to prison with a
rope about his neck, go unwillingly, and, as it were, struggling
against it? with the exception, perhaps, of the priests themselves,
who take a fond delight in the mutual narrative of their own
misdeeds, as a kind of merry tales. I will not pollute my page by
retailing the monstrous abominations with which auricular confession
teems; I only say, that if that holy man (Nectarius, of whom supra
sec. 7) did not act unadvisedly when for one rumour of whoredom he
banished confession from his church, or rather from the memory of
his people, the innumerable acts of prostitution, adultery, and
incest, which it produces in the present day, warn us of the
necessity of abolishing it.
    20. As to the pretence of the confessionaries respecting the
power of the keys, and their placing in it, so to speak, the sum and
substance of their kingdom, we must see what force it ought to have.
Were the keys then, (they ask,) given without a cause? Was it said
without a cause, "Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound
in heaven, and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in
heaven?" (Matth. 18: 18.) Do we make void the word of Christ? I
answer, that there was a weighty reason for giving the keys, as I
lately explained, and will again show at greater length when I come
to treat of Excommunication, (Book 4, cap. 12.) But what if I should
cut off the handle for all such questions with one sword, viz., that
priests are neither vicars nor successors of the Apostles? But that
also will be elsewhere considered, (Book 4, 6.) Now, at the very
place where they are most desirous to fortify themselves, they erect
a battering-ram, by which all their own machinations are overthrown.
Christ did not give his Apostles the power of binding and loosing
before he endued them with the Holy Spirit. I deny, therefore, that
any man, who has not previously received the Holy Spirit, is
competent to possess the power of the keys. I deny that any one can
use the keys, unless the Holy Spirit precede, teaching and dictating
what is to be done. They pretend, indeed, that they have the Holy
Spirit, but by their works deny him; unless, indeed, we are to
suppose that the Holy Spirit is some vain thing of no value, as they
certainly do feign, but we will not believe them. With this engine
they are completely overthrown; whatever be the door of which they
boast of having the key, we must always ask, whether they have the
Holy Spirit, who is arbiter and ruler of the keys? If they reply,
that they have, we must again ask, whether the Holy Spirit can err?
This they will not venture to say distinctly, although by their
doctrine they indirectly insinuate it. Therefore, we must infer,
that no priestlings have the power of the keys, because they every
where and indiscriminately loose what the Lord was pleased should be
bound, and bind what he has ordered to be loosed.
    21. When they see themselves convicted on the clearest
evidence, of loosing and binding worthy and unworthy without
distinction, they lay claim to power without knowledge. And although
they dare not deny that knowledge is requisite for the proper use,
they still affirm that the power itself has been given to bad
administrators. This, however, is the power, "Whatsoever ye shall
bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever ye shall
loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Either the promise of
Christ must be false, or those who are endued with this power bind
and loose properly. There is no room for the evasion, that the words
of Christ are limited, according to the merits of him who is loosed
or bound. We admit, that none can be bound or loosed but those who
are worthy of being bound or loosed. But the preachers of the Gospel
and the Church have the word by which they can measure this
worthiness. By this word preachers of the Gospel can promise
forgiveness of sins to all who are in Christ by faith, and can
declare a sentence of condemnation against all, and upon all, who do
not embrace Christ. In this word the Church declares, that "neither
fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers," "nor thieves, nor
covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners shall
inherit the kingdom of God," (1 Cor. 6: 9, 10.) Such it binds in
sure fetters. By the same word it looses and consoles the penitent.
But what kind of power is it which knows not what is to be bound or
loosed? You cannot bind or loose without knowledge. Why, then, do
they say, that they absolve by authority given to them, when
absolution is uncertain? As regards us, this power is merely
imaginary, if it cannot be used. Now, I holds either that there is
no use, or one so uncertain as to be virtually no use at all. For
when they confess that a good part of the priests do not use the
keys duly, and that power without the legitimate use is ineffectual,
who is to assure me, that the one by whom I am loosed is a good
dispenser of the keys? But if he is a bad one, what better has he
given me than this nugatory dispensation, - What is to be bound or
loosed in you I know not, since I have not the proper use of the
keys; but if you deserve it, I absolve you? As much might be done, I
say not by a laic, (since they would scarcely listen to such a
statement,) but by the Turk or the devil. For it is just to say, I
have not the word of God, the sure rule for loosing, but authority
has been given me to absolve you, if you deserve it. We see,
therefore, what their object was, when they defined (see sec. 16)
the keys as authority to discern and power to execute; and said,
that knowledge is added as a counselor, and counsels the proper use;
their object was to reign libidinously and licentiously, without God
and his word.
    22. Should any one object, first, that the lawful ministers of
Christ will be no less perplexed in the discharge of their duty,
because the absolution, which depends on faith, will always be
equivocal; and, secondly, that sinners will receive no comfort at
all, or cold comfort, because the minister, who is not a fit judge
of their faith, is not certain of their absolution, we are prepared
with an answer. They say that no sins are remitted by the priest,
but such sins as he is cognizant of; thus, according to them,
remission depends on the judgment of the priest, and unless he
accurately discriminate as to who are worthy of pardon, the whole
procedure is null and void. In short, the power of which they speak
is a jurisdiction annexed to examination, to which pardon and
absolution are restricted. Here no firm footing can be found, nay,
there is a profound abyss; because, where confession is not
complete, the hope of pardon also is defective; next, the priest
himself must necessarily remain in suspense, while he knows not
whether the sinner gives a faithful enumeration of his sins; lastly,
such is the rudeness and ignorance of priests, that the greater part
of them are in no respect fitter to perform this office than a
cobbler to cultivate the fields, while almost all the others have
good reason to suspect their own fitness. Hence the perplexity and
doubt as to the Popish absolution, from their choosing to found it
on the person of the priest, and not on his person only, but on his
knowledge, so that he can only judge of what is laid before him
investigated, and ascertained. Now, if any should ask at these good
doctors, whether the sinner is reconciled to God when some sins are
remitted? I know not what answer they could give, unless that they
should be forced to confess, that whatever the priest pronounces
with regard to the remission of sins which have been enumerated to
him will be unavailing, so long as others are not exempted from
condemnation. On the part of the penitent, again, it is hence
obvious in what a state of pernicious anxiety his conscience will be
held; because, while he leans on what they call the discernment of
the priest, he cannot come to any decision from the word of God.
From all these absurdities the doctrine which we deliver is
completely free. For absolution is conditional, allowing the sinner
to trust that God is propitious to him, provided he sincerely seek
expiation in the sacrifice of Christ, and accept of the grace
offered to him. Thus, he cannot err who, in the capacity of a
herald, promulgates what has been dictated to him from the word of
God. The sinner, again, can receive a clear and sure absolution
when, in regard to embracing the grace of Christ, the simple
condition annexed is in terms of the general rule of our Master
himself, - a rule impiously spurned by the Papacy, - "According to
your faith be it unto you," (Matth. 9: 29.)
    23. The absurd jargon which they make of the doctrine of
Scripture concerning the power of the keys, I have promised to
expose elsewhere; the proper place will be in treating of the
Government of the Church, (Book 4, c. 12.) Meanwhile, let the reader
remember how absurdly they wrest to auricular and secret confession
what was said by Christ partly of the preaching of the Gospel, and
partly of excommunication. Wherefore, when they object that the
power of loosing was given to the Apostles, and that this power
priests exercise by remitting sins acknowledged to them, it is plain
that the principle which they assume is false and frivolous: for the
absolution which is subordinate to faith is nothing else than an
evidence of pardon, derived from the free promise of the Gospel,
while the other absolution, which depends on the discipline of the
Church, has nothing to do with secret sins; but is more a matter of
example for the purpose of removing the public offense given to the
Church. As to their diligence in searching up and down for passages
by which they may prove that it is not sufficient to confess sins to
God alone, or to laymen, unless the priest take cognizance, it is
vile and disgraceful. For when the ancient fathers advise sinners to
disburden themselves to their pastor, we cannot understand them to
refer to a recital which was not then in use. Then, so unfair are
Lombard and others like-minded, that they seem intentionally to have
devoted themselves to spurious books, that they might use them as a
cloak to deceive the simple. They, indeed, acknowledge truly, that
as forgiveness always accompanies repentance, no obstacle properly
remains after the individual is truly penitent, though he may not
have actually confessed; and, therefore, that the priest does not so
much remit sins, as pronounce and declare that they are remitted;
though in the term declaring, they insinuate a gross error,
surrogating ceremony in place of doctrine. But in pretending that he
who has already obtained pardon before God is acquitted in the face
of the Church, they unseasonably apply to the special use of every
individual, that which we have already said was designed for common
discipline when the offense of a more heinous and notorious
transgression was to be removed. Shortly after they pervert and
destroy their previous moderation, by adding that there is another
mode of remission, namely, by the infliction of penalty and
satisfaction, in which they arrogate to their priests the right of
dividing what God has every where promised to us entire. While He
simply requires repentance and faith, their division or exception is
altogether blasphemous. For it is just as if the priest, assuming
the office of tribune, were to interfere with God, and try to
prevent him from admitting to his favor by his mere liberality any
one who had not previously lain prostrate at the tribunicial bench,
and there been punished.
    24. The whole comes to this, when they wish to make God the
author of this fictitious confession their vanity is proved as I
have shown their falsehood in expounding the few passages which they
cite. But while it is plain, that the law was imposed by men, I say
that it is both tyrannical and insulting to God, who, in binding
consciences to his word, would have them free from human rule. Then
when confession is prescribed as necessary to obtain pardon, which
God wished to be free, I say that the sacrilege is altogether
intolerable, because nothing belongs more peculiarly to God than the
forgiveness of sins, in which our salvation consists. I have,
moreover, shown that this tyranny was introduced when the world was
sunk in shameful barbarism. Besides, I have proved that the law is
pestiferous, inasmuch as when the fear of God exists, it plunges men
into despair, and when there is security soothing itself with vain
flattery, it blunts it the more. Lastly, I have explained that all
the mitigations which they employ have no other tendency than to
entangle, obscure, and corrupt the pure doctrine, and cloak their
iniquities with deceitful colors.
    25. In repentance they assign the third place to satisfaction,
all their absurd talk as to which can be refuted in one word. They
say, that it is not sufficient for the penitent to abstain from past
sins, and change his conduct for the better, unless he satisfy God
for what he has done; and that there are many helps by which we may
redeem sins, such as tears, fastings oblations, and offices of
charity; that by them the Lord is to be propitiated; by them the
debts due to divine justice are to be paid; by them our faults are
to be compensated; by them pardon is to be deserved: for though in
the riches of his mercy he has forgiven the guilt, he yet, as a just
discipline, retains the penalty, and that this penalty must be
bought off by satisfaction. The sum of the whole comes to this: that
we indeed obtain pardon of our sins from the mercy of God, but still
by the intervention of the merit of works, by which the evil of our
sins is compensated, and due satisfaction made to divine justice. To
such false views I oppose the free forgiveness of sins, one of the
doctrines most clearly taught in Scripture. First, what is
forgiveness but a gift of mere liberality? A creditor is not said to
forgive when he declares by granting a discharge, that the money has
been paid to him; but when, without any payment, through voluntary
kindness, he expunges the debt. And why is the term gratis (free)
afterwards added, but to take away all idea of satisfaction? With
what confidence, then, do they still set up their satisfactions,
which are thus struck down as with a thunderbolt? What? When the
Lord proclaims by Isaiah, "I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy
transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins,"
does he not plainly declare, that the cause and foundation of
forgiveness is to be sought from his goodness alone? Besides, when
the whole of Scripture bears this testimony to Christ, that through
his name the forgiveness of sins is to be obtained, (Acts 10: 43,)
does it not plainly exclude all other names? How then do they teach
that it is obtained by the name of satisfaction? Let them not deny
that they attribute this to satisfactions, though they bring them in
as subsidiary aids. For when Scripture says, by the name of Christ,
it means, that we are to bring nothing, pretend nothing of our own,
but lean entirely on the recommendation of Christ. Thus Paul, after
declaring that "God was in Christ reconciling the world unto
himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them," immediately adds
the reason and the method, "For he has made him to be sin for us who
knew no sin," (2 Cor. 5: 19, 20.)
    26. But with their usual perverseness, they maintain that both
the forgiveness of sins and reconciliation take place at once when
we are received into the favor of God through Christ in baptism;
that in lapses after baptism we must rise again by means of
satisfactions; that the blood of Christ is of no avail unless in so
far as it is dispensed by the keys of the Church. I speak not of a
matter as to which there can be any doubt; for this impious dogma is
declared in the plainest terms, in the writings not of one or two,
but of the whole Schoolmen. Their master, (Sent. Lib. 3, Dist. 9,)
after acknowledging, according to the doctrine of Peter, that Christ
"bare our sins in his own body on the tree," (1 Pet. 2: 24,)
immediately modifies the doctrine by introducing the exception, that
in baptism all the temporal penalties of sin are relaxed; but that
after baptism they are lessened by means of repentance, the cross of
Christ and our repentance thus co-operating together. St. John
speaks very differently, "If any man sin, we have an advocate with
the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and he is the propitiation
for our sins." "I write unto you, little children, because your sins
are forgiven you for his name's sake," (1 John 2: l, 2, 12.) He
certainly is addressing believers, and while setting forth Christ as
the propitiation for sins, shows them that there is no other
satisfaction by which an offended God can be propitiated or
appeased. He says not: God was once reconciled to you by Christ;
now, seek other methods; but he makes him a perpetual advocate, who
always, by his intercession, reinstates us in his Fathered favour -
a perpetual propitiation by which sins are expiated. For what was
said by another John will ever hold true, "Behold the Lamb of God,
which taketh away the sins of the world," (John 1: 29.) He, I say,
took them away, and no other; that is, since he alone is the Lamb of
God, he alone is the offering for our sins; he alone is expiation;
he alone is satisfaction. For though the right and power of
pardoning properly belongs to the Father, when he is distinguished
from the Son, as has already been seen, Christ is here exhibited in
another view, as transferring to himself the punishment due to us,
and wiping away our guilt in the sight of God. Whence it follows
that we could not be partakers of the expiation accomplished by
Christ, were he not possessed of that honor of which those who try
to appease God by their compensations seek to rob him.
    27. Here it is necessary to keep two things in view: that the
honor of Christ be preserved entire and unimpaired, and that the
conscience, assured of the pardon of sin, may have peace with God.
Isaiah says that the Farther "has laid on him the iniquity of us
all;" that "with his stripes we are healed," (Isa. 53: 5, 6.) Peter
repeating the same thing, in other words says, that he "bare our
sins in his own body on the tree," (1 Pet. 2: 24.) Paul's words are,
"God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for
sin condemned sin in the flesh," "being made a curse for us," (Rom.
8: 3; Gal. 3: 13;) in other words, the power and curse of sin was
destroyed in his flesh when he was offered as a sacrifice, on which
the whole weight of our sins was laid, with their curse and
execration, with the fearful judgment of God, and condemnation to
death. Here there is no mention of the vain dogma, that after the
initial cleansing no man experiences the efficacy of Christ's
passion in any other way than by means of satisfying penance: we are
directed to the satisfaction of Christ alone for every fall. Now
call to mind their pestilential dogma: that the grace of God is
effective only in the first forgiveness of sins; but if we
afterwards fall, our works co-operate in obtaining the second
pardon. If these things are so, do the properties above attributed
to Christ remain entire? How immense the difference between the two
propositions - that our iniquities were laid upon Christ, that in
his own person he might expiate them, and that they are expiated by
our works; that Christ is the propitiation for our sins, and that
God is to be propitiated by works. Then, in regard to pacifying the
conscience, what pacification will it be to be told that sins are
redeemed by satisfactions? How will it be able to ascertain the
measure of satisfaction? It will always doubt whether God is
propitious; will always fluctuate, always tremble. Those who rest
satisfied with petty satisfactions form too contemptible an estimate
of the justice of God, and little consider the grievous heinousness
of sin, as shall afterwards be shown. Even were we to grant that
they can buy off some sins by due satisfaction, still what will they
do while they are overwhelmed with so many sins that not even a
hundred lives, though wholly devoted to the purpose, could suffice
to satisfy for them? We may add, that all the passages in which the
forgiveness of sins is declared refer not only to catechumens, but
to the regenerate children of God; to those who have long been
nursed in the bosom of the Church. That embassy which Paul so highly
extols, "we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God," (2
Cor. 5: 20,) is not directed to strangers, but to those who had been
regenerated long before. Setting satisfactions altogether aside, he
directs us to the cross of Christ. Thus when he writes to the
Colossians that Christ had "made peace through the blood of his
cross," "to reconcile all things unto himself," he does not restrict
it to the moment at which we are received into the Church but
extends it to our whole course. This is plain from the context,
where he says that in him "we have redemption by his blood, even the
forgiveness of sins," (Col. 1: 14.) It is needless to collect more
passages, as they are ever occurring.
    28. Here they take refuge in the absurd distinction that some
sins are venial and others mortal; that for the latter a weighty
satisfaction is due, but that the former are purged by easier
remedies; by the Lord's Prayer, the sprinkling of holy water, and
the absolution of the Mass. Thus they insult and trifle with God.
And yet, though they have the terms venial and mortal sin
continually in their mouth, they have not yet been able to
distinguish the one from the other, except by making impiety and
impurity of hearts to be venial sin. We, on the contrary, taught by
the Scripture standard of righteousness and unrighteousness, declare
that "the wages of sin is death;" and that "the soul that sinneth,
it shall die," (Rom. 6: 23; Ezek. 18: 20.) The sins of believers are
venial, not because they do not merit death, but because by the
mercy of God there is "now no condemnation to those which are in
Christ Jesus" their sin being not imputed, but effaced by pardon. I
know how unjustly they calumniate this our doctrine; for they say it
is the paradox of the Stoics concerning the equality of sins: but we
shall easily convict them out of their own mouths. I ask them
whether, among those sins which they hold to be mortal, they
acknowledge a greater and a less? If so, it cannot follow, as a
matter of course, that all sins which are mortal are equal. Since
Scripture declares that the wages of sin is death, - that obedience
to the law is the way to life, - the transgression of it the way to
death, - they cannot evade this conclusion. In such a mass of sins,
therefore, how will they find an end to their satisfactions? If the
satisfaction for one sin requires one day, while preparing it they
involve themselves in more sins; since no man, however righteous,
passes one day without falling repeatedly. While they prepare
themselves for their satisfactions, number, or rather numbers
without number, will be added. Confidence in satisfaction being thus
destroyed, what more would they have? How do they still dare to
think of satisfying?
    29. They endeavor, indeed, to disentangle themselves, but it is
impossible. They pretend a distinction between penalty and guilt,
holding that the guilt is forgiven by the mercy of God; but that
though the guilt is remitted, the punishment which divine justice
requires to be paid remains. Satisfactions then properly relate to
the remission of the penalty. How ridiculous this levity! They now
confess that the remission of guilt is gratuitous; and yet they are
ever and anon telling as to merit it by prayers and tears, and other
preparations of every kind. Still the whole doctrine of Scripture
regarding the remission of sins is diametrically opposed to that
distinction. But although I think I have already done more than
enough to establish this, I will subjoin some other passages, by
which these slippery snakes will be so caught as to be afterwards
unable to writhe even the tip of their tail: "Behold, the days come,
saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of
Israel, and with the house of Judah." "I will forgive their
iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more," (Jer. 31: 31, 34.)
What this means we learn from another Prophet, when the Lord says,
"When the righteous turneth away from his righteousness" "all his
righteousness that he has done shall not be mentioned." "Again, when
the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he has
committed, and does that which is lawful and right, he shall save
his soul alive," (Ezek. 18: 24, 27.) When he declares that he will
not remember righteousness, the meaning is, that he will take no
account of it to reward it. In the same way, not to remember sins is
not to bring them to punishment. The same thing is denoted in other
passages, by casting them behind his back, blotting them out as a
cloud, casting them into the depths of the sea, not imputing them,
hiding them. By such forms of expression the Holy Spirit has
explained his meaning not obscurely, if we would lend a willing ear.
Certainly if God punishes sins, he imputes them; if he avenges, he
remembers; if he brings them to judgment, he has not hid them; if he
examines, he has not cast them behind his back; if he investigates,
he has not blotted them out like a cloud; if he exposes them, he has
not thrown them into the depths of the sea. In this way Augustine
clearly interprets: "If God has covered sins, he willed not to
advert to them; if he willed not to advert, he willed not to
animadvert; if he willed not to animadvert, he willed not to punish:
he willed not to take knowledge of them, he rather willed to pardon
them. Why then did he say that sins were hid? Just that they might
not be seen. What is meant by God seeing sins but punishing them?"
(August. in Ps. 32: 1.) But let us hear from another prophetical
passage on what terms the Lord forgives sins: "Though your sins be
as scarlet, they shall be white as snow; though they be red like
crimson, they shall be as wool," (Isa. 1: 18.) In Jeremiah again we
read: "In those days, and in that time, saith the Lord, the iniquity
of Israel shall be sought for, and there shall be none; and the sins
of Judah, they shall not be found: for I will pardon them whom I
reserve," (Jer. 50: 20.) Would you briefly comprehend the meaning of
these words? Consider what, on the contrary, is meant by these
expressions, "that transgression is sealed up in a bag;" "that the
iniquity of Ephraim is bound up; his sin is hid;" that "the sin of
Judah is written with a pen of iron, and with the point of a
diamond." If they mean, as they certainly do, that vengeance will be
recompensed, there can be no doubt that, by the contrary passages,
the Lord declares that he renounces all thought of vengeance. Here I
must entreat the reader not to listen to any glosses of mine, but
only to give some deference to the word of God.
    30. What, pray, did Christ perform for us if the punishment of
sin is still exacted? For when we say that he "bare our sins in his
own body on the tree," (1 Pet. 2: 24,) all we mean is, that he
endured the penalty and punishment which was due to our sins. This
is more significantly declared by Isaiah, when he says that the
"chastisement (or correction) of our peace was upon him," (Isaiah
53: 5.) But what is the correction of our peace, unless it be the
punishment due to our sins, and to be paid by us before we could be
reconciled to God, had he not become our substitute? Thus you
clearly see that Christ bore the punishment of sin that he might
thereby exempt his people from it. And whenever Paul makes mention
of the redemption procured by him, he calls it "apolutrosis", by
which he does not simply mean redemption, as it is commonly
understood, but the very price and satisfaction of redemption. For
which reason, he also says, that Christ gave himself an "antilutron"
(ransoms for us. "What is propitiation with the Lord (says
Augustine) but sacrifice? And what is sacrifice but that which was
offered for us in the death of Christ?" But we have our strongest
argument in the injunctions of the Mosaic Law as to expiating the
guilt of sin. The Lord does not there appoint this or that method of
satisfying, but requires the whole compensation to be made by
sacrifice, though he at the same time enumerates all the rites of
expiation with the greatest care and exactness. How comes it that he
does not at all enjoin works as the means of procuring pardon, but
only requires sacrifices for expiation, unless it were his purpose
thus to testify that this is the only kind of satisfaction by which
his justice is appeased? For the sacrifices which the Israelites
then offered were not regarded as human works, but were estimated by
their anti type, that is, the sole sacrifice of Christ. The kind of
compensation which the Lord receives from us is elegantly and
briefly expressed by Hosea: "Take with you words, and turn to the
Lord: say unto him, Take away all iniquity, and receive us
graciously," here is remission: "so will we render the calves of our
lips," here is satisfaction, (Hos. 14: 2.) I know that they have
still a more subtile evasion, by making a distinction between
eternal and temporal punishment; but as they define temporal
punishment to be any kind of infliction with which God visits either
the body or the soul, eternal death only excepted, this restriction
avails them little. The passages which we have quoted above say
expressly that the terms on which God receives us into favor are
these, viz., he remits all the punishment which we deserved by
pardoning our guilt. And whenever David or the other prophets ask
pardon for their sins, they deprecate punishment. Nay, a sense of
the divine justice impels them to this. On the other hand, when they
promise mercy from the Lord, they almost always discourse of
punishments and the forgiveness of them. Assuredly, when the Lord
declares in Ezekiel, that he will put an end to the Babylonish
captivity, not "for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy
name's sake," (Ezek. 36: 22,) he sufficiently demonstrates that both
are gratuitous. In short, if we are freed from guilt by Christ, the
punishment consequent upon guilt must cease with it.
    31. But since they also arm themselves with passages of
Scripture, let us see what the arguments are which they employ.
David, they say, when upbraided by Nathan the Prophet for adultery
and murder, receives pardon of the sin, and yet by the death of the
son born of adultery is afterwards punished (2 Sam. 12: 13, 14.)
Such punishments which were to be inflicted after the remission of
the guilt, we are taught to ransom by satisfactions. For Daniel
exhorted Nebuchadnezzar: "Break off thy sins by righteousness, and
thine iniquities by showing mercy to the poor," (Dan. 4: 27.) And
Solomon says, "by mercy and truth iniquity is purged" (Prov. 16: 6;)
and again, "love covereth all sins," (Prov. 10: 12.) This sentiment
is confirmed by Peter, (1 Pet. 4: 8.) Also in Luke, our Lord says of
the woman that was a sinner, "Her sins, which are many, are
forgiven; for she loved much," (Luke 7: 47.) How perverse and
preposterous the judgment they ever form of the doings of God! Had
they observed, what certainly they ought not to have overlooked,
that there are two kinds of divine judgment, they would have seen in
the correction of David a very different form of punishment from
that which must be thought designed for vengeance. But since it in
no slight degree concerns us to understand the purpose of God in the
chastisements by which he animadverts upon our sins and how much
they differ from the exemplary punishments which he indignantly
inflicts on the wicked and reprobate, I think it will not be
improper briefly to glance at it. For the sake of distinction, we
may call the one kind of judgment punishment, the other
chastisement. In judicial punishment, God is to be understood as
taking vengeance on his enemies, by displaying his anger against
them, confounding, scattering, and annihilating them. By divine
punishment, properly so called, let us then understand punishment
accompanied with indignation. In judicial chastisement, he is
offended, but not in wrath; he does not punish by destroying or
striking down as with a thunderbolt. Hence it is not properly
punishment or vengeance, but correction and admonition. The one is
the act of a judge, the other of a father. When the judge punishes a
criminal, he animadverts upon the crime, and demands the penalty.
When a father corrects his son sharply, it is not to mulct or
avenge, but rather to teach him, and make him more cautious for the
future. Chrysostom in his writings employs a simile which is
somewhat different, but the same in purport. He says, "A son is
whipt, and a slave is whipt, but the latter is punished as a slave
for his offense: the former is chastised as a free-born son,
standing in need of correction." The correction of the latter is
designed to prove and amend him; that of the former is scourging and
punishment.
    32. To have a short and clear view of the whole matter, we must
make two distinctions. First, whenever the infliction is designed to
avenge, then the curse and wrath of God displays itself. This is
never the case with believers. On the contrary, the chastening of
God carries his blessing with it, and is an evidence of love, as
Scripture teaches. This distinction is plainly marked throughout the
word of God. All the calamities which the wicked suffer in the
present life are depicted to us as a kind of anticipation of the
punishment of hell. In these they already see, as from a distance,
their eternal condemnation; and so far are they from being thereby
reformed, or deriving any benefit, that by such preludes they are
rather prepared for the fearful doom which finally awaits them. The
Lord chastens his servants sore, but does not give them over unto
death, (Ps. 118: 18.) When afflicted, they acknowledge it is good
for them, that they may learn his statutes, (Ps. 119: 71.) But as we
everywhere read that the saints received their chastisements with
placid mind, so inflictions of the latter kind they always most
earnestly deprecated. "O Lord, correct me," says Jeremiah, "but with
judgment; not in thine anger, lest thou bring me to nothing. Pour
out thy furry upon the heathen that know thee not, and upon the
families that call not on thy name," (Jer. 10: 24-25.) David says "O
Lord, rebuke me not in thine anger, neither chasten me in thy hot
displeasure" (Ps. 6: 1.) There is nothing inconsistent with this in
its being repeatedly said, that the Lord is angry with his saints
when he chastens them for their sins, (Ps. 38: 7.) In like manner,
in Isaiah, "And in that day thou shalt say, O Lord, I will praise
thee: though thou west angry with me, thine anger is turned away,
and thou comfortedst me," (Isa. 12: 1.) Likewise in Habakkuk, "In
wrath remember mercy," (Hab. 3: 2;) and in Micah, "I will bear the
indignation of the Lord, because I have sinned against him," (Mic.
7: 9.) Here we are reminded not only that those who are justly
punished gain nothing by murmuring, but that believers obtain a
mitigation of their pain by reflecting on the divine intention. For
the same reason, he is said to profane his inheritance; and yet we
know that he will never profane it. The expression refers not to the
counsel or purpose of God in punishing, but to the keen sense of
pain, endured by those who are visited with any measure of divine
severity. For the Lord not only chastens his people with a slight
degree of austerity, but sometimes so wounds them, that they seem to
themselves on the very eve of perdition. He thus declares that they
have deserved his anger, and it is fitting so to do, that they may
be dissatisfied with themselves for their sins, may be more careful
in their desires to appease God, and anxiously hasten to seek his
pardon; still, at this very time, he gives clearer evidence of his
mercy than of his anger. For He who cannot deceive has declared,
that the covenant made with us in our true Solomon stands fast and
will never be broken, "If his children forsake my law, and walk not
in my judgments; if they break my statutes, and keep not my
commandments; then will I visit their transgressions with the rod,
and their iniquity with stripes. Nevertheless, my loving-kindness
will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to
fail," (Ps. 89: 31-34.) To assure us of this mercy, he says, that
the rod with which he will chastise the posterity of Solomon will be
the "rod of men," and "the stripes of the children of men," (2 Sam.
7: 14.) While by these terms he denotes moderation and levity, he,
at the same time, intimates, that those who feel the hand of God
opposed to them cannot but tremble and be confounded. How much
regard he has to this levity in chastening his Israel he shows by
the Prophet, "Behold, I have refined thee, but not with silver; I
have chosen thee in the furnace of affliction," (Isa. 48: 10.)
Although he tells them that they are chastisements with a view to
purification, he adds, that even these are so tempered, that they
are not to be too much crushed by them. And this is very necessary,
for the more a man reveres God, and devotes himself to the
cultivation of piety, the more tender he is in bearing his anger,
(Ps. 90: 11; and ibid. Calv.) The reprobate, though they groan under
the lash, yet because they weigh not the true cause, but rather turn
their back, as well upon their sins as upon the divine judgment,
become hardened in their stupor; or, because they murmur and kick,
and so rebel against their judge, their infatuated violence fills
them with frenzy and madness. Believers, again, admonished by the
rod of God, immediately begin to reflect on their sins, and, struck
with fear and dread, retake themselves as suppliants to implore
mercy. Did not God mitigate the pains by which wretched souls are
excruciated, they would give way a hundred times, even at slight
signs of his anger.
    33. The second distinction is, that when the reprobate are
brought under the lash of God, they begin in a manner to pay the
punishment due to his justice; and though their refusal to listen to
these proofs of the divine anger will not escape with impunity,
still they are not punished with the view of bringing them to a
better mind, but only to teach them by dire experience that God is a
judge and avenger. The sons of God are beaten with rods, not that
they may pay the punishment due to their faults, but that they may
thereby be led to repent. Accordingly, we perceive that they have
more respect to the future than to the past. I prefer giving this in
the words of Chrysostom rather than my own: "His object in imposing
a penalty upon us, is not to inflict punishment on our sins but to
correct us for the future," (Chrysost. Serm. de Poenit. et Confess.)
So also Augustine, "The suffering at which you cry, is medicine, not
punishment; chastisement, not condemnation. Do not drive away the
rod, if you would not be driven away from the inheritance. Know,
brethren, that the whole of that misery of the human race, under
which the world groans, is a medicinal pain, not a penal sentence,"
(August. in Psal. 102, circa finem.) It seemed proper to quote these
passages, lest any one should think the mode of expression which I
have used to be novel or uncommon. To the same effect are the
indignant terms in which the Lord expostulates with his people, for
their ingratitude in obstinately despising all his inflictions. In
Isaiah he says, "Why should ye be stricken any more? ye will revolt
more and more. The whole head is sick and the whole heart faint,"
(Isa. 1: 5, 6.) But as such passages abound in the Prophets, it is
sufficient briefly to have shown, that the only purpose of God in
punishing his Church is to subdue her to repentance. Thus, when he
rejected Saul from the kingdoms he punished in vengeance, (1 Sam.
15: 23;) when he deprived David of his child, he chastised for
amendment, (2 Sam. 12: 18.) In this sense Paul is to be understood
when he says, "When we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord,
that we should not be condemned with the world," (1 Cor. 11: 32;)
that is, while we as sons of God are afflicted by our heavenly
Father's hand, it is not punishment to confound, but only
chastisement to train us. On this subject Augustine is plainly with
us, (De Peccator. Meritis ac Remiss. Lib. 2 cap. 33, 34.) For he
shows that the punishments with which men are equally chastened by
God are to be variously considered; because the saints after the
forgiveness of their sins have struggles and exercises, the
reprobate without forgiveness are punished for their iniquity.
Enumerating the punishments inflicted on David and other saints, he
says, it was designed, by thus humbling them, to prove and exercise
their piety. The passage in Isaiah, in which it is said, "Speak ye
comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry unto her, that her warfare is
accomplished that her iniquity is pardoned; for she has received of
the Lord's hands double for all her sins," (Isa. 40: 2,) proves not
that the pardon of sin depends on freedom from punishment. It is
just as if he had said, Sufficient punishment has now been exacted;
as for their number and heinousness you have long been oppressed
with sorrow and mourning, it is time to send you a message of
complete mercy, that your minds may be filled with joy on feeling me
to be a Father. For God there assumes the character of a father who
repents even of the just severity which he has been compelled to us,
towards his son.
    34. These are the thoughts with which the believer ought to be
provided in the bitterness of affliction, "The time is come that
judgment must begin at the house of God," "the city which is called
by my name," (1 Pet. 4: 17; Jer. 25: 29.) What could the sons of God
do, if they thought that the severity which they feel was vengeance?
He who, smitten by the hand of God, thinks that God is a judge
inflicting punishment, cannot conceive of him except as angry and at
enmity with him; cannot but detest the rod of God as curse and
condemnation; in short, Can never persuade himself that he is loved
by God, while he feels that he is still disposed to inflict
punishment upon him. He only profits under the divine chastening who
considers that God, though offended with his sins, is still
propitious and favorable to him. Otherwise, the feeling must
necessarily be what the Psalmist complains that he had experienced,
"Thy wrath lieth hard upon me, and thou hast afflicted me with all
thy waves." Also what Moses says, "For we are consumed by thine
anger, and by thy wrath we are troubled. Thou hast set our
iniquities before thee, our secret sins in the light of thy
countenance. For all our days are passed away in thy wrath; we spend
our years as a tale that is told," (Ps. 90: 7-9.) On the other hand,
David speaking of fatherly chastisements, to show how believers are
more assisted than oppressed by them, thus sings "Blessed is the man
whom thou chastenest, O Lord, and teachest him out of thy law; that
thou mayest give him rest from the days of adversity, until the pit
be digged for the wicked," (Ps. 94: 12,13.) It is certainly a sore
temptation, when God, sparing unbelievers and overlooking their
crimes, appears more rigid towards his own people. Hence, to solace
them, he adds the admonition of the law which teaches them, that
their salvation is consulted when they are brought back to the right
path, whereas the wicked are borne headlong in their errors, which
ultimately lead to the pit. It matters not whether the punishment is
eternal or temporary. For disease, pestilence, famine, and war, are
curses from God, as much as even the sentence of eternal death,
whenever their tendency is to operate as instruments of divine wrath
and vengeance against the reprobate.
    35. All, if I mistake not, now see what view the Lord had in
chastening David, namely, to prove that murder and adultery are most
offensive to God, and to manifest this offensiveness in a beloved
and faithful servant, that David himself might be taught never again
to dare to commit such wickedness; still, however, it was not a
punishment designed in payment of a kind of compensation to God. In
the same way are we to judge of that other correction, in which the
Lord subjects his people to a grievous pestilence, for the
disobedience of David in forgetting himself so far as to number the
people. He indeed freely forgave David the guilt of his sin; but
because it was necessary, both as a public example to all ages and
also to humble David himself, not to allow such an offense to go
unpunished, he chastened him most sharply with his whip. We ought
also to keep this in view in the universal curse of the human race.
For since after obtaining grace we still continue to endure the
miseries denounced to our first parent as the penalty of
transgression, we ought thereby to be reminded, how offensive to God
is the transgression of his law, that thus humbled and dejected by a
consciousness of our wretched condition, we may aspire more ardently
to true happiness. But it were most foolish in any one to imagine,
that we are subjected to the calamities of the present life for the
guilt of sin. This seems to me to have been Chrysostom's meaning
when he said, "If the purpose of God in inflicting punishment is to
bring those persisting in evil to repentance, when repentance is
manifested punishment would be superfluous," (Chrysos. Homily. 3 de
Provid.) Wherefore, as he knows what the disposition of each
requires, he treats one with greater harshness and another with more
indulgence. Accordingly, when he wishes to show that he is not
excessive in exacting punishment, he upbraids a hard hearted and
obstinate people, because, after being smitten, they still continued
in sin, (Jer. 5: 3.) In the same sense he complains, that "Ephraim
is a cake not turned" (Hos. 7: 8,) because chastisement did not make
a due impression on their minds, and, correcting their vices, make
them fit to receive pardon. Surely he who thus speaks shows, that as
soon as any one repents he will be ready to receive him, and that
the rigor which he exercises in chastising faults is wrung from him
by our perverseness, since we should prevent him by a voluntary
correction. Such, however, being the hardness and rudeness of all
hearts, that they stand universally in need of castigation, our
infinitely wise Parent has seen it meet to exercise all without
exception, during their whole lives, with chastisement. It is
strange how they fix their eyes so intently on the one example of
David, and are not moved by the many examples in which they might
have beheld the free forgiveness of sins. The publican is said to
have gone down from the temple justified (Luke 18: 14;) no
punishment follows. Peter obtained the pardon of his sin, (Luke 22:
61.) "We read of his tears," says Ambrose, (Serm. 46, De Poenit.
Petri,) "we read not of satisfaction." To the paralytic it is said,
"Son, be of good cheer; thy sina be forgiven thee," (Matth. 9: 2;)
no penance is enjoined. All the acts of forgiveness mentioned in
Scripture are gratuitous. The rule ought to be drawn from these
numerous examples, rather than from one example which contains a
kind of specialty.
    36. Daniel, in exhorting Nebuchadnezzar to break off his sins
by righteousness, and his iniquities by showing mercy to the poor,
(Dan. 4: 27,) meant not to intimate, that righteousness and mercy
are able to propitiate God and redeem from punishment, (far be it
from us to suppose that there ever was any other "apolutrosis"
(ransom) than the blood of Christ;) but the breaking off referred to
in that passage has reference to man rather than to God: as if he
had said, O king, you have exercised an unjust and violent
domination, you have oppressed the humble, spoiled the poor, treated
your people harshly and unjustly; instead of unjust exaction,
instead of violence and oppression, now practice mercy and justice.
In like manner, Solomon says, that love covers a multitude of sins;
not, however, with God, but among men. For the whole verse stands
thus, "Hatred stirreth up strifes; but love covereth all sins,"
(Prov. 10: 12.) Here, after his manner, he contrasts the evils
produced by hatred with the fruits of charity, in this sense, Those
who hate are incessantly biting, carping at, upbraiding, lacerating
each other, making every thing a fault; but those who love mutually
conceal each other's faults, wink at many, forgive many: not that
the one approves the vices of the other, but tolerates and cures by
admonishing, rather than exasperates by assailing. That the passage
is quoted by Peter (1 Pet. 4: 8) in the same sense we cannot doubt,
unless we would charge him with corrupting or craftily wresting
Scripture. When it is said, that "by mercy and truth iniquity is
purged," (Prov. 16: 6,) the meaning is, not that by them
compensation is made to the Lord, so that he being thus satisfied
remits the punishment which he would otherwise have exacted; but
intimation is made after the familiar manner of Scripture, that
those who, forsaking their vices and iniquities turn to the Lord in
truth and piety, will find him propitious: as if he had said, that
the wrath of God is calmed, and his judgment is at rest, whenever we
rest from our wickedness. But, indeed, it is not the cause of pardon
that is described, but rather the mode of true conversion; just as
the Prophets frequently declare, that it is in vain for hypocrites
to offer God fictitious rites instead of repentance, seeing his
delight is in integrity and the duties of charity. In like manner,
also, the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, commending kindness
and humanity, reminds us, that "with such sacrifices God is well
pleased," (Heb. 13: 16.) And indeed when Christ, rebuking the
Pharisees because, intent merely on the outside of the cup and
platter, they neglected purity of heart, enjoins them, in order that
they may be clean in all respects, to give alms, does he exhort them
to give satisfaction thereby? He only tells them what the kind of
purity is which God requires. Of this mode of expression we have
treated elsewhere, (Matth. 23: 25; Luke 11: 39-41; see Calv. in
Harm. Evang.)
    37. In regard to the passage in Luke, (Luke 7: 36, sq.) no man
of sober judgment, who reads the parable there employed by our Lord,
will raise any controversy with us. The Pharisee thought that the
Lord did not know the character of the woman whom he had so easily
admitted to his presence. For he presumed that he would not have
admitted her if he had known what kind of a sinner she was; and from
this he inferred, that one who could be deceived in this way was not
a prophet. Our Lord, to show that she was not a sinner, inasmuch as
she had already been forgiven, spake this parable: "There was a
certain creditor which had two debtors; the one owed five hundred
pence, and the other fifty. And when they had nothing to pay, he
frankly forgave them both. Tell me, therefore, which of them will
love him most? The Pharisee answers: "I suppose that he to whom he
forgave most." Then our Savior rejoins: "Her sins, which are many,
are forgiven; for she loved much." By these words it is plain he
does not make love the cause of forgiveness, but the proof of it.
The similitude is borrowed from the case of a debtor, to whom a debt
of five hundred pence had been forgiven. It is not said that the
debt is forgiven because he loved much, but that he loved much
because it was forgiven. The similitude ought to be applied in this
way: You think this woman is a sinner; but you ought to have
acknowledged her as not a sinner, in respect that her sins have been
forgiven her. Her love ought to have been to you a proof of her
having obtained forgiveness, that love being an expression of
gratitude for the benefit received. It is an argument a posteriori,
by which something is demonstrated by the results produced by it.
Our Lord plainly attests the ground on which she had obtained
forgiveness, when he says, "Thy faith has saved thee." By faith,
therefore, we obtain forgiveness: by love we give thanks, and bear
testimony to the loving-kindness of the Lord.
    38. I am little moved by the numerous passages in the writings
of the Fathers relating to satisfaction. I see indeed that some (I
will frankly say almost all whose books are extant) have either
erred in this matter, or spoken too roughly and harshly; but I
cannot admit that they were so rude and unskillful as to write these
passages in the sense in which they are read by our new
satisfactionaries. Chrysostom somewhere says, "When mercy is
implored interrogation ceases; when mercy is asked, judgment rages
not; when mercy is sought, there is no room for punishment; where
there is mercy, no question is asked; where there is mercy, the
answer gives pardon," (Chrysos. Hom. 2 in Psal. 50.) How much soever
these words may be twisted, they can never be reconciled with the
dogmas of the Schoolmen. In the book De Dogmatibus Ecclesiasticis,
which is attributed to Augustine, you read, (cap. 54,) "The
satisfaction of repentance is to cut off the causes of sins, and not
to indulge an entrance to their suggestions." From this it appears
that the doctrine of satisfaction, said to be paid for sins
committed, was every where derided in those ages; for here the only
satisfaction referred to is caution, abstinence from sin for the
future. I am unwilling to quote what Chrysostom says, (Hom. 10 in
Genes.) that God requires nothing more of us than to confess our
faults before him with tears, as similar sentiments abound both in
his writings and those of others. Augustine indeed calls works of
mercy remedies for obtaining forgiveness of sins, (Enchir. ad
Laur.;) but lest any one should stumble at the expression, he
himself, in another passage, obviates the difficulty. "The flesh of
Christ," says he, "is the true and only sacrifice for sins - not
only for those which are all effaced in baptism, but those into
which we are afterwards betrayed through infirmity, and because of
which the whole Church daily cries, 'Forgive us our debts,' (Matth.
6: 12.) And they are forgiven by that special sacrifice."
    39. By satisfaction, however, they, for the most part, meant
not compensation to be paid to God, but the public testimony, by
which those who had been punished with excommunication, and wished
again to be received into communion, assured the Church of their
repentance. For those penitents were enjoined certain fasts and
other things, by which they might prove that they were truly, and
from the heart, weary of their former life, or rather might
obliterate the remembrance of their past deeds: in this way they
were said to give satisfaction, not to God, but to the Church. The
same thing is expressed by Augustine in a passage in his Enchiridion
ad Laurentium, cap. 65. From that ancient custom the satisfactions
and confessions now in use took their rise. It is indeed a viperish
progeny, not even a vestige of the better form now remaining. I know
that ancient writers sometimes speak harshly; nor do I deny, as I
lately said, that they have perhaps erred; but dogmas, which were
tainted with a few blemishes now that they have fallen into the
unwashed hands of those men, are altogether defiled. And if we were
to decide the contest by authority of the Fathers, what kind of
Fathers are those whom they obtrude upon us? A great part of those,
from whom Lombard their Coryphaeus framed his centos, are extracted
from the absurd dreams of certain monks passing under the names of
Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine, and Chrysostom. On the present subject
almost all his extracts are from the book of Augustine De
Paenitentia, a book absurdly compiled by some rhapsodist, alike from
good and bad authors - a book which indeed bears the name of
Augustine, but which no person of the least learning would deign to
acknowledge as his. Wishing to save my readers trouble, they will
pardon me for not searching minutely into all their absurdities. For
myself it were not very laborious, and might gain some applause, to
give a complete exposure of dogmas which have hitherto been vaunted
as mysteries; but as my object is to give useful instruction, I
desist.

Chapter 5.

5. Of the modes of supplementing satisfaction, viz., indulgences and
purgatory.

    Divisions of the chapter, - I. A summary description and
refutation of Popish indulgences, sec. 1, 2. II. Confutation by Leo
and Augustine. Answer to two objections urged in support of them,
sec. 3, 4. A profane love of filthy lucre on the part of the Pope.
The origin of indulgences unfolded, sec. 5. III. An examination of
Popish purgatory. Its horrible impiety, sec. 6. An explanation of
five passages of Scripture by which Sophists endeavor to support
that dream, sec. 7, 8. Sentiments of the ancient Theologians
concerning purgatory, sec. 10.
    
Sections.

1. The dogma of satisfaction the parent of indulgences. Vanity of
    both. The reason of it. Evidence of the avarice of the Pope and
    the Romish clergy: also of the blindness with which the
    Christian world was smitten
2. View of indulgences given by the Sophists. Their true nature.
    Refutation of them. Refutation confirmed by seven passages of
    Scripture.
3. Confirmed also by the testimony of Leo, a Roman Bishop, and by
    Augustine. Attempts of the Popish doctors to establish the
    monstrous doctrine of indulgences, and even support it by
    Apostolical authority. First answer.
4. Second answer to the passage of an Apostle adduced to support the
    dogma of indulgences. Answer confirmed by a comparison with
    other passages, and from a passage in Augustine, explaining the
    Apostle's meaning. Another passage from the same Apostle
    confirming this view.
5. The Pope's profane thirst for filthy lucre exposed. The origin of
    indulgences.
6. Examination of the fictitious purgatory of the Papists. 1. From
    the nature of the thing itself. 2. From the authority of God.
    3. From the consideration of the merit of Christ, which is
    destroyed by this fiction. Purgatory, what it is. 4. From the
    impiety teeming from this fountain.
7. Exposition of the passages of Scripture quoted in support of
    purgatory. 1. Of the Impardonable sin, from which it is
    inferred that there are some sins afterwards to be forgiven. 2.
    Of the passage as to paying the last farthing.
8. 3. The passage concerning the bending of the knee to Christ by
    things under the earth. 4. The example of Judas Maccabaeus in
    sending an oblation for the dead to Jerusalem.
9. 5. Of the fire which shall try every man's work. The sentiment of
    the ancient theologians. Answer, containing a reduction ad
    absurdum. Confirmation by a passage of Augustine. The meaning
    of the Apostle. What to be understood by fire. A clear
    exposition of the metaphor. The day of the Lord. How those who
    suffer loss are saved by fire.
10. The doctrine of purgatory ancient, but refuted by a more ancient
    Apostle. Not supported by ancient writers, by Scripture, or
    solid argument. Introduced by custom and a zeal not duly
    regulated by the word of God. Ancient writers, as Augustine,
    speak doubtfully in commending prayer for the dead. At all
    events, we must hold by the word of God, which rejects this
    fiction. A vast difference between the more ancient and the
    more modern builders of purgatory. This shown by comparing
    them.
    
    1. From this dogma of satisfaction that of indulgences takes
its rise. For the pretence is, that what is wanting to our own
ability is hereby supplied; and they go the insane length of
defining them to be a dispensation of the merits of Christ, and the
martyrs which the Pope makes by his bulls. Though they are fitter
for hellebore than for argument, - and it is scarcely worth while to
refute these frivolous errors, which, already battered down, begin
of their own accord to grow antiquated, and totter to their fall; -
yet, as a brief refutation may be useful to some of the unlearned, I
will not omit it. Indeed, the fact that indulgences have so long
stood safe and with impunity, and wantoned with so much fury and
tyranny, may be regarded as a proof into how deep a night of
ignorance mankind were for some ages plunged. They saw themselves
insulted openly, and without disguise, by the Pope and his
bull-bearers; they saw the salvation of the soul made the subject of
a lucrative traffic, salvation taxed at a few pieces of money,
nothing given gratuitously; they saw what was squeezed from them in
the form of oblations basely consumed on strumpets, pimps and
gluttony, the loudest trumpeters of indulgences being the greatest
despisers; they saw the monster stalking abroad, and every day
luxuriating with greater license, and that without end, new bulls
being constantly issued, and new sums extracted. Still indulgences
were received with the greatest reverence, worshipped, and bought.
Even those who saw more clearly than others deemed them pious
frauds, by which, even in deceiving, some good was gained. Now, at
length, that a considerable portion of the world have begun to
rethink themselves, indulgences grow cool, and gradually even begin
to freeze, preparatory to their final extinction.
    2. But since very many who see the vile imposture, theft, and
rapine, (with which the dealers in indulgences have hitherto deluded
and sported with us,) are not aware of the true source of the
impiety, it may be proper to show not only what indulgences truly
are, but also that they are polluted in every part. They give the
name of treasury of the Church to the merits of Christ, the holy
Apostles and Martyrs. They pretend, as I have said, that the radical
custody of the granary has been delivered to the Roman bishop, to
whom the dispensation of these great blessings belongs in such a
sense, that he can both exercise it by himself, and delegate the
power of exercising it to others. Hence we have from the Pope at one
time plenary indulgences, at another for certain years; from the
cardinals for a hundred days, and from the bishops for forty. These,
to describe them truly, are a profanation of the blood of Christ,
and a delusion of Satan, by which the Christian people are led away
from the grace of God and the life which is in Christ, and turned
aside from the true way of salvation. For how could the blood of
Christ be more shamefully profaned than by denying its sufficiency
for the remission of sins, for reconciliation and satisfaction,
unless its defects, as if it were dried up and exhausted, are
supplemented from some other quarter? Peter's words are: "To him
give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever
believeth in him shall receive remission of sins," (Acts 10: 43;)
but indulgences bestow the remission of sins through Peter, Paul,
and the Martyrs. "The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us
from all sin," says John, (1 John 1: 7.) Indulgences make the blood
of the martyrs an ablution of sins. "He has made him to be sin (i.
e. a satisfaction for sin) for us who knew no sin," says Paul, (2
Cor. 5: 21,) "that we might be made the righteousness of God in
him." Indulgences make the satisfaction of sin to depend on the
blood of the martyrs. Paul exclaimed and testified to the
Corinthians, that Christ alone was crucified, and died for them, (1
Cor. 1: 13.) Indulgences declare that Paul and others died for us.
Paul elsewhere says that Christ purchased the Church with his own
blood, (Acts 20: 28.) Indulgences assign another purchase to the
blood of martyrs. "By one offering he has perfected for ever them
that are sanctified," says the Apostle, (Heb. 10: 14.) Indulgences,
on the other hand, insist that sanctification, which would otherwise
be insufficient, is perfected by martyrs. John says that all the
saints "have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of
the Lamb," (Rev. 7: 14.) Indulgences tell us to wash our robes in
the blood of saints.
    3. There is an admirable passage in opposition to their
blasphemies in Leo, a Roman Bishop, (ad Palaestinos, Ep. 81.)
"Although the death of many saints was precious in the sight of the
Lord, (Ps. 116: 15,) yet no innocent man's slaughter was the
propitiation of the world. The just received crowns did not give
them; and the fortitude of believers produced examples of patience,
not gifts of righteousness: for their deaths were for themselves;
and none by his final end paid the debt of another, except Christ
our Lord, in whom alone all are crucified - all dead, buried, and
raised up." This sentiment, as it was of a memorable nature, he has
elsewhere repeated, (Epist. 95.) Certainly one could not desire a
clearer confutation of this impious dogma. Augustine introduces the
same sentiment not less appositely: "Although brethren die for
brethren, yet no martyr's blood is shed for the remission of sins:
this Christ did for us, and in this conferred upon us not what we
should imitate, but what should make us grateful," (August. Tract.
in Joann. 84.) Again, in another passage: "As he alone became the
Son of God and the Son of man, that he might make us to be with
himself sons of God, so he alone, without any ill desert, undertook
the penalty for us, that through him we mighty without good desert,
obtain undeserved favor," (ad Bonif. Lib. 4, cap. 4.) Indeed, as
their whole doctrine is a patchwork of sacrilege and blasphemy, this
is the most blasphemous of the whole. Let them acknowledge whether
or not they hold the following dogmas: That the martyrs, by their
death, performed more to God, and merited more than was necessary
for themselves, and that they have a large surplus of merits which
may be applied to others; that in order that this great good may not
prove superfluous, their blood is mingled with the blood of Christ,
and out of both is formed the treasury of the Church, for the
forgiveness and satisfaction of sins; and that in this sense we must
understand the words of Paul: "Who now rejoice in my sufferings, and
fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my
flesh for his body's sake, which is the Church," (Col. 1: 24.) What
is this but merely to leave the name of Christ, and at the same time
make him a vulgar saintling, who can scarcely be distinguished in
the crowd? He alone ought to be preached, alone held forth, alone
named, alone looked to, whenever the subject considered is the
obtaining of the forgiveness of sins, expiation, and sanctification.
But let us hear their propositions. That the blood of martyrs may
not be shed without fruit, it must be employed for the common good
of the Church. Is it so? Was there no fruit in glorifying God by
death? in sealing his truth with their blood? in testifying, by
contempt of the present life, that they looked for a better? in
confirming the faith of the Church, and at the same time disabling
the pertinacity of the enemy by their constancy? But thus it is.
They acknowledge no fruit if Christ is the only propitiation, if he
alone died for our sins, if he alone was offered for our redemption.
Nevertheless, they say, Peter and Paul would have gained the crown
of victory though they had died in their beds a natural death. But
as they contended to blood, it would not accord with the justice of
God to leave their doing so barren and unfruitful. As if God were
unable to augment the glory of his servants in proportion to the
measure of his gifts. The advantage derived in common by the Church
is great enough, when, by their triumphs, she is inflamed with zeal
to fight.
    4. How maliciously they wrest the passage in which Paul says,
that he supplies in his body that which was lacking in the
sufferings of Christ! (Col. 1: 24.) That defect or supplement refers
not to the work of redemption, satisfaction, or expiation, but to
those afflictions with which the members of Christ, in other words,
all believers, behave to be exercised, so long as they are in the
flesh. He says, therefore, that part of the sufferings of Christ
still remains, viz., that what he suffered in himself he daily
suffers in his members. Christ so honors us as to regard and count
our afflictions as his own. By the additional words - for the
Church, Paul means not for the redemptions or reconciliations or
satisfaction of the Church, but for edification and progress. As he
elsewhere says, "I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that
they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with
eternal glory" (2 Tim. 2: 10.) He also writes to the Corinthians:
"Whether we be afflicted, it is for your consolation and salvation,
which is effectual in the enduring of the same sufferings which we
also suffer," (2 Cor. 1: 6.) In the same place he immediately
explains his meaning by adding, that he was made a minister of the
Church, not for redemption, but according to the dispensation which
he received to preach the gospel of Christ. But if they still desire
another interpreter, let them hear Augustine: "The sufferings of
Christ are in Christ alone, as in the head; in Christ and the Church
as in the whole body. Hence Paul, being one member says, 'I fill up
in my body that which is behind of the sufferings of Christ.'
Therefore O hearers whoever you be, if you are among the members of
Christ, whatever you suffer from those who are not members of
Christ, was lacking to the sufferings of Christ," (August. in Ps.
16.) He elsewhere explains the end of the sufferings of the Apostles
undertaken for Christ: "Christ is my door to you, because ye are the
sheep of Christ purchased by his blood: acknowledge your price,
which is not paid by me, but preached by me," (August. Tract. in
Joann. 47.) He afterwards adds, "As he laid down his life, so ought
we to lay down our lives for the brethren, to build up peace and
maintain faith." Thus far Augustine. Far be it from us to imagine
that Paul thought any thing was wanting to the sufferings of Christ
in regard to the complete fulness of righteousness, salvation, and
life, or that he wished to make any addition to it, after showing so
clearly and eloquently that the grace of Christ was poured out in
such rich abundance as far to exceed all the power of sin, (Rom. 5:
15.) All saints have been saved by it alone, not by the merit of
their own life or death, as Peter distinctly testifies, (Acts 15:
11;) so that it is an insult to God and his Anointed to place the
worthiness of any saint in any thing save the mercy of God alone.
But why dwell longer on this, as if the matter were obscure, when to
mention these monstrous dogmas is to refute them?
    5. Moreover, to say nothing of these abominations, who taught
the Pope to enclose the grace of Jesus Christ in lead and parchment,
grace which the Lord is pleased to dispense by the word of the
Gospel? Undoubtedly either the Gospel of God or indulgences must be
false. That Christ is offered to us in the Gospel with all the
abundance of heavenly blessings, with all his merits, all his
righteousness, wisdom, and grace, without exception, Paul bears
witness when he says, "Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as
though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be
ye reconciled to God. For he has made him to be sin for us, who knew
no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him," (2
Cor. 5: 20, 21.) And what is meant by the fellowship (koinonia) of
Christ, which according to the same Apostle (1 Cor. 1: 9) is offered
to us in the Gospel, all believers know. On the contrary,
indulgences, bringing forth some portion of the grace of God from
the armory of the Pope, fix it to lead, parchment, and a particular
place, but dissever it from the word of God. When we inquire into
the origin of this abuse, it appears to have arisen from this, that
when in old times the satisfactions imposed on penitents were too
severe to be borne, those who felt themselves burdened beyond
measure by the penance imposed, petitioned the Church for
relaxation. The remission so given was called indulgence. But as
they transferred satisfactions to God, and called them compensations
by which men redeem themselves from the justice of God, they in the
same way transferred indulgences, representing them as expiatory
remedies which free us from merited punishment. The blasphemies to
which we have referred have been feigned with so much effrontery
that there is not the least pretext for them.
    6. Their purgatory cannot now give us much trouble, since with
this ax we have struck it, thrown it down, and overturned it from
its very foundations. I cannot agree with some who think that we
ought to dissemble in this matter, and make no mention of purgatory,
from which (as they say) fierce contests arise, and very little
edification can be obtained. I myself would think it right to
disregard their follies did they not tend to serious consequences.
But since purgatory has been reared on many, and is daily propped up
by new blasphemies; since it produces many grievous offenses,
assuredly it is not to be connived at, however it might have been
disguised for a time, that without any authority from the word of
God, it was devised by prying audacious rashness, that credit was
procured for it by fictitious revelations, the wiles of Satan, and
that certain passages of Scripture were ignorantly wrested to its
support. Although the Lord bears not that human presumption should
thus force its way to the hidden recesses of his judgments; although
he has issued a strict prohibition against neglecting his voice, and
making inquiry at the dead, (Deut. 18: 11,) and permits not his word
to be so erroneously contaminated. Let us grant, however, that all
this might have been tolerated for a time as a thing of no great
moment; yet when the expiation of sins is sought elsewhere than in
the blood of Christ, and satisfaction is transferred to others,
silence were most perilous. We are bound, therefore, to raise our
voice to its highest pitch, and cry aloud that purgatory is a deadly
device of Satan; that it makes void the cross of Christ; that it
offers intolerable insult to the divine mercy; that it undermines
and overthrows our faith. For what is this purgatory but the
satisfaction for sin paid after death by the souls of the dead?
Hence when this idea of satisfaction is refuted, purgatory itself is
forthwith completely overturned. But if it is perfectly clear, from
what was lately said, that the blood of Christ is the only
satisfaction, expiation, and cleansing for the sins of believers,
what remains but to hold that purgatory is mere blasphemy, horrid
blasphemy against Christ? I say nothing of the sacrilege by which it
is daily defended, the offenses which it begets in religion, and the
other innumerable evils which we see teeming forth from that
fountain of impiety.
    7. Those passages of Scripture on which it is their wont
falsely and iniquitously to fasten, it may be worth while to wrench
out of their hands. When the Lord declares that the sin against the
Holy Ghost will not be forgiven either in this world or the world to
come, he thereby intimates (they say) that there is a remission of
certain sins hereafter. But who sees not that the Lord there speaks
of the guilt of sin? But if this is so, what has it to do with their
purgatory, seeing they deny not that the guilt of those sins, the
punishment of which is there expiated, is forgiven in the present
life? Lest, however, they should still object, we shall give a
plainer solution. Since it was the Lord's intention to cut off all
hope of pardon from this flagitous wickedness, he did not consider
it enough to say, that it would never be forgiven, but in the way of
amplification employed a division by which he included both the
judgment which every man's conscience pronounces in the present
life, and the final judgment which will be publicly pronounced at
the resurrection; as if he had said, Beware of this malignant
rebellion, as you would of instant destruction; for he who of set
purpose endeavors to extinguish the offered light of the Spirit,
shall not obtain pardon either in this life, which has been given to
sinners for conversion, or on the last day when the angels of God
shall separate the sheep from the goats, and the heavenly kingdom
shall be purged of all that offends. The next passage they produce
is the parable in Matthew: "Agree with thine adversary quickly,
whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary
deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the
officer, and thou be cast into prison. Verily, I say unto thee, Thou
shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost
earthing," (Matth. 5: 25, 26.) If in this passage the judge means
God, the adversary the devil, the officer an angel, and the prison
purgatory, I give in at once. But if every man sees that Christ
there intended to show to how many perils and evils those expose
themselves who obstinately insist on their utmost right, instead of
being satisfied with what is fair and equitable, that he might
thereby the more strongly exhort his followers to concord, where, I
ask, are we to find their purgatory?
    8. They seek an argument in the passage in which Paul declares,
that all things shall bow the knee to Christ, "things in heaven, and
things in earth, and things under the earth," (Phil. 2: 10.) They
take it for granted, that by "things under the earth," cannot be
meant those who are doomed to eternal damnation, and that the only
remaining conclusion is, that they must be souls suffering in
purgatory. They would not reason very ill if, by the bending of the
knee, the Apostle designated true worship; but since he simply says
that Christ has received a dominion to which all creatures are
subject, what prevents us from understanding those "under the earth"
to mean the devils, who shall certainly be sisted before the
judgment-seat of God, there to recognize their Judge with fear and
trembling? In this way Paul himself elsewhere interprets the same
prophecy: "We shall all stand before the judgment-seat of Christ.
For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow
to me, and every tongue shall confess to God," (Rom. 14: 10, 11.)
But we cannot in this way interpret what is said in the Apocalypse:
"Every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the
earth, and such as are in the sea, heard I saying, Blessing, and
honor, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the
throne, and unto the Lamb, for ever and ever," (Rev. 5: 13.) This I
readily admit; but what kinds of creatures do they suppose are here
enumerated? It is absolutely certain, that both irrational and
inanimate creatures are comprehended. All, then, which is affirmed
is, that every part of the universe, from the highest pinnacle of
heaven to the very centre of the earth, each in its own way
proclaims the glory of the Creator.
    To the passage which they produce from the history of the
Maccabees, (1 Maccab. 12: 43,) I will not deign to reply, lest I
should seem to include that work among the canonical books. But
Augustine holds it to be canonical. First, with what degree of
confidence? "The Jews," says he, "do not hold the book of the
Maccabees as they do the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms, to which
the Lord bears testimony as to his own witnesses, saying, Ought not
all things which are written in the Law, and the Psalms, and the
Prophets, concerning me be fulfilled? (Luke 24: 44.) But it has been
received by the Church not uselessly, if it be read or heard with
soberness." Jerome, however, unhesitatingly affirms, that it is of
no authority in establishing doctrine; and from the ancient little
book, De Expositione Symboli; which bears the name of Cyprian, it is
plain that it was in no estimation in the ancient Church. And why do
I here contend in vain? As if the author himself did not
sufficiently show what degree of deference is to be paid him, when
in the end he asks pardon for any thing less properly expressed, (2
Maccab. 15: 38.) He who confesses that his writings stand in need of
pardon, certainly proclaims that they are not oracles of the Holy
Spirit. We may add, that the piety of Judas is commended for no
other reason than for having a firm hope of the final resurrection,
in sending his oblation for the dead to Jerusalem. For the writer of
the history does not represent what he did as furnishing the price
of redemption, but merely that they might be partakers of eternal
life, with the other saints who had fallen for their country and
religion. The act, indeed, was not free from superstition and
misguided zeal; but it is mere fatuity to extend the legal sacrifice
to us, seeing we are assured that the sacrifices then in use ceased
on the advent of Christ.
    9. But, it seems, they find in Paul an invincible support,
which cannot be so easily overthrown. His words are, "Now if any man
build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay,
stubble; every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall
declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall
try every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work shall be
burnt, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so
as by fire," (1 Cor. 3: 12-l5.) What fire (they ask) can that be but
the fire of purgatory, by which the defilements of sin are wiped
away, in order that we may enter pure into the kingdom of God? But
most of the Fathers give it a different meaning, viz., the
tribulation or cross by which the Lord tries his people, that they
may not rest satisfied with the defilements of the flesh. This is
much more probable than the fiction of a purgatory. I do not,
however, agree with them, for I think I see a much surer and clearer
meaning to the passage. But, before I produce it, I wish they would
answer me, whether they think the Apostle and all the saints have to
pass through this purgatorial fire? I am aware they will say, no;
for it were too absurd to hold that purification is required by
those whose superfluous merits they dream of as applicable to all
the members of the Church. But this the Apostle affirms; for he
says, not that the works of certain persons, but the works of all
will be tried. And this is not my argument, but that of Augustine,
who thus impugns that interpretation. And (what makes the thing more
absurd) he says, not that they will pass through fire for certain
works, but that even if they should have edified the Church with the
greatest fidelity, they will receive their reward after their works
shall have been tried by fire. First, we see that the Apostle used a
metaphor when he gave the names of wood, hay, and stubble, to
doctrines of man's device. The ground of the metaphor is obvious,
viz., that as wood when it is put into the fire is consumed and
destroyed, so neither will those doctrines be able to endure when
they come to be tried. Moreover, every one sees that the trial is
made by the Spirit of God. Therefore, in following out the thread of
the metaphor, and adapting its parts properly to each other, he gave
the name of fire to the examination of the Holy Spirit. For, just as
silver and gold, the nearer they are brought to the fire, give
stronger proof of their genuineness and purity, so the Lord's truth,
the more thoroughly it is submitted to spiritual examination, has
its authority the better confirmed. As hay, wood, and stubble, when
the fire is applied to them, are suddenly consumed, so the
inventions of man, not founded on the word of God, cannot stand the
trial of the Holy Spirit, but forthwith give way and perish. In
fine, if spurious doctrines are compared to wood, hay, and stubble,
because, like wood, hay, and stubble, they are burned by fire and
fitted for destruction, though the actual destruction is only
completed by the Spirit of the Lord, it follows that the Spirit is
that fire by which they will be proved. This proof Paul calls the
day of the Lord; using a term common in Scripture. For the day of
the Lord is said to take place whenever he in some way manifests his
presence to men, his face being specially said to shine when his
truth is manifested. It has now been proved, that Paul has no idea
of any other fire than the trial of the Holy Spirit. But how are
those who suffer the loss of their works saved by fire? This it will
not be difficult to understand, if we consider of what kind of
persons he speaks. For he designates them builders of the Church,
who, retaining the proper foundation, build different materials upon
it; that is, who, not abandoning the principal and necessary
articles of faith, err in minor and less perilous matters, mingling
their own fictions with the word of God. Such, I say, must suffer
the loss of their work by the destruction of their fictions. They
themselves, however, are saved, yet so as by fire; that is, not that
their ignorance and delusions are approved by the Lord, but they are
purified from them by the grace and power of the Holy Spirit. All
those, accordingly, who have tainted the golden purity of the divine
word with the pollution of purgatory must necessarily suffer the
loss of their work.
    10. But the observance of it in the Church is of the highest
antiquity. This objection is disposed of by Paul, when, including
even his own age in the sentence, he declares, that all who in
building the Church have laid upon it something not conformable to
the foundation, must suffer the loss of their work. When, therefore,
my opponents object, that it has been the practice for thirteen
hundred years to offer prayers for the dead, I, in return, ask them,
by what word of God, by what revelation, by what example it was
done? For here not only are passages of Scripture wanting, but in
the examples of all the saints of whom we read, nothing of the kind
is seen. We have numerous, and sometimes long narratives, of their
mourning and sepulchral rites, but not one word is said of prayers.
But the more important the matter was, the more they ought to have
dwelt upon it. Even those who in ancient times offered prayers for
the dead, saw that they were not supported by the command of God and
legitimate example. Why then did they presume to do it? I hold that
herein they suffered the common lot of man, and therefore maintain,
that what they did is not to be imitated. Believers ought not to
engage in any work without a firm conviction of its propriety, as
Paul enjoins, (Rom. 14: 23;) and this conviction is expressly
requisite in prayer. It is to be presumed, however, that they were
influenced by some reason; they sought a solace for their sorrow,
and it seemed cruel not to give some attestation of their love to
the dead, when in the presence of God. All know by experience how
natural it is for the human mind thus to feel.
    Received custom too was a kind of torch, by which the minds of
many were inflamed. We know that among all the Gentiles, and in all
ages, certain rites were paid to the dead, and that every year
lustrations were performed for their manes. Although Satan deluded
foolish mortals by these impostures, yet the means of deceiving were
borrowed from a sound principle, viz., that death is not
destruction, but a passages from this life to another. And there can
be no doubt that superstition itself always left the Gentiles
without excuse before the judgment-seat of God, because they
neglected to prepare for that future life which they professed to
believe. Thus, that Christians might not seem worse than heathens,
they felt ashamed of paying no office to the dead, as if they had
been utterly annihilated. Hence their ill advised assiduity; because
they thought they would expose themselves to great disgrace, if they
were slow in providing funeral feasts and oblations. What was thus
introduced by perverse rivalship, ever and anon received new
additions, until the highest holiness of the Papacy consisted in
giving assistance to the suffering dead. But far better and more
solid comfort is furnished by scripture when it declares, "Blessed
are the dead that die in the Lord;" and adds the reason, "for they
rest from their labors," (Rev. 14: 13.) We ought not to indulge our
love so far as to set up a perverse mode of prayer in the Church.
Surely every person possessed of the least prudence easily
perceives, that whatever we meet with on this subject in ancient
writers, was in deference to public custom and the ignorance of the
vulgar. I admit they were themselves also carried away into error,
the usual effect of rash credulity being to destroy the judgment.
Meanwhile the passages themselves show, that when they recommended
prayer for the dead it was with hesitation. Augustine relates in his
Confessions, that his mother, Monica, earnestly entreated to be
remembered when the solemn rites at the altar were performed;
doubtless an old woman's wish, which her son did not bring to the
test of Scripture, but from natural affection wished others to
approve. His book, De Cura pro Mortals Agenda, On showing Care for
the Dead, is so full of doubt, that its coldness may well extinguish
the heat of a foolish zeal. Should any one, in pretending to be a
patron of the dead, deal merely in probabilities, the only effect
will be to make those indifferent who were formerly solicitous. -
The only support of this dogma is, that as a custom of praying for
the dead prevailed, the duty ought not to be despised. But granting
that ancient ecclesiastical writers deemed it a pious thing to
assist the dead, the rule which can never deceive is always to be
observed, viz., that we must not introduce anything of our own into
our prayers, but must keep all our wishes in subordination to the
word of God, because it belongs to Him to prescribe what he wishes
us to ask. Now, since the whole Law and Gospel do not contain one
syllable which countenances the right of praying for the dead, it is
a profanation of prayer to go one step farther than God enjoins.
But, lest our opponents boast of sharing their error with the
ancient Church, I say, that there is a wide difference between the
two. The latter made a commemoration of the dead, that they might
not seem to have cast off all concern for them; but they, at the
same time, acknowledged that they were doubtful as to their state;
assuredly they made no such assertion concerning purgatory as
implied that they did not hold it to be uncertain. The former
insist, that their dream of purgatory shall be received without
question as an article of faith. The latter sparingly and in a
perfunctory manner only commended their dead to the Lord, in the
communion of the holy supper. The former are constantly urging the
care of the dead, and by their importunate preaching of it, make out
that it is to be preferred to all the offices of charity. But it
would not be difficult for us to produce some passages from ancient
writers, which clearly overturn all those prayers for the dead which
were then in use. Such is the passage of Augustine, in which he
shows that the resurrection of the flesh and eternal glory is
expected by all, but that rest which follows death is received by
every one who is worthy of it when he dies. Accordingly, he declares
that all the righteous, not less than the Apostles, Prophets, and
Martyrs, immediately after death enjoy blessed rest. If such is
their condition, what, I ask, will our prayers contribute to them? I
say nothing of those grosser superstitions by which they have
fascinated the minds of the simple; and yet they are innumerable,
and most of them so monstrous, that they cannot cover them with any
cloak of decency. I say nothing, moreover, of those most shameful
traffickings, which they plied as they listed while the world was
stupefied. For I would never come to an end; and, without
enumerating them, the pious reader will here find enough to
establish his conscience.

    

Chapter 6.

6. The life of a Christian man. Scriptural arguments exhorting to
it.

    This and the four following chapters treat of the Life of the
Christian, and are so arranged as to admit of being classed under
two principal heads.
    First, it must be held to be an universally acknowledged point,
that no man is a Christian who does not feel some special love for
righteousness, chap. 6. Secondly, in regard to the standard by which
every man ought to regulate his life, although it seems to be
considered in chap. 7 only, yet the three following chapters also
refer to it. For it shows that the Christian has two duties to
perform. First, the observance being so arduous, he needs the
greatest patience. Hence chap. 8 treats professedly of the utility
of the cross, and chap. 9 invites to meditation on the future life.
Lastly, chap. 10 clearly shows, as in no small degree conducive to
this end, how we are to use this life and its comforts without
abusing them.
    This sixth chapter consists of two parts, - I. Connection
between this treatise on the Christian Life and the doctrine of
Regeneration and Repentance. Arrangement of the treatise, sec. 1-3.
II. Extremes to be avoided; 1. False Christians denying Christ by
their works condemned, sec. 4. 2. Christians should not despair,
though they have not attained perfection, provided they make daily
progress in piety and righteousness.
    
Sections.

1. Connection between this chapter and the doctrine of Regeneration.
    Necessity of the doctrine concerning the Christian Life. The
    brevity of this treatise. The method of it. Plainness and
    unadorned simplicity of the Scripture system of morals.
2. Two divisions. First, Personal holiness. 1. Because God is holy.
    2. Because of our communion with his saints.
3. Second division, relating to our Redemption. Admirable moral
    system of Scripture. Five special inducements or exhortations
    to a Christian Life.
4. False Christians who are opposed to this life censured 1. They
    have not truly learned Christ. 2. The Gospel not the guide of
    their words or actions. 3. They do not imitate Christ the
    Master. 4. They would separate the Spirit from his word.
5. Christians ought not to despond: Provided 1. They take the word
    of God for their guide. 2. Sincerely cultivate righteousness.
    3. Walk, according to their capacity, in the ways of the Lord.
    4. Make some progress. 5. Persevere.
    
    1. We have said that the object of regeneration is to bring the
life of believers into concord and harmony with the righteousness of
God, and so confirm the adoption by which they have been received as
sons. But although the law comprehends within it that new life by
which the image of God is restored in us, yet, as our sluggishness
stands greatly in need both of helps and incentives it will be
useful to collect out of Scripture a true account of this
reformations lest any who have a heartfelt desire of repentance
should in their zeal go astray. Moreover, I am not unaware that, in
undertaking to describe the life of the Christian, I am entering on
a large and extensive subject, one which, when fully considered in
all its parts, is sufficient to fill a large volume. We see the
length to which the Fathers in treating of individual virtues extend
their exhortations. This they do, not from mere loquaciousness; for
whatever be the virtue which you undertake to recommend, your pen is
spontaneously led by the copiousness of the matter so to amplify,
that you seem not to have discussed it properly if you have not done
it at length. My intention, however, in the plan of life which I now
propose to give, is not to extend it so far as to treat of each
virtue specially, and expatiate in exhortation. This must be sought
in the writings of others, and particularly in the Homilies of the
Fathers.1 For me it will be sufficient to point out the method by
which a pious man may be taught how to frame his life aright, and
briefly lay down some universal rule by which he may not improperly
regulate his conduct. I shall one day possibly find time for more
ample discourse, [or leave others to perform an office for which I
am not so fit. I have a natural love of brevity, and, perhaps, any
attempt of mine at copiousness would not succeed. Even if I could
gain the highest applause by being more prolix, I would scarcely be
disposed to attempt it,2] while the nature of my present work
requires me to glance at simple doctrine with as much brevity as
possible. As philosophers have certain definitions of rectitude and
honesty, from which they derive particular duties and the whole
train of virtues; so in this respect Scripture is not without order,
but presents a most beautiful arrangement, one too which is every
way much more certain than that of philosophers. The only difference
is, that they, under the influence of ambition, constantly affect an
exquisite perspicuity of arrangement, which may serve to display
their genius, whereas the Spirit of God, teaching without
affectation, is not so perpetually observant of exact method, and
yet by observing it at times sufficiently intimates that it is not
to be neglected.
    2. The Scripture system of which we speak aims chiefly at two
objects. The former is, that the love of righteousness, to which we
are by no means naturally inclined, may be instilled and implanted
into our minds. The latter is, (see chap. 2:,) to prescribe a rule
which will prevent us while in the pursuit of righteousness from
going astray. It has numerous admirable methods of recommending
righteousness.3 Many have been already pointed out in different
parts of this work; but we shall here also briefly advert to some of
them. With what better foundation can it begin than by reminding us
that we must be holy, because "God is holy?" (Lev. 19: 1; 1 Pet. 1:
16.) For when we were scattered abroad like lost sheep, wandering
through the labyrinth of this world, he brought us back again to his
own fold. When mention is made of our union with God, let us
remember that holiness must be the bond; not that by the merit of
holiness we come into communion with him, (we ought rather first to
cleave to him, in order that, pervaded with his holiness, we may
follow whither he calls,) but because it greatly concerns his glory
not to have any fellowship with wickedness and impurity. Wherefore
he tells us that this is the end of our calling, the end to which we
ought ever to have respect, if we would answer the call of God. For
to what end were we rescued from the iniquity and pollution of the
world into which we were plunged, if we allow ourselves, during our
whole lives, to wallow in them? Besides, we are at the same time
admonished, that if we would be regarded as the Lord's people, we
must inhabit the holy city Jerusalem, (Isaiah rev. 8, et alibi;)
which, as he hath consecrated it to himself, it were impious for its
inhabitants to profane by impurity. Hence the expressions, "Who
shall abide in thy tabernacle? who shall dwell in thy holy hill? He
that walketh uprightly, and worketh righteousness," (Ps. 15: 1, 2;
24: 3, 4;) for the sanctuary in which he dwells certainly ought not
to be like an unclean stall.
    3. The better to arouse us, it exhibits God the Father, who, as
he hath reconciled us to himself in his Anointed, has impressed his
image upon us, to which he would have us to be conformed, (Rom. 5:
4.) Come, then, and let them show me a more excellent system among
philosophers, who think that they only have a moral philosophy duly
and orderly arranged. They, when they would give excellent
exhortations to virtue, can only tell us to live agreeably to
nature. Scripture derives its exhortations from the true source,4
when it not only enjoins us to regulate our lives with a view to God
its author to whom it belongs; but after showing us that we have
degenerated from our true origin, viz., the law of our Creator,
adds, that Christ, through whom we have returned to favour with God,
is set before us as a model, the image of which our lives should
express. What do you require more effectual than this? Nay, what do
you require beyond this? If the Lord adopts us for his sons on the
condition that our life be a representation of Christ, the bond of
our adoption, - then, unless we dedicate and devote ourselves to
righteousness, we not only, with the utmost perfidy, revolt from our
Creator, but also abjure the Saviour himself. Then, from an
enumeration of all the blessings of God, and each part of our
salvation, it finds materials for exhortation. Ever since God
exhibited himself to us as a Father, we must be convicted of extreme
ingratitude if we do not in turn exhibit ourselves as his sons. Ever
since Christ purified us by the laver of his blood, and communicated
this purification by baptism, it would ill become us to be defiled
with new pollution. Ever since he ingrafted us into his body, we,
who are his members, should anxiously beware of contracting any
stain or taint. Ever since he who is our head ascended to heaven, it
is befitting in us to withdraw our affections from the earth, and
with our whole soul aspire to heaven. Ever since the Holy Spirit
dedicated us as temples to the Lord, we should make it our endeavour
to show forth the glory of God, and guard against being profaned by
the defilement of sin. Ever since our soul and body were destined to
heavenly incorruptibility and an unfading crown, we should earnestly
strive to keep them pure and uncorrupted against the day of the
Lord. These, I say, are the surest foundations of a well-regulated
life, and you will search in vain for any thing resembling them
among philosophers, who, in their commendation of virtue, never rise
higher than the natural dignity of man.
    4. This is the place to address those who, having nothing of
Christ but the name and sign, would yet be called Christians. How
dare they boast of this sacred name? None have intercourse with
Christ but those who have acquired the true knowledge of him from
the Gospel. The Apostle denies that any man truly has learned Christ
who has not learned to put off "the old man, which is corrupt
according to the deceitful lusts, and put on Christ," (Eph. 4: 22.)
They are convicted, therefore, of falsely and unjustly pretending a
knowledge of Christ, whatever be the volubility and eloquence with
which they can talk of the Gospel. Doctrine is not an affair of the
tongue, but of the life; is not apprehended by the intellect and
memory merely, like other branches of learning; but is received only
when it possesses the whole soul, and finds its seat and habitation
in the inmost recesses of the heart. Let them, therefore, either
cease to insult God, by boasting that they are what they are not, or
let them show themselves not unworthy disciples of their divine
Master. To doctrine in which our religion is contained we have given
the first place, since by it our salvation commences; but it must be
transfused into the breast, and pass into the conduct, and so
transform us into itself, as not to prove unfruitful. If
philosophers are justly offended, and banish from their company with
disgrace those who, while professing an art which ought to be the
mistress of their conduct, convert it into mere loquacious
sophistry, with how much better reason shall we detest those flimsy
sophists who are contented to let the Gospel play upon their lips,
when, from its efficacy, it ought to penetrate the inmost affections
of the heart, fix its seat in the soul, and pervade the whole man a
hundred times more than the frigid discourses of philosophers?
    5. I insist not that the life of the Christian shall breathe
nothing but the perfect Gospel, though this is to be desired, and
ought to be attempted. I insist not so strictly on evangelical
perfection, as to refuse to acknowledge as a Christian any man who
has not attained it. In this way all would be excluded from the
Church, since there is no man who is not far removed from this
perfection, while many, who have made but little progress, would be
undeservedly rejected. What then? Let us set this before our eye as
the end at which we ought constantly to aim. Let it be regarded as
the goal towards which we are to run. For you cannot divide the
matter with God, undertaking part of what his word enjoins, and
omitting part at pleasure. For, in the first place, God uniformly
recommends integrity as the principal part of his worship, meaning
by integrity real singleness of mind, devoid of gloss and fiction,
and to this is opposed a double mind; as if it had been said, that
the spiritual commencement of a good life is when the internal
affections are sincerely devoted to God, in the cultivation of
holiness and justice. But seeing that, in this earthly prison of the
body, no man is supplied with strength sufficient to hasten in his
course with due alacrity, while the greater number are so oppressed
with weakness, that hesitating, and halting, and even crawling on
the ground, they make little progress, let every one of us go as far
as his humble ability enables him, and prosecute the journey once
begun. No one will travel so badly as not daily to make some degree
of progress. This, therefore, let us never cease to do, that we may
daily advance in the way of the Lord; and let us not despair because
of the slender measure of success. How little soever the success may
correspond with our wish, our labour is not lost when to-day is
better than yesterday, provided with true singleness of mind we keep
our aim, and aspire to the goal, not speaking flattering things to
ourselves, nor indulging our vices, but making it our constant
endeavour to become better, until we attain to goodness itself. If
during the whole course of our life we seek and follow, we shall at
length attain it, when relieved from the infirmity of flesh we are
admitted to full fellowship with God.
    
Notes
[1]The French adds, "C'est a dire, sermons populaires ;" - that is
to say, popular sermons.
[2]The passage in brackets is omitted in the French.
[3]The French begins the sentence thus, "Quant est du premier
poinct; - As to the former point.
[4]Mal. 1: 6; Eph. 5: 1; 1 John 3: 1, 3; Eph. 5: 26; Rom. 6: 1- 4; 1
Cor. 6: 11; 1 Pet. 1: 15, 19; 1 Cor. 6: 15; John 15: 3; Eph. 5: 2,
3; Col. 3: 1, 2; 1 Cor. 3: 16; 6: 17; 2 Cor. 6: 16; 1 Thess. 5: 23.

    

Chapter 7.

7. A summary of the Christian life. Of self-denial.5

    The divisions of the chapter are, - I. The rule which permits
us not to go astray in the study of righteousness, requires two
things, viz., that man, abandoning his own will, devote himself
entirely to the service of God; whence it follows, that we must seek
not our own things, but the things of God, sec. 1, 2. II. A
description of this renovation or Christian life taken from the
Epistle to Titus, and accurately explained under certain special
heads, sec. 3 to end.
    
Sections.
    
1. Consideration of the second general division in regard to the
    Christian life. Its beginning and sum. A twofold respect. 1. We
    are not our own. Respect to both the fruit and the use. Unknown
    to philosophers, who have placed reason on the throne of the
    Holy Spirit.
2. Since we are not our own, we must seek the glory of God, and obey
    his will. Self-denial recommended to the disciples of Christ.
    He who neglects it, deceived either by pride or hypocrisy,
    rushes on destruction.
3. Three things to be followed, and two to be shunned in life.
    Impiety and worldly lusts to be shunned. Sobriety, justice, and
    piety, to be followed. An inducement to right conduct.
4. Self-denial the sum of Paul's doctrine. Its difficulty. Qualities
    in us which make it difficult. Cures for these qualities. 1.
    Ambition to be suppressed. 2. Humility to be embraced. 3.
    Candour to be esteemed. 4. Mutual charity to be preserved. 5.
    Modesty to be sincerely cultivated.
5. The advantage of our neighbour to be promoted. Here self- denial
    most necessary, and yet most difficult. Here a double remedy.
    1. The benefits bestowed upon us are for the common benefit of
    the Church. 2. We ought to do all we can for our neighbour.
    This illustrated by analogy from the members of the human body.
    This duty of charity founded on the divine command.
6. Charity ought to have for its attendants patience and kindness.
    We should consider the image of God in our neighbours, and
    especially in those who are of the household of faith. Hence a
    fourfold consideration which refutes all objections. A common
    objection refuted.
7. Christian life cannot exist without charity. Remedies for the
    vices opposed to charity. 1. Mercy. 2. Humility. 3. Modesty. 4.
    Diligence. 5. Perseverance.
8. Self-denial, in respect of God, should lead to equanimity and
    tolerance. 1. We are always subject to God. 2. We should shun
    avarice and ambition. 3. We should expect all prosperity from
    the blessing of God, and entirely depend on him.
9. We ought not to desire wealth or honours without the divine
    blessing, nor follow the arts of the wicked. We ought to cast
    all our care upon God, and never envy the prosperity of others.
10. We ought to commit ourselves entirely to God. The necessity of
    this doctrine. Various uses of affliction. Heathen abuse and
    corruption.
    
    1. Although the Law of God contains a perfect rule of conduct
admirably arranged, it has seemed proper to our divine Master to
train his people by a more accurate method, to the rule which is
enjoined in the Law; and the leading principle in the method is,
that it is the duty of believers to present their "bodies a living
sacrifice, holy and acceptable unto God, which is their reasonable
service," (Rom. 12: 1.) Hence he draws the exhortation: "Be not
conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of
your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and
perfect will of God." The great point, then, is, that we are
consecrated and dedicated to God, and, therefore, should not
henceforth think, speak, design, or act, without a view to his
glory. What he hath made sacred cannot, without signal insult to
him, be applied to profane use. But if we are not our own, but the
Lord's, it is plain both what error is to be shunned, and to what
end the actions of our lives ought to be directed. We are not our
own; therefore, neither is our own reason or will to rule our acts
and counsels. We are not our own; therefore, let us not make it our
end to seek what may be agreeable to our carnal nature. We are not
our own; therefore, as far as possible, let us forget ourselves and
the things that are ours. On the other hand, we are God's; let us,
therefore, live and die to him (Rom. 14: 8.) We are God's;
therefore, let his wisdom and will preside over all our actions. We
are God's; to him, then, as the only legitimate end, let every part
of our life be directed. O how great the proficiency of him who,
taught that he is not his own, has withdrawn the dominion and
government of himself from his own reason that he may give them to
God! For as the surest source of destruction to men is to obey
themselves, so the only haven of safety is to have no other will, no
other wisdom, than to follow the Lord wherever he leads. Let this,
then be the first step, to abandon ourselves, and devote the whole
energy of our minds to the service of God. By service, I mean not
only that which consists in verbal obedience, but that by which the
mind, divested of its own carnal feelings, implicitly obeys the call
of the Spirit of God. This transformation, (which Paul calls the
renewing of the mind, Rom. 12: 2; Eph. 4: 23,) though it is the
first entrance to life, was unknown to all the philosophers. They
give the government of man to reason alone, thinking that she alone
is to be listened to; in short, they assign to her the sole
direction of the conduct. But Christian philosophy bids her give
place, and yield complete submission to the Holy Spirit, so that the
man himself no longer lives, but Christ lives and reigns in him,
(Gal. ii. 20.)
    2. Hence follows the other principle, that we are not to seek
our own, but the Lord's will, and act with a view to promote his
glory. Great is our proficiency, when, almost forgetting ourselves,
certainly postponing our own reason, we faithfully make it our study
to obey God and his commandments. For when Scripture enjoins us to
lay aside private regard to ourselves, it not only divests our minds
of an excessive longing for wealth, or power, or human favour, but
eradicates all ambition and thirst for worldly glory, and other more
secret pests. The Christian ought, indeed, to be so trained and
disposed as to consider, that during his whole life he has to do
with God. For this reason, as he will bring all things to the
disposal and estimate of God, so he will religiously direct his
whole mind to him. For he who has learned to look to God in
everything he does, is at the same time diverted from all vain
thoughts. This is that self-denial which Christ so strongly enforces
on his disciples from the very outset, (Matth. xvi. 24,) which, as
soon as it takes hold of the mind, leaves no place either, first,
for pride, show, and ostentation; or, secondly, for avarice, lust,
luxury, effeminacy, or other vices which are engendered by self
love. On the contrary, wherever it reigns not, the foulest vices are
indulged in without shame; or, if there is some appearance of
virtue, it is vitiated by a depraved longing for applause. Show me,
if you can, an individual who, unless he has renounced himself in
obedience to the Lord's command, is disposed to do good for its own
sake. Those who have not so renounced themselves have followed
virtue at least for the sake of praise. The philosophers who have
contended most strongly that virtue is to be desired on her own
account, were so inflated with arrogance as to make it apparent that
they sought virtue for no other reason than as a ground for
indulging in pride. So far, therefore, is God from being delighted
with these hunters after popular applause with their swollen
breasts, that he declares they have received their reward in this
world, (Matth. 6: 2,) and that harlots and publicans are nearer the
kingdom of heaven than they, (Matth. 21: 31.) We have not yet
sufficiently explained how great and numerous are the obstacles by
which a man is impeded in the pursuit of rectitude, so long as he
has not renounced himself. The old saying is true, There is a world
of iniquity treasured up in the human soul. Nor can you find any
other remedy for this than to deny yourself, renounce your own
reason, and direct your whole mind to the pursuit of those things
which the Lord requires of you, and which you are to seek only
because they are pleasing to Him.
    3. In another passage, Paul gives a brief, indeed, but more
distinct account of each of the parts of a well-ordered life: "The
grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should
live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; looking
for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearance of the great God
and our Saviour Jesus Christ; who gave himself for us, that he might
redeem us from all iniquity, and purify to himself a peculiar
people, zealous of good works," (Tit. 2: 11-14.) After holding forth
the grace of God to animate us, and pave the way for His true
worship, he removes the two greatest obstacles which stand in the
way, viz., ungodliness, to which we are by nature too prone, and
worldly lusts, which are of still greater extent. Under ungodliness,
he includes not merely superstition, but everything at variance with
the true fear of God. Worldly lusts are equivalent to the lusts of
the flesh. Thus he enjoins us, in regard to both tables of the Law,
to lay aside our own mind, and renounce whatever our own reason and
will dictate. Then he reduces all the actions of our lives to three
branches, sobriety, righteousness, and godliness. Sobriety
undoubtedly denotes as well chastity and temperance as the pure and
frugal use of temporal goods, and patient endurance of want.
Righteousness comprehends all the duties of equity, in every one his
due. Next follows godliness, which separates us from the pollutions
of the world, and connects us with God in true holiness. These, when
connected together by an indissoluble chain, constitute complete
perfection. But as nothing is more difficult than to bid adieu to
the will of the flesh, subdue, nay, abjure our lusts, devote
ourselves to God and our brethren, and lead an angelic life amid the
pollutions of the world, Paul, to set our minds free from all
entanglements, recalls us to the hope of a blessed immortality,
justly urging us to contend, because as Christ has once appeared as
our Redeemer, so on his final advent he will give full effect to the
salvation obtained by him. And in this way he dispels all the
allurements which becloud our path, and prevent us from aspiring as
we ought to heavenly glory; nay, he tells us that we must be
pilgrims in the world, that we may not fail of obtaining the
heavenly inheritance.
    4. Moreover, we see by these words that self-denial has respect
partly to men and partly (more especially) to God, (sec. 8-10.) For
when Scripture enjoins us, in regard to our fellow men, to prefer
them in honour to ourselves, and sincerely labour to promote their
advantages (Rom. 12: 10; Phil. 2: 3,) he gives us commands which our
mind is utterly incapable of obeying until its natural feelings are
suppressed. For so blindly do we all rush in the direction of self-
love, that every one thinks he has a good reason for exalting
himself and despising all others in comparison. If God has bestowed
on us something not to be repented of, trusting to it, we
immediately become elated, and not only swell, but almost burst with
pride. The vices with which we abound we both carefully conceal from
others, and flatteringly represent to ourselves as minute and
trivial, nay, sometimes hug them as virtues. When the same qualities
which we admire in ourselves are seen in others, even though they
should be superior, we, in order that we may not be forced to yield
to them, maliciously lower and carp at them; in like manner, in the
case of vices, not contented with severe and keen animadversion, we
studiously exaggerate them. Hence the insolence with which each, as
if exempted from the common lot, seeks to exalt himself above his
neighbour, confidently and proudly despising others, or at least
looking down upon them as his inferiors. The poor man yields to the
rich, the plebeian to the noble, the servant to the master, the
unlearned to the learned, and yet every one inwardly cherishes some
idea of his own superiority. Thus each flattering himself, sets up a
kind of kingdom in his breast; the arrogant, to satisfy themselves,
pass censure on the minds and manners of other men, and when
contention arises, the full venom is displayed. Many bear about with
them some measure of mildness so long as all things go smoothly and
lovingly with them, but how few are there who, when stung and
irritated, preserve the same tenor of moderation? For this there is
no other remedy than to pluck up by the roots those most noxious
pests, self-love and love of victory, (filoneicia cai filantia.)
This the doctrine of Scripture does. For it teaches us to remember,
that the endowments which God has bestowed upon us are not our own,
but His free gifts, and that those who plume themselves upon them
betray their ingratitude. "Who maketh thee to differ," saith Paul,
"and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst
receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?"
(1 Cor. 4: 7.) Then by a diligent examination of our faults let us
keep ourselves humble. Thus while nothing will remain to swell our
pride, there will be much to subdue it. Again, we are enjoined,
whenever we behold the gifts of God in others, so to reverence and
respect the gifts, as also to honour those in whom they reside. God
having been pleased to bestow honour upon them, it would ill become
us to deprive them of it. Then we are told to overlook their faults,
not, indeed, to encourage by flattering them, but not because of
them to insult those whom we ought to regard with honour and good
will.6 In this way, with regard to all with whom we have
intercourse, our behaviour will be not only moderate and modest, but
courteous and friendly. The only way by which you can ever attain to
true meekness, is to have your heart imbued with a humble opinion of
yourself and respect for others.
    5. How difficult it is to perform the duty of seeking the good
of our neighbour! Unless you leave off all thought of yourself and
in a manner cease to be yourself, you will never accomplish it. How
can you exhibit those works of charity which Paul describes unless
you renounce yourself, and become wholly devoted to others? "Charity
(says he, 1 Cor. 13: 4) suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth
not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, doth not behave
itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked &c.
Were it the only thing required of us to seek not our own, nature
would not have the least power to comply: she so inclines us to love
ourselves only, that she will not easily allow us carelessly to pass
by ourselves and our own interests that we may watch over the
interests of others, nay, spontaneously to yield our own rights and
resign it to another. But Scripture, to conduct us to this, reminds
us, that whatever we obtain from the Lord is granted on the
condition of our employing it for the common good of the Church, and
that, therefore, the legitimate use of all our gifts is a kind and
liberal communication of them with others. There cannot be a surer
rule, nor a stronger exhortation to the observance of it, than when
we are taught that all the endowments which we possess are divine
deposits entrusted to us for the very purpose of being distributed
for the good of our neighbour. But Scripture proceeds still farther
when it likens these endowments to the different members of the
body, (1 Cor. 12: 12.) No member has its function for itself, or
applies it for its own private use, but transfers it to its fellow-
members; nor does it derive any other advantage from it than that
which it receives in common with the whole body. Thus, whatever the
pious man can do, he is bound to do for his brethren, not consulting
his own interest in any other way than by striving earnestly for the
common edification of the Church. Let this, then, be our method of
showing good-will and kindness, considering that, in regard to
everything which God has bestowed upon us, and by which we can aid
our neighbour, we are his stewards, and are bound to give account of
our stewardship; moreover, that the only right mode of
administration is that which is regulated by love. In this way, we
shall not only unite the study of our neighbour's advantage with a
regard to our own, but make the latter subordinate to the former.
And lest we should have omitted to perceive that this is the law for
duly administering every gift which we receive from God, he of old
applied that law to the minutest expressions of his own kindness. He
commanded the first-fruits to be offered to him as an attestation by
the people that it was impious to reap any advantage from goods not
previously consecrated to him, (Exod. 22: 29; 23: 19.) But if the
gifts of God are not sanctified to us until we have with our own
hand dedicated them to the Giver, it must be a gross abuse that does
not give signs of such dedication. It is in vain to contend that you
cannot enrich the Lord by your offerings. Though, as the Psalmist
says "Thou art my Lord: my goodness extendeth not unto thee," yet
you can extend it "to the saints that are in the earth," (Ps. 16: 2,
3;) and therefore a comparison is drawn between sacred oblations and
alms as now corresponding to the offerings under the Law.7
    6. Moreover, that we may not weary in well-doing, (as would
otherwise forthwith and infallibly be the case,) we must add the
other quality in the Apostle's enumeration, "Charity suffiereth
long, and is kind, is not easily provoked," (1 Cor. 13: 4.) The Lord
enjoins us to do good to all without exception, though the greater
part, if estimated by their own merit, are most unworthy of it. But
Scripture subjoins a most excellent reason, when it tells us that we
are not to look to what men in themselves deserve, but to attend to
the image of God, which exists in all, and to which we owe all
honour and love. But in those who are of the household of faith, the
same rule is to be more carefully observed, inasmuch as that image
is renewed and restored in them by the Spirit of Christ. Therefore,
whoever be the man that is presented to you as needing your
assistance, you have no ground for declining to give it to him. Say
he is a stranger. The Lord has given him a mark which ought to be
familiar to you: for which reason he forbids you to despise your own
flesh, (Gal. 6: 10.) Say he is mean and of no consideration. The
Lord points him out as one whom he has distinguished by the lustre
of his own image, (Isaiah 58: 7.) Say that you are bound to him by
no ties of duty. The Lord has substituted him as it were into his
own place, that in him you may recognize the many great obligations
under which the Lord has laid you to himself. Say that he is
unworthy of your least exertion on his account; but the image of
God, by which he is recommended to you, is worthy of yourself and
all your exertions. But if he not only merits no good, but has
provoked you by injury and mischief, still this is no good reason
why you should not embrace him in love, and visit him with offices
of love. He has deserved very differently from me, you will say. But
what has the Lord deserved?8 Whatever injury he has done you, when
he enjoins you to forgive him, he certainly means that it should be
imputed to himself. In this way only we attain to what is not to say
difficult but altogether against nature,9 to love those that hate
us, render good for evil, and blessing for cursing, remembering that
we are not to reflect on the wickedness of men, but look to the
image of God in them, an image which, covering and obliterating
their faults, should by its beauty and dignity allure us to love and
embrace them.
    7. We shall thus succeed in mortifying ourselves if we fulfil
all the duties of charity. Those duties, however, are not fulfilled
by the mere discharge of them, though none be omitted, unless it is
done from a pure feeling of love. For it may happen that one may
perform every one of these offices, in so far as the external act is
concerned, and be far from performing them aright. For you see some
who would be thought very liberal, and yet accompany every thing
they give with insult, by the haughtiness of their looks, or the
violence of their words. And to such a calamitous condition have we
come in this unhappy age, that the greater part of men never almost
give alms without contumely. Such conduct ought not to have been
tolerated even among the heathen; but from Christians something more
is required than to carry cheerfulness in their looks, and give
attractiveness to the discharge of their duties by courteous
language. First, they should put themselves in the place of him whom
they see in need of their assistance, and pity his misfortune as if
they felt and bore it, so that a feeling of pity and humanity should
incline them to assist him just as they would themselves. He who is
thus minded will go and give assistance to his brethren, and not
only not taint his acts with arrogance or upbraiding but will
neither look down upon the brother to whom he does a kindness, as
one who needed his help, or keep him in subjection as under
obligation to him, just as we do not insult a diseased member when
the rest of the body labours for its recovery, nor think it under
special obligation to the other members, because it has required
more exertion than it has returned. A communication of offices
between members is not regarded as at all gratuitous, but rather as
the payment of that which being due by the law of nature it were
monstrous to deny. For this reason, he who has performed one kind of
duty will not think himself thereby discharged, as is usually the
case when a rich man, after contributing somewhat of his substance,
delegates remaining burdens to others as if he had nothing to do
with them. Every one should rather consider, that however great he
is, he owes himself to his neighbours, and that the only limit to
his beneficence is the failure of his means. The extent of these
should regulate that of his charity.
    8. The principal part of self-denial, that which as we have
said has reference to God, let us again consider more fully. Many
things have already been said with regard to it which it were
superfluous to repeat; and, therefore, it will be sufficient to view
it as forming us to equanimity and endurance. First, then, in
seeking the convenience or tranquillity of the present life,
Scripture calls us to resign ourselves, and all we have, to the
disposal of the Lord, to give him up the affections of our heart,
that he may tame and subdue them. We have a frenzied desire, an
infinite eagerness, to pursue wealth and honour, intrigue for power,
accumulate riches, and collect all those frivolities which seem
conducive to luxury and splendour. On the other hand, we have a
remarkable dread, a remarkable hatred of poverty, mean birth, and a
humble condition, and feel the strongest desire to guard against
them. Hence, in regard to those who frame their life after their own
counsel, we see how restless they are in mind, how many plans they
try, to what fatigues they submit, in order that they may gain what
avarice or ambition desires, or, on the other hand, escape poverty
and meanness. To avoid similar entanglements, the course which
Christian men must follow is this: first, they must not long for, or
hope for, or think of any kind of prosperity apart from the blessing
of God; on it they must cast themselves, and there safely and
confidently recline. For, however much the carnal mind may seem
sufficient for itself when in the pursuit of honour or wealth, it
depends on its own industry and zeal, or is aided by the favour of
men, it is certain that all this is nothing, and that neither
intellect nor labour will be of the least avail, except in so far as
the Lord prospers both. On the contrary, his blessing alone makes a
way through all obstacles, and brings every thing to a joyful and
favourable issue. Secondly, though without this blessing we may be
able to acquire some degree of fame and opulence, (as we daily see
wicked men loaded with honours and riches,) yet since those on whom
the curse of God lies do not enjoy the least particle of true
happiness, whatever we obtain without his blessing must turn out
ill. But surely men ought not to desire what adds to their misery.
    9. Therefore, if we believe that all prosperous and desirable
success depends entirely on the blessing of God, and that when it is
wanting all kinds of misery and calamity await us, it follows that
we should not eagerly contend for riches and honours, trusting to
our own dexterity and assiduity, or leaning on the favour of men, or
confiding in any empty imagination of fortune; but should always
have respect to the Lord, that under his auspices we may be
conducted to whatever lot he has provided for us. First, the result
will be, that instead of rushing on regardless of right and wrong,
by wiles and wicked arts, and with injury to our neighbours, to
catch at wealth and seize upon honours, we will only follow such
fortune as we may enjoy with innocence. Who can hope for the aid of
the divine blessing amid fraud, rapine, and other iniquitous arts?
As this blessing attends him only who thinks purely and acts
uprightly, so it calls off all who long for it from sinister designs
and evil actions. Secondly, a curb will be laid upon us, restraining
a too eager desire of becoming rich, or an ambitious striving after
honour. How can any one have the effrontery to expect that God will
aid him in accomplishing desires at variance with his word? What God
with his own lips pronounces cursed, never can be prosecuted with
his blessing. Lastly, if our success is not equal to our wish and
hope, we shall, however, be kept from impatience and detestation of
our condition, whatever it be, knowing that so to feel were to
murmur against God, at whose pleasure riches and poverty, contempt
and honours, are dispensed. In shorts he who leans on the divine
blessing in the way which has been described, will not, in the
pursuit of those things which men are wont most eagerly to desire,
employ wicked arts which he knows would avail him nothing; nor when
any thing prosperous befalls him will he impute it to himself and
his own diligence, or industry, or fortune, instead of ascribing it
to God as its author. If, while the affairs of others flourish, his
make little progress, or even retrograde, he will bear his humble
lot with greater equanimity and moderation than any irreligious man
does the moderate success which only falls short of what he wished;
for he has a solace in which he can rest more tranquilly than at the
very summit of wealth or power, because he considers that his
affairs are ordered by the Lord in the manner most conducive to his
salvation. This, we see, is the way in which David was affected,
who, while he follows God and gives up himself to his guidance,
declares, "Neither do I exercise myself in great matters, or in
things too high for me. Surely I have behaved and quieted myself as
a child that is weaned of his mother," (Ps. 131: 1, 2.)
    10. Nor is it in this respect only that pious minds ought to
manifest this tranquillity and endurance; it must be extended to all
the accidents to which this present life is liable. He alone,
therefore, has properly denied himself, who has resigned himself
entirely to the Lord, placing all the course of his life entirely at
his disposal. Happen what may, he whose mind is thus composed will
neither deem himself wretched nor murmur against God because of his
lot. How necessary this disposition is will appear, if you consider
the many accidents to which we are liable. Various diseases ever and
anon attack us: at one time pestilence rages; at another we are
involved in all the calamities of war. Frost and hail, destroying
the promise of the year, cause sterility, which reduces us to
penury; wife, parents, children, relatives, are carried off by
death; our house is destroyed by fire. These are the events which
make men curse their life, detest the day of their birth, execrate
the light of heaven, even censure God, and (as they are eloquent in
blasphemy) charge him with cruelty and injustice. The believer must
in these things also contemplate the mercy and truly paternal
indulgence of God. Accordingly, should he see his house by the
removal of kindred reduced to solitude even then he will not cease
to bless the Lord; his thought will be, Still the grace of the Lord,
which dwells within my house, will not leave it desolate. If his
crops are blasted, mildewed, or cut off by frost, or struck down by
hail,10 and he sees famine before him, he will not however despond
or murmur against God, but maintain his confidence in him; "We thy
people, and sheep of thy pasture, will give thee thanks for ever,"
(Ps. 79: 13;) he will supply me with food, even in the extreme of
sterility. If he is afflicted with disease, the sharpness of the
pain will not so overcome him, as to make him break out with
impatience, and expostulate with God; but, recognising justice and
lenity in the rod, will patiently endure. In short, whatever
happens, knowing that it is ordered by the Lord, he will receive it
with a placid and grateful mind, and will not contumaciously resist
the government of him, at whose disposal he has placed himself and
all that he has. Especially let the Christian breast eschew that
foolish and most miserable consolation of the heathen, who, to
strengthen their mind against adversity, imputed it to fortune, at
which they deemed it absurd to feel indignant, as she was ascopoV
(aimless) and rash, and blindly wounded the good equally with the
bad. On the contrary, the rule of piety is, that the hand of God is
the ruler and arbiter of the fortunes of all, and, instead of
rushing on with thoughtless violence, dispenses good and evil with
perfect regularity.
    
Notes

[5]On this and the three following chapters, which contain the
second part of the Treatise on the Christian Life, see Augustine, De
Moribus Ecclesiae Catholicae, and Calvin de Scandalis.
[6]Calvin. de Sacerdotiis Eccles. Papal. in fine. [7]Heb. 13: 16; 2
Cor.ix. 12.
[8]French, "Car si nous disons qu' il n'a merite que mal de nous;
Dieu nous pourra demander quel mal il nous a fait, lui dont nous
tenons tout notre bien;" - For if we say that he has deserved
nothing of us but evil, God may ask us what evil he has done us, he
of whom we hold our every blessing.
[9]Matth. 5: 44; 6: 14; 18: 35; Luke 17: 3.
[10]The French is, "Soit que ses bleds et vignes soyent gastees et
destruites par gelee, gresle, ou autre tempeste;" - whether his corn
and vines are hurt and destroyed by frost, hail, or other tempest.

    
    
Chapter 8.

8. Of bearing the cross - One branch of self-denial.
    
    The four divisions of this chapter are, - I. The nature of the
cross, its necessity and dignity, sec. 1, 2. II. The manifold
advantages of the cross described, sec. 3-6. III. The form of the
cross the most excellent of all, and yet it by no means removes all
sense of pain, sec. 7, 8. IV. A description of warfare under the
cross, and of true patience, (not that of philosophers,) after the
example of Christ, sec. 9-11.
    
Sections.

1. What the cross is. By whom, and on whom, and for what cause
    imposed. Its necessity and dignity.
2. The cross necessary. 1. To humble our pride. 2. To make us apply
    to God for aid. Example of David.
3. To give us experience of God's presence. 3. Manifold uses of the
    cross. 1. Produces patience, hope, and firm confidence in God,
    gives us victory and perseverance. Faith invincible.
4. 2. Frames us to obedience. Example of Abraham. This training how
    useful.
5. The cross necessary to subdue the wantonness of the flesh. This
    portrayed by an apposite simile. Various forms of the cross.
6. 3. God permits our infirmities, and corrects past faults, that he
    may keep us in obedience. This confirmed by a passage from
    Solomon and an Apostle.
7. Singular consolation under the cross, when we suffer persecution
    for righteousness. Some parts of this consolation.
8. This form of the cross most appropriate to believers, and should
    be borne willingly and cheerfully. This cheerfulness is not
    unfeeling hilarity, but, while groaning under the burden, waits
    patiently for the Lord.
9. A description of this conflict. Opposed to the vanity of the
    Stoics. Illustrated by the authority and example of Christ.
10. Proved by the testimony and uniform experience of the elect.
    Also by the special example of the Apostle Peter. The nature of
    the patience required of us.
11. Distinction between the patience of Christians and philosophers.
    The latter pretend a necessity which cannot be resisted. The
    former hold forth the justice of God and his care of our
    safety. A full exposition of this difference.

    1. The pious mind must ascend still higher, namely, whither
Christ calls his disciples when he says, that every one of them must
"take up his cross," (Matth. 16: 24.) Those whom the Lord has chosen
and honoured with his intercourse must prepare for a hard,
laborious, troubled life, a life full of many and various kinds of
evils; it being the will of our heavenly Father to exercise his
people in this way while putting them to the proof. Having begun
this course with Christ the first-born, he continues it towards all
his children. For though that Son was dear to him above others, the
Son in whom he was "well pleased," yet we see, that far from being
treated gently and indulgently, we may say, that not only was he
subjected to a perpetual cross while he dwelt on earth, but his
whole life was nothing else than a kind of perpetual cross. The
Apostle assigns the reason, "Though he was a Son, yet learned he
obedience by the things which he suffered," (Heb. 5: 8.) Why then
should we exempt ourselves from that condition to which Christ our
Head behoved to submit; especially since he submitted on our
account, that he might in his own person exhibit a model of
patience? Wherefore, the Apostle declares, that all the children of
God are destined to be conformed to him. Hence it affords us great
consolation in hard and difficult circumstances, which men deem evil
and adverse, to think that we are holding fellowship with the
sufferings of Christ; that as he passed to celestial glory through a
labyrinth of many woes, so we too are conducted thither through
various tribulations. For, in another passage, Paul himself thus
speaks, "we must through much tribulation enter the kingdom of God,"
(Acts 14: 22;) and again, "that I may know him, and the power of his
resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made
conformable unto his death," (Rom 8: 29.) How powerfully should it
soften the bitterness of the cross, to think that the more we are
afflicted with adversity, the surer we are made of our fellowship
with Christ; by communion with whom our sufferings are not only
blessed to us, but tend greatly to the furtherance of our salvation.
    2. We may add, that the only thing which made it necessary for
our Lord to undertake to bear the cross, was to testify and prove
his obedience to the Father; whereas there are many reasons which
make it necessary for us to live constantly under the cross. Feeble
as we are by nature, and prone to ascribe all perfection to our
flesh, unless we receive as it were ocular demonstration of our
weakness, we readily estimate our virtue above its proper worth, and
doubt not that, whatever happens, it will stand unimpaired and
invincible against all difficulties. Hence we indulge a stupid and
empty confidence in the flesh, and then trusting to it wax proud
against the Lord himself; as if our own faculties were sufficient
without his grace. This arrogance cannot be better repressed than
when He proves to us by experience, not only how great our weakness,
but also our frailty is. Therefore, he visits us with disgrace, or
poverty, or bereavement, or disease, or other afflictions. Feeling
altogether unable to support them, we forthwith, in so far as
regards ourselves, give way, and thus humbled learn to invoke his
strength, which alone can enable us to bear up under a weight of
affliction. Nay, even the holiest of men, however well aware that
they stand not in their own strength, but by the grace of God, would
feel too secure in their own fortitude and constancy, were they not
brought to a more thorough knowledge of themselves by the trial of
the cross. This feeling gained even upon David, "In my prosperity I
Said, I shall never be moved. Lord, by thy favour thou hast made my
mountain to stand strong: thou didst hide thy face, and I was
troubled," (Ps. 30: 6, 7.) He confesses that in prosperity his
feelings were dulled and blunted, so that, neglecting the grace of
God, on which alone he ought to have depended, he leant to himself,
and promised himself perpetuity. If it so happened to this great
prophet, who of us should not fear and study caution? Though in
tranquillity they flatter themselves with the idea of greater
constancy and patience, yet, humbled by adversity, they learn the
deception. Believers, I say, warned by such proofs of their
diseases, make progress in humility, and, divesting themselves of a
depraved confidence in the flesh, betake themselves to the grace of
God, and, when they have so betaken themselves, experience the
presence of the divine power, in which is ample protection.
    3. This Paul teaches when he says that tribulation worketh
patience, and patience experience. God having promised that he will
be with believers in tribulation, they feel the truth of the
promise; while supported by his hand, they endure patiently. This
they could never do by their own strength. Patience, therefore,
gives the saints an experimental proof that God in reality furnishes
the aid which he has promised whenever there is need. Hence also
their faith is confirmed, for it were very ungrateful not to expect
that in future the truth of God will be, as they have already found
it, firm and constant. We now see how many advantages are at once
produced by the cross. Overturning the overweening opinion we form
of our own virtue, and detecting the hypocrisy in which we delight,
it removes our pernicious carnal confidence, teaching us, when thus
humbled, to recline on God alone, so that we neither are oppressed
nor despond. Then victory is followed by hope, inasmuch as the Lord,
by performing what he has promised, establishes his truth in regard
to the future. Were these the only reasons, it is surely plain how
necessary it is for us to bear the cross. It is of no little
importance to be rid of your self-love, and made fully conscious of
your weakness; so impressed with a sense of your weakness as to
learn to distrust yourself - to distrust yourself so as to transfer
your confidence to God, reclining on him with such heartfelt
confidence as to trust in his aid, and continue invincible to the
end, standing by his grace so as to perceive that he is true to his
promises, and so assured of the certainty of his promises as to be
strong in hope.
    4. Another end which the Lord has in afflicting his people is
to try their patience, and train them to obedience - not that they
can yield obedience to him except in so far as he enables them; but
he is pleased thus to attest and display striking proofs of the
graces which he has conferred upon his saints, lest they should
remain within unseen and unemployed. Accordingly, by bringing
forward openly the strength and constancy of endurance with which he
has provided his servants, he is said to try their patience. Hence
the expressions that God tempted Abraham, (Gen. 21: 1, 12,) and made
proof of his piety by not declining to sacrifice his only son.
Hence, too, Peter tells us that our faith is proved by tribulation,
just as gold is tried in a furnace of fire. But who will say it is
not expedient that the most excellent gift of patience which the
believer has received from his God should be applied to uses by
being made sure and manifest? Otherwise men would never value it
according to its worth. But if God himself, to prevent the virtues
which he has conferred upon believers from lurking in obscurity,
nay, lying useless and perishing, does aright in supplying materials
for calling them forth, there is the best reason for the afflictions
of the saints, since without them their patience could not exist. I
say, that by the cross they are also trained to obedience, because
they are thus taught to live not according to their own wish, but at
the disposal of God. Indeed, did all things proceed as they wish,
they would not know what it is to follow God. Seneca mentions (De
Vit. Beata, cap. 15:) that there was an old proverb when any one was
exhorted to endure adversity, "Follow God;" thereby intimating, that
men truly submitted to the yoke of God only when they gave their
back and hand to his rod. But if it is most right that we should in
all things prove our obedience to our heavenly Father, certainly we
ought not to decline any method by which he trains us to obedience.
    5. Still, however, we see not how necessary that obedience is,
unless we at the same time consider how prone our carnal nature is
to shake off the yoke of God whenever it has been treated with some
degree of gentleness and indulgence. It just happens to it as with
refractory horses, which, if kept idle for a few days at hack and
manger, become ungovernable, and no longer recognize the rider,
whose command before they implicitly obeyed. And we invariably
become what God complains of in the people of Israel - waxing gross
and fat, we kick against him who reared and nursed us, (Deut. 32:
15.) The kindness of God should allure us to ponder and love his
goodness; but since such is our malignity, that we are invariably
corrupted by his indulgence, it is more than necessary for us to be
restrained by discipline from breaking forth into such petulance.
Thus, lest we become emboldened by an over-abundance of wealth; lest
elated with honour, we grow proud; lest inflated with other
advantages of body, or mind, or fortune, we grow insolent, the Lord
himself interferes as he sees to be expedient by means of the cross,
subduing and curbing the arrogance of our flesh, and that in various
ways, as the advantage of each requires. For as we do not all
equally labour under the same disease, so we do not all need the
same difficult cure. Hence we see that all are not exercised with
the same kind of cross. While the heavenly Physician treats some
more gently, in the case of others he employs harsher remedies, his
purpose being to provide a cure for all. Still none is left free and
untouched, because he knows that all, without a single exception,
are diseased.
    6. We may add, that our most merciful Father requires not only
to prevent our weakness, but often to correct our past faults, that
he may keep us in due obedience. Therefore, whenever we are
afflicted we ought immediately to call to mind our past life. In
this way we will find that the faults which we have committed are
deserving of such castigation. And yet the exhortation to patience
is not to be founded chiefly on the acknowledgment of sin. For
Scripture supplies a far better consideration when it says, that in
adversity "we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be
condemned with the world," (1 Cor. 11: 32.) Therefore, in the very
bitterness of tribulation we ought to recognise the kindness and
mercy of our Father, since even then he ceases not to further our
salvation. For he afflicts, not that he may ruin or destroy but
rather that he may deliver us from the condemnation of the world.
Let this thought lead us to what Scripture elsewhere teaches: "My
son, despise not the chastening of the Lord; neither be weary of his
correction: For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father
the son in whom he delighteth," (Prov. iii 11, 12.) When we perceive
our Father's rod, is it not our part to behave as obedient docile
sons rather than rebelliously imitate desperate men, who are
hardened in wickedness? God dooms us to destruction, if he does not,
by correction, call us back when we have fallen off from him, so
that it is truly said, "If ye be without chastisement," "then are ye
bastards, and not sons," (Heb. 12: 8.) We are most perverse then if
we cannot bear him while he is manifesting his good-will to us, and
the care which he takes of our salvation. Scripture states the
difference between believers and unbelievers to be, that the latter,
as the slaves of inveterate and deep-seated iniquity, only become
worse and more obstinate under the lash; whereas the former, like
free-born sons turn to repentance. Now, therefore, choose your
class. But as I have already spoken of this subject, it is
sufficient to have here briefly adverted to it.
    7. There is singular consolation, moreover, when we are
persecuted for righteousness' sake. For our thought should then be,
How high the honour which God bestows upon us in distinguishing us
by the special badge of his soldiers. By suffering persecution for
righteousness' sake, I mean not only striving for the defence of the
Gospel, but for the defence of righteousness in any way. Whether,
therefore, in maintaining the truth of God against the lies of
Satan, or defending the good and innocent against the injuries of
the bad, we are obliged to incur the offence and hatred of the
world, so as to endanger life, fortune, or honour, let us not grieve
or decline so far to spend ourselves for God; let us not think
ourselves wretched in those things in which he with his own lips has
pronounced us blessed, (Matth. 5: 10.) Poverty, indeed considered in
itself, is misery; so are exile, contempt, imprisonment, ignominy:
in fine, death itself is the last of all calamities. But when the
favour of God breathes upon is, there is none of these things which
may not turn out to our happiness. Let us then be contented with the
testimony of Christ rather than with the false estimate of the
flesh, and then, after the example of the Apostles, we will rejoice
in being "counted worthy to suffer shame for his name," (Acts 5:
41.) For why? If, while conscious of our innocence, we are deprived
of our substance by the wickedness of man, we are, no doubt, humanly
speaking, reduced to poverty; but in truth our riches in heaven are
increased: if driven from our homes we have a more welcome reception
into the family of God; if vexed and despised, we are more firmly
rooted in Christ; if stigmatised by disgrace and ignominy, we have a
higher place in the kingdom of God; and if we are slain, entrance is
thereby given us to eternal life. The Lord having set such a price
upon us, let us be ashamed to estimate ourselves at less than the
shadowy and evanescent allurements of the present life.
    8. Since by these, and similar considerations, Scripture
abundantly solaces us for the ignominy or calamities which we endure
in defence of righteousness, we are very ungrateful if we do not
willingly and cheerfully receive them at the hand of the Lord,
especially since this form of the cross is the most appropriate to
believers, being that by which Christ desires to be glorified in us,
as Peter also declares, (1 Pet. 4: 11, 14.) But as to ingenuous
natures, it is more bitter to suffer disgrace than a hundred deaths,
Paul expressly reminds us that not only persecution, but also
disgrace awaits us, "because we trust in the living God," (1 Tim. 4:
10.) So in another passage he bids us, after his example, walk "by
evil report and good report," (2 Cor. vi. 8.) The cheerfulness
required, however, does not imply a total insensibility to pain. The
saints could show no patience under the cross if they were not both
tortured with pain and grievously molested. Were there no hardship
in poverty, no pain in disease, no sting in ignominy, no fear in
death, where would be the fortitude and moderation in enduring them?
But while every one of these, by its inherent bitterness, naturally
vexes the mind, the believer in this displays his fortitude, that
though fully sensible of the bitterness and labouring grievously, he
still withstands and struggles boldly; in this displays his
patience, that though sharply stung, he is however curbed by the
fear of God from breaking forth into any excess; in this displays
his alacrity, that though pressed with sorrow and sadness, he rests
satisfied with spiritual consolation from God.
    9. This conflict which believers maintain against the natural
feeling of pain, while they study moderation and patience, Paul
elegantly describes in these words: "We are troubled on every side,
yet not distressed; we are perplexed, but not in despair;
persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed," (2 Cor.
4: 8, 9.) You see that to bear the cross patiently is not to have
your feelings altogether blunted, and to be absolutely insensible to
pain, according to the absurd description which the Stoics of old
gave of their hero as one who, divested of humanity, was affected in
the same way by adversity and prosperity, grief and joy; or rather,
like a stone, was not affected by anything. And what did they gain
by that sublime wisdom? they exhibited a shadow of patience, which
never did, and never can, exist among men. Nay, rather by aiming at
a too exact and rigid patience, they banished it altogether from
human life. Now also we have among Christians a new kind of Stoics,
who hold it vicious not only to groan and weep, but even to be sad
and anxious. These paradoxes are usually started by indolent men
who, employing themselves more in speculation than in action, can do
nothing else for us than beget such paradoxes. But we have nothing
to do with that iron philosophy which our Lord and Master condemned
- not only in word, but also by his own example. For he both grieved
and shed tears for his own and others' woes. Nor did he teach his
disciples differently: "Ye shall weep and lament, but the world
shall rejoice," (John 16: 20.) And lest any one should regard this
as vicious, he expressly declares, "Blessed are they that mourn,"
(Matth. 5: 4.) And no wonder. If all tears are condemned, what shall
we think of our Lord himself, whose "sweat was as it were great
drops of blood falling down to the ground?" (Luke 22: 44; Matth. 26:
38.) If every kind of fear is a mark of unbelief, what place shall
we assign to the dread which, it is said, in no slight degree amazed
him; if all sadness is condemned, how shall we justify him when he
confesses, "My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death?"
    10. I wished to make these observations to keep pious minds
from despair, lest, from feeling it impossible to divest themselves
of the natural feeling of grief, they might altogether abandon the
study of patience. This must necessarily be the result with those
who convert patience into stupor, and a brave and firm man into a
block. Scripture gives saints the praise of endurance when, though
afflicted by the hardships they endure, they are not crushed; though
they feel bitterly, they are at the same time filled with spiritual
joy; though pressed with anxiety, breathe exhilarated by the
consolation of God. Still there is a certain degree of repugnance in
their hearts, because natural sense shuns and dreads what is adverse
to it, while pious affection, even through these difficulties, tries
to obey the divine will. This repugnance the Lord expressed when he
thus addressed Peter: "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou
wast young, thou girdedst thyself and walkedst whither thou wouldst;
but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and
another shall gird thee; and carry thee whither thou wouldest not,"
(John 21: 18.) It is not probable, indeed, that when it became
necessary to glorify God by death he was driven to it unwilling and
resisting; had it been so, little praise would have been due to his
martyrdom. But though he obeyed the divine ordination with the
greatest alacrity of heart, yet, as he had not divested himself of
humanity, he was distracted by a double will. When he thought of the
bloody death which he was to die, struck with horror, he would
willingly have avoided it: on the other hand, when he considered
that it was God who called him to it, his fear was vanquished and
suppressed, and he met death cheerfully. It must therefore be our
study, if we would be disciples of Christ, to imbue our minds with
such reverence and obedience to God as may tame and subjugate all
affections contrary to his appointment. In this way, whatever be the
kind of cross to which we are subjected, we shall in the greatest
straits firmly maintain our patience. Adversity will have its
bitterness, and sting us. When afflicted with disease, we shall
groan and be disquieted, and long for health; pressed with poverty,
we shall feel the stings of anxiety and sadness, feel the pain of
ignominy, contempt, and injury, and pay the tears due to nature at
the death of our friends: but our conclusion will always be, The
Lord so willed it, therefore let us follow his will. Nay, amid the
pungency of grief, among groans and tears this thought will
necessarily suggest itself and incline us cheerfully to endure the
things for which we are so afflicted.
    11. But since the chief reason for enduring the cross has been
derived from a consideration of the divine will, we must in few
words explain wherein lies the difference between philosophical and
Christian patience. Indeed, very few of the philosophers advanced so
far as to perceive that the hand of God tries us by means of
affliction, and that we ought in this matter to obey God. The only
reason which they adduce is, that so it must be. But is not this
just to say, that we must yield to God, because it is in vain to
contend against him? For if we obey God only because it is
necessary, provided we can escape, we shall cease to obey him. But
what Scripture calls us to consider in the will of God is very
different, namely, first justice and equity, and then a regard to
our own salvation. Hence Christian exhortations to patience are of
this nature, Whether poverty, or exile, or imprisonment, or
contumely, or disease, or bereavement, or any such evil affects us,
we must think that none of them happens except by the will and
providence of God; moreover, that every thing he does is in the most
perfect order. What! do not our numberless daily faults deserve to
be chastised, more severely, and with a heavier rod than his mercy
lays upon us? Is it not most right that our flesh should be subdued,
and be, as it were, accustomed to the yoke, so as not to rage and
wanton as it lists? Are not the justice and the truth of God worthy
of our suffering on their account? [11] But if the equity of God is
undoubtedly displayed in affliction, we cannot murmur or struggle
against them without iniquity. We no longer hear the frigid cant,
Yield, because it is necessary; but a living and energetic precept,
Obey, because it is unlawful to resist; bear patiently, because
impatience is rebellion against the justice of God. Then as that
only seems to us attractive which we perceive to be for our own
safety and advantage, here also our heavenly Father consoles us, by
the assurance, that in the very cross with which he afflicts us he
provides for our salvation. But if it is clear that tribulations are
salutary to us, why should we not receive them with calm and
grateful minds? In bearing them patiently we are not submitting to
necessity but resting satisfied with our own good. The effect of
these thoughts is, that to whatever extent our minds are contracted
by the bitterness which we naturally feel under the cross, to the
same extent will they be expanded with spiritual joy. Hence arises
thanksgiving, which cannot exist unless joy be felt. But if the
praise of the Lord and thanksgiving can emanate only from a cheerful
and gladdened breasts and there is nothing which ought to interrupt
these feelings in us, it is clear how necessary it is to temper the
bitterness of the cross with spiritual joy.

Notes
11 See end of sec. 4, and sec. 5, 7, 8.

Chapter 9.

9. Of meditating on the future life.

    The three divisions of this chapter, - I. The principal use of
the cross is, that it in various ways accustoms us to despise the
present, and excites us to aspire to the future life, sec. 1, 2. II.
In withdrawing from the present life we must neither shun it nor
feel hatred for it; but desiring the future life, gladly quit the
present at the command of our sovereign Master, see. 3, 4. III. Our
infirmity in dreading death described. The correction and safe
remedy, sec. 6.
    
Sections.
    
1. The design of God in afflicting his people. 1. To accustom us to
    despise the present life. Our infatuated love of it.
    Afflictions employed as the cure. 2. To lead us to aspire to
    heaven.
2. Excessive love of the present life prevents us from duly aspiring
    to the other. Hence the disadvantages of prosperity. Blindness
    of the human judgment. Our philosophizing on the vanity of life
    only of momentary influence. The necessity of the cross.
3. The present life an evidence of the divine favour to his people;
    and therefore, not to be detested. On the contrary, should call
    forth thanksgiving. The crown of victory in heaven after the
    contest on earth.
4. Weariness of the present life how to be tempered. The believer's
    estimate of life. Comparison of the present and the future
    life. How far the present life should be hated.
5. Christians should not tremble at the fear of death. Two reasons.
    Objection. Answer. Other reasons.
6. Reasons continued. Conclusion.
    
    1. Whatever be the kind of tribulation with which we are
afflicted, we should always consider the end of it to be, that we
may be trained to despise the present, and thereby stimulated to
aspire to the future life. For since God well knows how strongly we
are inclined by nature to a slavish love of this world, in order to
prevent us from clinging too strongly to it, he employs the fittest
reason for calling us back, and shaking off our lethargy. Every one
of us, indeed, would be thought to aspire and aim at heavenly
immortality during the whole course of his life. For we would be
ashamed in no respect to excel the lower animals; whose condition
would not be at all inferior to ours, had we not a hope of
immortality beyond the grave. But when you attend to the plans,
wishes, and actions of each, you see nothing in them but the earth.
Hence our stupidity; our minds being dazzled with the glare of
wealth, power, and honours, that they can see no farther. The heart
also, engrossed with avarice, ambition, and lust, is weighed down
and cannot rise above them. In short, the whole soul, ensnared by
the allurements of the flesh, seeks its happiness on the earth. To
meet this disease, the Lord makes his people sensible of the vanity
of the present life, by a constant proof of its miseries. Thus, that
they may not promise themselves deep and lasting peace in it, he
often allows them to be assailed by war, tumult, or rapine, or to be
disturbed by other injuries. That they may not long with too much
eagerness after fleeting and fading riches, or rest in those which
they already possess, he reduces them to want, or, at least,
restricts them to a moderate allowance, at one time by exile, at
another by sterility, at another by fire, or by other means. That
they may not indulge too complacently in the advantages of married
life, he either vexes them by the misconduct of their partners, or
humbles them by the wickedness of their children, or afflicts them
by bereavement. But if in all these he is indulgent to them, lest
they should either swell with vain-glory, or be elated with
confidence, by diseases and dangers he sets palpably before them how
unstable and evanescent are all the advantages competent to mortals.
We duly profit by the discipline of the cross, when we learn that
this life, estimated in itself, is restless, troubled, in numberless
ways wretched, and plainly in no respect happy; that what are
estimated its blessings are uncertain, fleeting, vain, and vitiated
by a great admixture of evil. From this we conclude, that all we
have to seek or hope for here is contest; that when we think of the
crown we must raise our eyes to heaven. For we must hold, that our
mind never rises seriously to desire and aspire after the future,
until it has learned to despise the present life.
    2. For there is no medium between the two things: the earth
must either be worthless in our estimation, or keep us enslaved by
an intemperate love of it. Therefore, if we have any regard to
eternity, we must carefully strive to disencumber ourselves of these
fetters. Moreover, since the present life has many enticements to
allure us, and great semblance of delight, grace, and sweetness to
soothe us, it is of great consequence to us to be now and then
called off from its fascinations. [12] For what, pray, would happen,
if we here enjoyed an uninterrupted course of honour and felicity,
when even the constant stimulus of affliction cannot arouse us to a
due sense of our misery? That human life is like smoke or a shadow,
is not only known to the learned; there is not a more trite proverb
among the vulgar. Considering it a fact most useful to be known,
they have recommended it in many well-known expressions. Still there
is no fact which we ponder less carefully, or less frequently
remember. For we form all our plans just as if we had fixed our
immortality on the earth. If we see a funeral, or walk among graves,
as the image of death is then present to the eye, I admit we
philosophise admirably on the vanity of life. We do not indeed
always do so, for those things often have no effect upon us at all.
But, at the best, our philosophy is momentary. It vanishes as soon
as we turn our back, and leaves not the vestige of remembrance
behind; in short, it passes away, just like the applause of a
theatre at some pleasant spectacle. Forgetful not only of death, but
also of mortality itself, as if no rumour of it had ever reached us,
we indulge in supine security as expecting a terrestrial
immortality. Meanwhile, if any one breaks in with the proverb, that
man is the creature of a day, [13] we indeed acknowledge its truth,
but, so far from giving heed to it, the thought of perpetuity still
keeps hold of our minds. Who then can deny that it is of the highest
importance to us all, I say not, to be admonished by words, but
convinced by all possible experience of the miserable condition of
our earthly life; since even when convinced we scarcely cease to
gaze upon it with vicious, stupid admiration, as if it contained
within itself the sum of all that is good? But if God finds it
necessary so to train us, it must be our duty to listen to him when
he calls, and shakes us from our torpor, that we may hasten to
despise the world, and aspire with our whole heart to the future
life.
    3. Still the contempt which believers should train themselves
to feel for the present life, must not be of a kind to beget hatred
of it or ingratitude to God. This life, though abounding in all
kinds of wretchedness, is justly classed among divine blessings
which are not to be despised. Wherefore, if we do not recognize the
kindness of God in it, we are chargeable with no little ingratitude
towards him. To believers, especially, it ought to be a proof of
divine benevolence, since it is wholly destined to promote their
salvation. Before openly exhibiting the inheritance of eternal
glory, God is pleased to manifest himself to us as a Father by minor
proofs, viz., the blessings which he daily bestows upon us.
Therefore, while this life serves to acquaint us with the goodness
of God, shall we disdain it as if it did not contain one particle of
good? We ought, therefore, to feel and be affected towards it in
such a manner as to place it among those gifts of the divine
benignity which are by no means to be despised. Were there no proofs
in Scripture, (they are most numerous and clear,) yet nature herself
exhorts us to return thanks to God for having brought us forth into
light, granted us the use of it, and bestowed upon us all the means
necessary for its preservation. And there is a much higher reason
when we reflect that here we are in a manner prepared for the glory
of the heavenly kingdom. For the Lord hath ordained, that those who
are ultimately to be crowned in heaven must maintain a previous
warfare on the earth, that they may not triumph before they have
overcome the difficulties of war, and obtained the victory. Another
reason is, that we here begin to experience in various ways a
foretaste of the divine benignity, in order that our hope and desire
may be whetted for its full manifestation. When once we have
concluded that our earthly life is a gift of the divine mercy, of
which, agreeably to our obligation, it behoves us to have a grateful
remembrance, we shall then properly descend to consider its most
wretched condition, and thus escape from that excessive fondness for
it, to which, as I have said, we are naturally prone.
    4. In proportion as this improper love diminishes, our desire
of a better life should increase. I confess, indeed, that a most
accurate opinion was formed by those who thought, that the best
thing was not to be born, the next best to die early. For, being
destitute of the light of God and of true religion, what could they
see in it that was not of dire and evil omen? Nor was it
unreasonable for those [14] who felt sorrow and shed tears at the
birth of their kindred, to keep holiday at their deaths. But this
they did without profit; because, devoid of the true doctrine of
faith, they saw not how that which in itself is neither happy nor
desirable turns to the advantage of the righteous: and hence their
opinion issued in despair. Let believers, then, in forming an
estimate of this mortal life, and perceiving that in itself it is
nothing but misery, make it their aim to exert themselves with
greater alacrity, and less hinderance, in aspiring to the future and
eternal life. When we contrast the two, the former may not only be
securely neglected, but, in comparison of the latter, be disdained
and contemned. If heaven is our country, what can the earth be but a
place of exile? If departure from the world is entrance into life,
what is the world but a sepulchre, and what is residence in it but
immersion in death? If to be freed from the body is to gain full
possession of freedom, what is the body but a prison? If it is the
very summit of happiness to enjoy the presence of God, is it not
miserable to want it? But "whilst we are at home in the body, we are
absent from the Lord," (2 Cor. 5: 6.) Thus when the earthly is
compared with the heavenly life, it may undoubtedly be despised and
trampled under foot. We ought never, indeed, to regard it with
hatred, except in so far as it keeps us subject to sin; and even
this hatred ought not to be directed against life itself. At all
events, we must stand so affected towards it in regard to weariness
or hatred as, while longing for its termination, to be ready at the
Lord's will to continue in it, keeping far from everything like
murmuring and impatience. For it is as if the Lord had assigned us a
post, which we must maintain till he recalls us. Paul, indeed,
laments his condition, in being still bound with the fetters of the
body, and sighs earnestly for redemption, (Rom. 7: 24;)
nevertheless, he declared that, in obedience to the command of Gods
he was prepared for both courses, because he acknowledges it as his
duty to God to glorify his name whether by life or by death, while
it belongs to God to determine what is most conducive to His glory,
(Phil. 1: 20-24.) Wherefore, if it becomes us to live and die to the
Lord, let us leave the period of our life and death at his disposal.
Still let us ardently long for death, and constantly meditate upon
it, and in comparison with future immortality, let us despise life,
and, on account of the bondage of sin, long to renounce it whenever
it shall so please the Lord.
    5. But, most strange to say, many who boast of being
Christians, instead of thus longing for death, are so afraid of it
that they tremble at the very mention of it as a thing ominous and
dreadful. We cannot wonder, indeed, that our natural feelings should
be somewhat shocked at the mention of our dissolution. But it is
altogether intolerable that the light of piety should not be so
powerful in a Christian breast as with greater consolation to
overcome and suppress that fear. For if we reflect that this our
tabernacle, unstable, defective, corruptible, fading, pining, and
putrid, is dissolved, in order that it may forthwith be renewed in
sure, perfect, incorruptible, in fine, in heavenly glory, will not
faith compel us eagerly to desire what nature dreads? If we reflect
that by death we are recalled from exile to inhabit our native
country, a heavenly country, shall this give us no comfort? But
everything longs for permanent existence. I admit this, and
therefore contend that we ought to look to future immortality, where
we may obtain that fixed condition which nowhere appears on the
earth. For Paul admirably enjoins believers to hasten cheerfully to
death, not because they a would be unclothed, but clothed upon," (2
Cor. 5: 2.) Shall the lower animals, and inanimate creatures
themselves even wood and stone, as conscious of their present
vanity, long for the final resurrection, that they may with the sons
of God be delivered from vanity, (Rom. viii. 19;) and shall we,
endued with the light of intellect, and more than intellect,
enlightened by the Spirit of God, when our essence is in question,
rise no higher than the corruption of this earth? But it is not my
purpose, nor is this the place, to plead against this great
perverseness. At the outset, I declared that I had no wish to engage
in a diffuse discussion of common-places. My advice to those whose
minds are thus timid is to read the short treatise of Cyprian De
Mortalitate, unless it be more accordant with their deserts to send
them to the philosophers, that by inspecting what they say on the
contempt of death, they may begin to blush. This, however let us
hold as fixed, that no man has made much progress in the school of
Christ who does not look forward with joy to the day of death and
final resurrection, (2 Tim. 4: 18; Tit. 2: 13:) for Paul
distinguishes all believers by this mark; and the usual course of
Scripture is to direct us thither whenever it would furnish us with
an argument for substantial joy. "Look up," says our Lord, "and lift
up your heads: for your redemption draweth nigh," (Luke 21: 28.) Is
it reasonable, I ask, that what he intended to have a powerful
effect in stirring us up to alacrity and exultation should produce
nothing but sadness and consternation? If it is so, why do we still
glory in him as our Master? Therefore, let us come to a sounder
mind, and how repugnant so ever the blind and stupid longing of the
flesh may be, let us doubt not to desire the advent of the Lord not
in wish only, but with earnest sighs, as the most propitious of all
events. He will come as a Redeemer to deliver us from an immense
abyss of evil and misery, and lead us to the blessed inheritance of
his life and glory.
    6. Thus, indeed, it is; the whole body of the faithful, so long
as they live on the earth, must be like sheep for the slaughter, in
order that they may be conformed to Christ their head, (Rom. 8: 36.)
Most deplorable, therefore, would their situation be did they not,
by raising their mind to heaven, become superior to all that is in
the world, and rise above the present aspect of affairs, (1 Cor. 15:
l9.) On the other hand, when once they have raised their head above
all earthly objects, though they see the wicked flourishing in
wealth and honour, and enjoying profound peace, indulging in luxury
and splendour, and revelling in all kinds of delights, though they
should moreover be wickedly assailed by them, suffer insult from
their pride, be robbed by their avarice, or assailed by any other
passion, they will have no difficulty in bearing up under these
evils. They will turn their eye to that day, (Isaiah 25: 8; Rev. 7:
17,) on which the Lord will receive his faithful servants, wipe away
all tears from their eyes, clothe them in a robe of glory and joy,
feed them with the ineffable sweetness of his pleasures, exalt them
to share with him in his greatness; in fine, admit them to a
participation in his happiness. But the wicked who may have
flourished on the earth, he will cast forth in extreme ignominy,
will change their delights into torments, their laughter and joy
into wailing and gnashing of teeth, their peace into the gnawing of
conscience, and punish their luxury with unquenchable fire. He will
also place their necks under the feet of the godly, whose patience
they abused. For, as Paul declares, "it is a righteous thing with
God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you; and to you
who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed
from heaven," (2 Thess. 1: 6, 7.) This, indeed, is our only
consolation; deprived of it, we must either give way to despondency,
or resort to our destruction to the vain solace of the world. The
Psalmist confesses, "My feet were almost gone: my steps had well
nigh slipt: for I was envious at the foolish when I saw the
prosperity of the wicked," (Psalm 73: 3, 4;) and he found no resting-
place until he entered the sanctuary, and considered the latter end
of the righteous and the wicked. To conclude in one word, the cross
of Christ then only triumphs in the breasts of believers over the
devil and the flesh, sin and sinners, when their eyes are directed
to the power of his resurrection.
    
Notes
[12] French, "Or pource que la vie presente a tousiours force de
delices pour nous attraire, et a grande apparence d'amenite, de
grace et de douceur pour nous amieller, il nous est bien mestier
d'estre retire d'heure en d'heure, a ce que nous ne soyons point
abusez, et comme ensorcelez de telles flatteries;" - Now because the
present life has always a host of delights to attract us, and has
great appearance of amenity, grace, and sweetness to entice us, it
is of great importance to us to be hourly withdrawn, in order that
we may not be deceived, and, as it were, bewitched with such
flattery.
[13] Latin, " Animal esse efhmeron;" - is an ephemereal animal.
[14] French, "Le peuple des Scythes;" - the Scythians.

Chapter 10.

10. How to use the present life, and the comforts of it.

    The divisions of this chapter are, - I. The necessity and
usefulness of this doctrine. Extremes to be avoided, if we would
rightly use the present life and its comforts, sec. 1, 2. II. One of
these extremes, viz, the intemperance of the flesh, to be carefully
avoided. Four methods of doing so described in order, sec. 3-6.
    
Sections.
    
1. Necessity of this doctrine. Use of the goods of the present life.
    Extremes to be avoided. 1. Excessive austerity. 2. Carnal
    intemperance and lasciviousness.
2. God, by creating so many mercies, consulted not only for our
    necessities, but also for our comfort and delight. Confirmation
    from a passage in the Psalms, and from experience.
3. Excessive austerity, therefore, to be avoided. So also must the
    wantonness of the flesh. 1. The creatures invite us to know,
    love, and honour the Creator. 2. This not done by the wicked,
    who only abuse these temporal mercies.
4. All earthly blessings to be despised in comparison of the
    heavenly life. Aspiration after this life destroyed by an
    excessive love of created objects. First, Intemperance.
5. Second, Impatience and immoderate desire. Remedy of these evils.
    The creatures assigned to our use. Man still accountable for
    the use he makes of them.
6. God requires us in all our actions to look to his calling. Use of
    this doctrine. It is full of comfort.
    
    1. By such rudiments we are at the same time well instructed by
Scripture in the proper use of earthly blessings, a subject which,
in forming a scheme of life, is by no mean to be neglected. For if
we are to live, we must use the necessary supports of life; nor can
we even shun those things which seem more subservient to delight
than to necessity. We must therefore observe a mean, that we may use
them with a pure conscience, whether for necessity or for pleasure.
This the Lord prescribes by his word, when he tells us that to his
people the present life is a kind of pilgrimage by which they hasten
to the heavenly kingdom. If we are only to pass through the earth,
there can be no doubt that we are to use its blessings only in so
far as they assist our progress, rather than retard it. Accordingly,
Paul, not without cause, admonishes us to use this world without
abusing it, and to buy possessions as if we were selling them, (1
Cor. 7: 30, 31.) But as this is a slippery place, and there is great
danger of falling on either side, let us fix our feet where we can
stand safely. There have been some good and holy men who, when they
saw intemperance and luxury perpetually carried to excess, if not
strictly curbed, and were desirous to correct so pernicious an evil,
imagined that there was no other method than to allow man to use
corporeal goods only in so far as they were necessaries: a counsel
pious indeed, but unnecessarily austere; for it does the very
dangerous thing of binding consciences in closer fetters than those
in which they are bound by the word of God. Moreover, necessity,
according to them, [15] was abstinence from every thing which could
be wanted, so that they held it scarcely lawful to make any addition
to bread and water. Others were still more austere, as is related of
Cratetes the Theban, who threw his riches into the sea, because he
thought, that unless he destroyed them they would destroy him. Many
also in the present day, while they seek a pretext for carnal
intemperance in the use of external things, and at the same time
would pave the way for licentiousness, assume for granted, what I by
no means concede, that this liberty is not to be restrained by any
modification, but that it is to be left to every man's conscience to
use them as far as he thinks lawful. I indeed confess that here
consciences neither can nor ought to be bound by fixed and definite
laws; but that Scripture having laid down general rules for the
legitimate uses we should keep within the limits which they
prescribe.
    2. Let this be our principle, that we err not in the use of the
gifts of Providence when we refer them to the end for which their
author made and destined them, since he created them for our good,
and not for our destruction. No man will keep the true path better
than he who shall have this end carefully in view. Now then, if we
consider for what end he created food, we shall find that he
consulted not only for our necessity, but also for our enjoyment and
delight. Thus, in clothing, the end was, in addition to necessity,
comeliness and honour; and in herbs, fruits, and trees, besides
their various uses, gracefulness of appearance and sweetness of
smell. Were it not so, the Prophet would not enumerate among the
mercies of God "wine that maketh glad the heart of man, and oil to
make his face to shine," (Ps. 104: 15.) The Scriptures would not
everywhere mention, in commendation of his benignity, that he had
given such things to men. The natural qualities of things themselves
demonstrate to what end, and how far, they may be lawfully enjoyed.
Has the Lord adorned flowers with all the beauty which spontaneously
presents itself to the eye, and the sweet odour which delights the
sense of smell, and shall it be unlawful for us to enjoy that beauty
and this odour? What? Has he not so distinguished colours as to make
some more agreeable than others? Has he not given qualities to gold
and silver, ivory and marble, thereby rendering them precious above
other metals or stones? In short, has he not given many things a
value without having any necessary use?
    3. Have done, then, with that inhuman philosophy which, in
allowing no use of the creatures but for necessity, not only
maliciously deprives us of the lawful fruit of the divine
beneficence, but cannot be realised without depriving man of all his
senses, and reducing him to a block. But, on the other hand, let us
with no less care guard against the lusts of the flesh, which, if
not kept in order, break through all bounds, and are, as I have
said, advocated by those who, under pretence of liberty, allow
themselves every sort of license. First one restraint is imposed
when we hold that the object of creating all things was to teach us
to know their author, and feel grateful for his indulgence. Where is
the gratitude if you so gorge or stupify yourself with feasting and
wine as to be unfit for offices of piety, or the duties of your
calling? Where the recognition of God, if the flesh, boiling forth
in lust through excessive indulgences infects the mind with its
impurity, so as to lose the discernment of' honour and rectitude?
Where thankfulness to God for clothing, if on account of sumptuous
raiment we both admire ourselves and disdain others? if, from a love
of show and splendour, we pave the way for immodesty? Where our
recognition of God, if the glare of these things captivates our
minds? For many are so devoted to luxury in all their senses that
their mind lies buried: many are so delighted with marble, gold, and
pictures, that they become marble-hearted - are changed as it were
into metal, and made like painted figures. The kitchen, with its
savoury smells, so engrosses them that they have no spiritual
savour. The same thing may be seen in other matters. Wherefore, it
is plain that there is here great necessity for curbing licentious
abuse, and conforming to the rule of Paul, "make not provision for
the flesh to fulfil the lusts thereof," (Rom. 13: 14.) Where too
much liberty is given to them, they break forth without measure or
restraint.
    4. There is no surer or quicker way of accomplishing this than
by despising the present life and aspiring to celestial immortality.
For hence two rules arise: First, "it remaineth, that both they that
have wives be as though they had none;" "and they that use this
world, as not abusing it," (1 Cor. 7: 29, 31.) Secondly, we must
learn to be no less placid and patient in enduring penury, than
moderate in enjoying abundance. He who makes it his rule to use this
world as if he used it not, not only cuts off all gluttony in regard
to meat and drink, and all effeminacy, ambition, pride, excessive
shows and austerity, in regard to his table, his house, and his
clothes, but removes every care and affection which might withdraw
or hinder him from aspiring to the heavenly life, and cultivating
the interest of his soul. [16] It was well said by Cato: Luxury
causes great care, and produces great carelessness as to virtue; and
it is an old proverb, - Those who are much occupied with the care of
the body, usually give little care to the soul. Therefore while the
liberty of the Christian in external matters is not to be tied down
to a strict rule, it is, however, subject to this law - he must
indulge as little as possible; on the other hand, it must be his
constant aims not only to curb luxury, but to cut off all show of
superfluous abundance, and carefully beware of converting a help
into an hinderance.
    5. Another rule is, that those in narrow and slender
circumstances should learn to bear their wants patiently, that they
may not become immoderately desirous of things, the moderate use of
which implies no small progress in the school of Christ. For in
addition to the many other vices which accompany a longing for
earthly good, he who is impatient under poverty almost always
betrays the contrary disease in abundance. By this I mean, that he
who is ashamed of a sordid garment will be vain-glorious of a
splendid one; he who not contented with a slender, feels annoyed at
the want of a more luxurious supper, will intemperately abuse his
luxury if he obtains it; he who has a difficulty, and is
dissatisfied in submitting to a private and humble condition, will
be unable to refrain from pride if he attain to honour. Let it be
the aim of all who have any unfeigned desire for piety to learn,
after the example of the Apostle, "both to be full and to be hungry,
both to abound and to suffer need," (Philip. 4: 12.) Scripture,
moreover, has a third rule for modifying the use of earthly
blessings. We have already adverted to it when considering the
offices of charity. For it declares that they have all been given us
by the kindness of God, and appointed for our use under the
condition of being regarded as trusts, of which we must one day give
account. We must, therefore, administer them as if we constantly
heard the words sounding in our ears, "Give an account of your
stewardship." At the same time, let us remember by whom the account
is to be taken, viz., by him who, while he so highly commends
abstinence, sobriety, frugality, and moderation, abominates luxury,
pride, ostentation, and vanity; who approves of no administration
but that which is combined with charity, who with his own lips has
already condemned all those pleasures which withdraw the heart from
chastity and purity, or darken the intellect.
    6. The last thing to be observed is, that the Lord enjoins
every one of us, in all the actions of life, to have respect to our
own calling. He knows the boiling restlessness of the human mind,
the fickleness with which it is borne hither and thither, its
eagerness to hold opposites at one time in its grasp, its ambition.
Therefore, lest all things should be thrown into confusion by our
folly and rashness, he has assigned distinct duties to each in the
different modes of life. And that no one may presume to overstep his
proper limits, he has distinguished the different modes of life by
the name of callings. Every man's mode of life, therefore, is a kind
of station assigned him by the Lord, that he may not be always
driven about at random. So necessary is this distinction, that all
our actions are thereby estimated in his sight, and often in a very
different way from that in which human reason or philosophy would
estimate them. There is no more illustrious deed even among
philosophers than to free one's country from tyranny, and yet the
private individual who stabs the tyrant is openly condemned by the
voice of the heavenly Judge. But I am unwilling to dwell on
particular examples; it is enough to know that in every thing the
call of the Lord is the foundation and beginning of right action. He
who does not act with reference to it will never, in the discharge
of duty, keep the right path. He will sometimes be able, perhaps, to
give the semblance of something laudable, but whatever it may be in
the sight of man, it will be rejected before the throne of God; and
besides, there will be no harmony in the different parts of his
life. Hence, he only who directs his life to this end will have it
properly framed; because free from the impulse of rashness, he will
not attempt more than his calling justifies, knowing that it is
unlawful to overleap the prescribed bounds. He who is obscure will
not decline to cultivate a private life, that he may not desert the
post at which God has placed him. Again, in all our cares, toils,
annoyances, and other burdens, it will be no small alleviation to
know that all these are under the superintendence of God. The
magistrate will more willingly perform his office, and the father of
a family confine himself to his proper sphere. Every one in his
particular mode of life will, without repining, suffer its
inconveniences, cares, uneasiness, and anxiety, persuaded that God
has laid on the burden. This, too, will afford admirable
consolation, that in following your proper calling, no work will be
so mean and sordid as not to have a splendour and value in the eye
of God.
    
Notes
[15]See Chrysost. ad Heb. Hi. As to Cratetes the Theban, see
Plutarch, Lib. de Vitand. aere alien. and Philostratus in Vita
Apollonii.
[16]French, "Parer notre ame de ses vrais ornemens;" - deck our soul
with its true ornaments.

Chapter 11.

11. Of justification by Faith. Both the name and the reality
defined.

    In this chapter and the seven which follow, the doctrine of
Justification by Faith is expounded, and opposite errors refuted.
The following may be regarded as the arrangement of these chapters:
- Chapter 11 states the doctrine, and the four subsequent chapters,
by destroying the righteousness of works, confirm the righteousness
of faith, each in the order which appears in the respective titles
of these chapters. In Chapter 12 the doctrine of Justification is
confirmed by a description of perfect righteousness; in Chapter 13
by calling attention to two precautions; in Chapter 14 by a
consideration of the commencement and progress of regeneration in
the regenerate; and in Chapter 15 by two very pernicious effects
which constantly accompany the righteousness of works. The three
other chapters are devoted to refutation; Chapter 16 disposes of the
objections of opponents; Chapter 17 replies to the arguments drawn
from the promises of the Law or the Gospel; Chapter 18 refutes what
is said in support of the righteousness of faith from the promise of
reward.
    There are three principal divisions in the Eleventh Chapter. I.
The terms used in this discussion are explained, sec. 1-4. II.
Osiander's dream as to essential righteousness impugned, sec. 5-13.
III. The righteousness of faith established in opposition to the
righteousness of works.
    
Sections.

1. Connection between the doctrine of Justification and that of
    Regeneration. The knowledge of this doctrine very necessary for
    two reasons.
2. For the purpose of facilitating the exposition of it, the terms
    are explained. 1. What it is to be justified in the sight of
    God. 2. To be justified by works. 3. To be justified by faith.
    Definition.
3. Various meanings of the term Justification. 1. To give praise to
    God and truth. 2. To make a vain display of righteousness. 3.
    To impute righteousness by faith, by and on account of Christ.
    Confirmation from an expression of Paul, and another of our
    Lord.
4. Another confirmation from a comparison with other expressions, in
    which justification means free righteousness before God through
    faith in Jesus Christ. 1. Acceptance. 2. Imputation of
    righteousness. 3. Remission of sins. 4. Blessedness. 5.
    Reconciliation with God. 6. Righteousness by the obedience of
    Christ.
5. The second part of the chapter. Osiander's dream as to essential
    righteousness refuted. 1. Osiander's argument: Answer. 2.
    Osiander's second argument: Answer. Third argument: Answer.
6. necessity of this refutation. Fourth argument: Answer.
    Confirmation: Another answer. Fifth and sixth arguments and
    answers.
7. Seventh and eighth arguments.
8. Ninth argument: Answer.
9. Tenth argument: Answer.
10. In what sense Christ is said to be our righteousness. Eleventh
    and twelfth arguments and answers.
11. Thirteenth and fourteenth arguments: Answers. An exception by
    Osiander. Imputed and begun righteousness to be distinguished.
    Osiander confounds them. Fifteenth argument: Answer.
lo. Sixteenth argument, a dream of Osiander: Answer. Other four
    arguments and answers. Conclusion of the refutation of
    Osiander's errors.
13. Last part of the chapter. Refutation of the Sophists pretending
    a righteousness compounded partly of faith and partly of works.
14. Sophistical evasion by giving the same name to different things:
    Two answers.
15. Second evasion: Two answers. First answer. Pernicious
    consequences resulting from this evasion.
16. Second answer, showing wherein, according to Scripture,
    Justification consists.
17. In explanation of this doctrine of Justification, two passages
    of Scripture produced.
18. Another passage of Scripture.
19. Third evasion. Papistical objection to the doctrine of
    Justification by Faith alone: Three answers. Fourth evasion:
    Three answers.
20. Fifth evasion, founded on the application of the term
    Righteousness to good works, and also on their reward: Answer,
    confirmed by the invincible argument of Paul. Sixth evasion:
    Answer.
21. Osiander and the Sophists being thus refuted, the accuracy of
    the definition of Justification by Faith established.
22. Definition confirmed. 1. By passages of Scripture. 2. By the
    writings of the ancient Fathers.
23. Man justified by faith, not because by it he obtains the Spirit,
    and is thus made righteous, but because by faith he lays hold
    of the righteousness of Christ. An objection removed. An
    example of the doctrine of Justification by Faith from the
    works of Ambrose.

    1. I trust I have now sufficiently shown how man's only
resource for escaping from the curse of the law, and recovering
salvation, lies in faith; and also what the nature of faith is, what
the benefits which it confers, and the fruits which it produces. The
whole may be thus summed up: Christ given to us by the kindness of
God is apprehended and possessed by faith, by means of which we
obtain in particular a twofold benefit; first, being reconciled by
the righteousness of Christ, God becomes, instead of a judge, an
indulgent Father; and, secondly, being sanctified by his Spirit, we
aspire to integrity and purity of life. This second benefit, viz.,
regeneration, appears to have been already sufficiently discussed.
On the other hand, the subject of justification was discussed more
cursorily, because it seemed of more consequence first to explain
that the faith by which alone, through the mercy of God, we obtain
free justification, is not destitute of good works; and also to show
the true nature of these good works on which this question partly
turns. The doctrine of Justification is now to be fully discussed,
and discussed under the conviction, that as it is the principal
ground on which religion must be supported, so it requires greater
care and attention. For unless you understand first of all what your
position is before God, and what the judgment which he passes upon
you, you have no foundation on which your salvation can be laid, or
on which piety towards God can be reared. The necessity of
thoroughly understanding this subject will become more apparent as
we proceed with it.
    2. Lest we should stumble at the very threshold, (this we
should do were we to begin the discussion without knowing what the
subject is,) let us first explain the meaning of the expressions, To
be justified in the sight of God, to be Justified by faith or by
works. A man is said to be justified in the sight of God when in the
judgment of God he is deemed righteous, and is accepted on account
of his righteousness; for as iniquity is abominable to God, so
neither can the sinner find grace in his sight, so far as he is and
so long as he is regarded as a sinner. Hence, wherever sin is, there
also are the wrath and vengeance of God. He, on the other hand, is
justified who is regarded not as a sinner, but as righteous, and as
such stands acquitted at the judgment-seat of God, where all sinners
are condemned. As an innocent man, when charged before an impartial
judge, who decides according to his innocence, is said to be
justified by the judge, as a man is said to be justified by God
when, removed from the catalogue of sinners, he has God as the
witness and assertor of his righteousness. In the same manner, a man
will be said to be justified by works, if in his life there can be
found a purity and holiness which merits an attestation of
righteousness at the throne of God, or if by the perfection of his
works he can answer and satisfy the divine justice. On the contrary,
a man will be justified by faith when, excluded from the
righteousness of works, he by faith lays hold of the righteousness
of Christ, and clothed in it appears in the sight of God not as a
sinner, but as righteous. Thus we simply interpret justification, as
the acceptance with which God receives us into his favor as if we
were righteous; and we say that this justification consists in the
forgiveness of sins and the imputation of the righteousness of
Christ, (see sec. 21 and 23.)
    3. In confirmation of this there are many clear passages of
Scripture. First, it cannot be denied that this is the proper and
most usual signification of the term. But as it were too tedious to
collect all the passages, and compare them with each other, let it
suffice to have called the reader's attention to the fact: he will
easily convince himself of its truth. I will only mention a few
passages in which the justification of which we speak is expressly
handled. First, when Luke relates that all the people that heard
Christ "justified God," (Luke 7: 29,) and when Christ declares, that
"Wisdom is justified of all her children," (Luke 7: 35,) Luke means
not that they conferred righteousness which always dwells in
perfection with God, although the whole world should attempt to
wrest it from him, nor does Christ mean that the doctrine of
salvation is made just: this it is in its own nature; but both modes
of expression are equivalent to attributing due praise to God and
his doctrine. On the other hand, when Christ upbraids the Pharisees
for justifying themselves, (Luke 16: 15,) he means not that they
acquired righteousness by acting properly, but that they ambitiously
courted a reputation for righteousness of which they were destitute.
Those acquainted with Hebrew understand the meaning better: for in
that language the name of wicked is given not only to those who are
conscious of wickedness, but to those who receive sentence of
condemnation. Thus, when Bathsheba says, "I and my son Solomon shall
be counted offenders," she does not acknowledge a crime, but
complains that she and her son will be exposed to the disgrace of
being numbered among reprobates and criminals, (1 Kings 1: 21.) It
is, indeed, plain from the context, that the term even in Latin must
be thus understood, viz., relatively, and does not denote any
quality. In regard to the use of the term with reference to the
present subject, when Paul speaks of the Scripture, "foreseeing that
God would justify the heathen through faith," (Gal. 3: 8,) what
other meaning can you give it than that God imputes righteousness by
faith? Again, when he says, "that he (God) might be just, and the
justifier of him who believeth in Jesus," (Rom. 3: 26,) what can the
meaning be, if not that God, in consideration of their faith, frees
them from the condemnation which their wickedness deserves? This
appears still more plainly at the conclusion, when he exclaims, "Who
shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that
justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea
rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God,
who also maketh intercession for us, (Rom. 8: 33, 34.) For it is
just as if he had said, Who shall accuse those whom God has
acquitted? Who shall condemn those for whom Christ pleads? To
justify therefore, is nothing else than to acquit from the charge of
guilt, as if innocence were proved. Hence, when God justifies us
through the intercession of Christ, he does not acquit us on a proof
of our own innocence, but by an imputation of righteousness, so that
though not righteous in ourselves, we are deemed righteous in
Christ. Thus it is said, in Paul's discourse in the Acts, "Through
this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins; and by him
all that believe are justified from all things from which ye could
not be justified by the law of Moses," (Acts 13: 38, 39.) You see
that after remission of sins justification is set down by way of
explanation; you see plainly that it is used for acquittal; you see
how it cannot be obtained by the works of the law; you see that it
is entirely through the interposition of Christ; you see that it is
obtained by faith; you see, in fine, that satisfaction intervenes,
since it is said that we are justified from our sins by Christ. Thus
when the publican is said to have gone down to his house
"justified," (Luke 18: 14,) it cannot be held that he obtained this
justification by any merit of works. All that is said is, that after
obtaining the pardon of sins he was regarded in the sight of God as
righteous. He was justified, therefore, not by any approval of
works, but by gratuitous acquittal on the part of God. Hence Ambrose
elegantly terms confession of sins "legal justification," (Ambrose
on Psalm 118 Serm. 10).
    4. Without saying more about the term, we shall have no doubt
as to the thing meant if we attend to the description which is given
of it. For Paul certainly designates justification by the term
acceptance, when he says to the Ephesians, "Having predestinated us
unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according
to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his
grace, wherein he has made us accepted in the Beloved," (Eph. 1: 5,
6.) His meaning is the very same as where he elsewhere says, "being
justified freely by his grace," (Rom. 3: 24.) In the fourth chapter
of the Epistle to the Romans, he first terms it the imputation of
righteousness, and hesitates not to place it in forgiveness of sins:
"Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom
God imputeth righteousness without works, saying, Blessed are they
whose iniquities are forgiven," &c., (Rom. 4: 6-8.) There, indeed,
he is not speaking of a part of justification, but of the whole. He
declares, moreover, that a definition of it was given by David, when
he pronounced him blessed who has obtained the free pardon of his
sins. Whence it appears that this righteousness of which he speaks
is simply opposed to judicial guilt. But the most satisfactory
passage on this subject is that in which he declares the sum of the
Gospel message to be reconciliation to God, who is pleased, through
Christ, to receive us into favor by not imputing our sins, (2 Cor.
5: 18-21.) Let my readers carefully weigh the whole context. For
Paul shortly after adding, by way of explanation, in order to
designate the mode of reconciliation, that Christ who knew no sin
was made sin for us, undoubtedly understands by reconciliation
nothing else than justification. Nor, indeed, could it be said, as
he elsewhere does, that we are made righteous "by the obedience" of
Christ, (Rom. 5: 19,) were it not that we are deemed righteous in
the sight of God in him and not in ourselves.
    5. But as Osiander has introduced a kind of monstrosity termed
essential righteousness, by which, although he designed not to
abolish free righteousness, he involves it in darkness, and by that
darkness deprives pious minds of a serious sense of divine grace;
before I pass to other matters, it may be proper to refute this
delirious dream. And, first, the whole speculation is mere empty
curiosity. He indeed, heaps together many passages of scripture
showing that Christ is one with us, and we likewise one with him, a
point which needs no proof; but he entangles himself by not
attending to the bond of this unity. The explanation of all
difficulties is easy to us, who hold that we are united to Christ by
the secret agency of his Spirit, but he had formed some idea akin to
that of the Manichees, desiring to transfuse the divine essence into
men. Hence his other notion, that Adam was formed in the image of
God, because even before the fall Christ was destined to be the
model of human nature. But as I study brevity, I will confine myself
to the matter in hand. He says, that we are one with Christ. This we
admit, but still we deny that the essence of Christ is confounded
with ours. Then we say that he absurdly endeavors to support his
delusions by means of this principle: that Christ is our
righteousness, because he is the eternal God, the fountain of
righteousness, the very righteousness of God. My readers will pardon
me for now only touching on matters which method requires me to
defer to another place. But although he pretends that, by the term
essential righteousness, he merely means to oppose the sentiment
that we are reputed righteous on account of Christ, he however
clearly shows, that not contented with that righteousness, which was
procured for us by the obedience and sacrificial death of Christ, he
maintains that we are substantially righteous in God by an infused
essence as well as quality. For this is the reason why he so
vehemently contends that not only Christ but the Father and the
Spirit dwell in us. The fact I admit to be true, but still I
maintain it is wrested by him. He ought to have attended to the mode
of dwelling, viz., that the Father and the Spirit are in Christ; and
as in him the fulness of the Godhead dwells, so in him we possess
God entire. Hence, whatever he says separately concerning the Father
and the Spirit, has no other tendency than to lead away the simple
from Christ. Then he introduces a substantial mixture, by which God,
transfusing himself into us, makes us as it were a part of himself.
Our being made one with Christ by the agency of the Spirit, he being
the head and we the members, he regards as almost nothing unless his
essence is mingled with us. But, as I have said, in the case of the
Father and the Spirit, he more clearly betrays his views, namely,
that we are not justified by the mere grace of the Mediator, and
that righteousness is not simply or entirely offered to us in his
person, but that we are made partakers of divine righteousness when
God is essentially united to us.
    6. Had he only said, that Christ by justifying us becomes ours
by an essential union, and that he is our head not only in so far as
he is man, but that as the essence of the divine nature is diffused
into us, he might indulge his dreams with less harm, and, perhaps,
it were less necessary to contest the matter with him; but since
this principle is like a cuttle-fish, which, by the ejection of dark
and inky blood, conceals its many tails, if we would not knowingly
and willingly allow ourselves to be robbed of that righteousness
which alone gives us full assurance of our salvation, we must
strenuously resist. For, in the whole of this discussion, the noun
righteousness and the verb to justify, are extended by Osiander to
two parts; to be justified being not only to be reconciled to God by
a free pardon, but also to be made just; and righteousness being not
a free imputation, but the holiness and integrity which the divine
essence dwelling in us inspires. And he vehemently asserts (see sec.
8) that Christ is himself our righteousness, not in so far as he, by
expiating sins, appeased the Father, but because he is the eternal
God and life. To prove the first point, viz., that God justifies not
only by pardoning but by regenerating, he asks, whether he leaves
those whom he justifies as they were by nature, making no change
upon their vices? The answer is very easy: as Christ cannot be
divided into parts, so the two things, justification and
sanctification, which we perceive to be united together in him, are
inseparable. Whomsoever, therefore, God receives into his favor, he
presents with the Spirit of adoption, whose agency forms them anew
into his image. But if the brightness of the sun cannot be separated
from its heat, are we therefore to say, that the earth is warmed by
light and illumined by heat? Nothing can be more apposite to the
matter in hand than this simile. The sun by its heat quickens and
fertilizes the earth; by its rays enlightens and illumines it. Here
is a mutual and undivided connection, and yet reason itself
prohibits us from transferring the peculiar properties of the one to
the other. In the confusion of a twofold grace, which Osiander
obtrudes upon us, there is a similar absurdity. Because those whom
God freely regards as righteous, he in fact renews to the
cultivation of righteousness, Osiander confounds that free
acceptance with this gift of regeneration, and contends that they
are one and the same. But Scriptures while combining both, classes
them separately, that it may the better display the manifold grace
of God. Nor is Paul's statement superfluous, that Christ is made
unto us "righteousness and sanctification," (1 Cor. 1: 30.) And
whenever he argues from the salvation procured for us, from the
paternal love of God and the grace of Christ, that we are called to
purity and holiness, he plainly intimates, that to be justified is
something else than to be made new creatures. Osiander on coming to
Scripture corrupts every passage which he quotes. Thus when Paul
says, "to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth
the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness," he expounds
justifying as making just. With the same rashness he perverts the
whole of the fourth chapter to the Romans. He hesitates not to give
a similar gloss to the passage which I lately quoted, "Who shall lay
any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth."
Here it is plain that guilt and acquittal simply are considered, and
that the Apostle's meaning depends on the antithesis. Therefore his
futility is detected both in his argument and his quotations for
support from Scripture. He is not a whit sounder in discussing the
term righteousness, when it is said, that faith was imputed to
Abraham for righteousness after he had embraced Christ, (who is the
righteousness of Gad and God himself) and was distinguished by
excellent virtues. Hence it appears that two things which are
perfect are viciously converted by him into one which is corrupt.
For the righteousness which is there mentioned pertains not to the
whole course of life; or rather, the Spirit testifies, that though
Abraham greatly excelled in virtue, and by long perseverance in it
had made so much progress, the only way in which he pleased God was
by receiving the grace which was offered by the promise, in faith.
From this it follows, that, as Paul justly maintains, there is no
room for works in justification.
    7. When he objects that the power of justifying exists not in
faith, considered in itself, but only as receiving Christ, I
willingly admit it. For did faith justify of itself, or (as it is
expressed) by its own intrinsic virtue, as it is always weak and
imperfect, its efficacy would be partial, and thus our righteousness
being maimed would give us only a portion of salvation. We indeed
imagine nothing of the kind, but say, that, properly speaking, God
alone justifies. The same thing we likewise transfer to Christ,
because he was given to us for righteousness; while we compare faith
to a kind of vessel, because we are incapable of receiving Christ,
unless we are emptied and come with open mouth to receive his grace.
Hence it follows, that we do not withdraw the power of justifying
from Christ, when we hold that, previous to his righteousness, he
himself is received by faith. Still, however, I admit not the
tortuous figure of the sophist, that faith is Christ; as if a vessel
of clay were a treasure, because gold is deposited in it. And yet
this is no reason why faith, though in itself of no dignity or
value, should not justify us by giving Christ; Just as such a vessel
filled with coin may give wealth. I say, therefore, that faith,
which is only the instrument for receiving justification, is
ignorantly confounded with Christ, who is the material cause, as
well as the author and minister of this great blessing. This
disposes of the difficulty, viz., how the term faith is to be
understood when treating of justification.
    8. Osiander goes still farther in regard to the mode of
receiving Christ, holding, that by the ministry of the external word
the internal word is received; that he may thus lead us away from
the priesthood of Christ, and his office of Mediator, to his eternal
divinity. We, indeed, do not divide Christ, but hold that he who,
reconciling us to God in his flesh, bestowed righteousness upon us,
is the eternal Word of God; and that he could not perform the office
of Mediator, nor acquire righteousness for us, if he were not the
eternal God. Osiander will have it, that as Christ is God and man,
he was made our righteousness in respect not of his human but of his
divine nature. But if this is a peculiar property of the Godhead, it
will not be peculiar to Christ, but common to him with the Father
and the Spirit, since their righteousness is one and the same. Thus
it would be incongruous to say, that that which existed naturally
from eternity was made ours. But granting that God was made unto us
righteousness, what are we to make of Paul's interposed statement,
that he was so made by God? This certainly is peculiar to the office
of mediator, for although he contains in himself the divine nature,
yet he receives his own proper title, that he may be distinguished
from the Father and the Spirit. But he makes a ridiculous boast of a
single passage of Jeremiah, in which it is said, that Jehovah will
be our righteousness, (Jer. 23: 6; 33: 16.) But all he can extract
from this is, that Christ, who is our righteousness, was God
manifest in the flesh. We have elsewhere quoted from Paul's
discourse, that God purchased the Church with his own blood, (Acts
20: 28.) Were any one to infer from this that the blood by which
sins were expiated was divine, and of a divine nature, who could
endure so foul a heresy? But Osiander, thinking that he has gained
the whole cause by this childish cavil, swells, exults, and stuffs
whole pages with his bombast, whereas the solution is simple and
obvious, viz., that Jehovah, when made of the seed of David, was
indeed to be the righteousness of believers, but in what sense
Isaiah declares, "By his knowledge shall my righteous servant
justify many," (Isa. 53: 11.) Let us observe that it is the Father
who speaks. He attributes the office of justifying to the Son, and
adds the reason, - because he is "righteous." He places the method,
or medium, (as it is called,) in the doctrine by which Christ is
known. For the word "da'at" is more properly to be understood in a
passive sense. Hence I infer, first, that Christ was made
righteousness when he assumed the form of a servant; secondly, that
he justified us by his obedience to the Father; and, accordingly
that he does not perform this for us in respect of his divine
nature, but according to the nature of the dispensation laid upon
him. For though God alone is the fountain of righteousness, and the
only way in which we are righteous is by participation with him,
yet, as by our unhappy revolt we are alienated from his
righteousness, it is necessary to descend to this lower remedy, that
Christ may justify us by the power of his death and resurrection.
    9. If he objects that this work by its excellence transcends
human, and therefore can only be ascribed to the divine nature; I
concede the former point, but maintain, that on the latter he is
ignorantly deluded. For although Christ could neither purify our
souls by his own blood, nor appease the Father by his sacrifice, nor
acquit us from the charge of guilt, nor, in short, perform the
office of priest, unless he had been very God, because no human
ability was equal to such a burden, it is however certain, that he
performed all these things in his human nature. If it is asked, in
what way we are justified? Paul answers, by the obedience of Christ.
Did he obey in any other way than by assuming the form of a servant?
We infer, therefore, that righteousness was manifested to us in his
flesh. In like manner, in another passage, (which I greatly wonder
that Osiander does not blush repeatedly to quote,) he places the
fountain of righteousness entirely in the incarnation of Christ, "He
has made him to be sin for us who knew no sin, that we might be made
the righteousness of God in him," (2 Cor. 5: 21.) Osiander in turgid
sentences lays hold of the expression, righteousness of God, and
shouts victory! as if he had proved it to be his own phantom of
essential righteousness, though the words have a very different
meaning, viz., that we are justified through the expiation made by
Christ. That the righteousness of God is used for the righteousness
which is approved by God, should be known to mere tyros, as in John,
the praise of God is contrasted with the praise of men, (John 12:
43.) I know that by the righteousness of God is sometimes meant that
of which God is the author, and which he bestows upon us; but that
here the only thing meant is, that being supported by the expiation
of Christ, we are able to stand at the tribunal of God, sound
readers perceive without any observation of mine. The word is not of
so much importance, provided Osiander agrees with us in this, that
we are justified by Christ in respect he was made an expiatory
victim for us. This he could not be in his divine nature. For which
reason also, when Christ would seal the righteousness and salvation
which he brought to us, he holds forth the sure pledge of it in his
flesh. He indeed calls himself "living bread," but, in explanation
of the mode, adds, "my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink
indeed," (John 6: 55.) The same doctrine is clearly seen in the
sacraments; which, though they direct our faith to the whole, not to
a part of Christ, yet, at the same time, declare that the materials
of righteousness and salvation reside in his flesh; not that the
mere man of himself justifies or quickens, but that God was pleased,
by means of a Mediator, to manifest his own hidden and
incomprehensible nature. Hence I often repeat, that Christ has been
in a manner set before us as a fountain, whence we may draw what
would otherwise lie without use in that deep and hidden abyss which
streams forth to us in the person of the Mediator. In this way, and
in this meaning, I deny not that Christ, as he is God and man,
justifies us; that this work is common also to the Father and the
Holy Spirit; in fine, that the righteousness of which God makes us
partakers is the eternal righteousness of the eternal God, provided
effect is given to the clear and valid reasons to which I have
adverted.
    10. Moreover, lest by his cavils he deceive the unwary, I
acknowledge that we are devoid of this incomparable gift until
Christ become ours. Therefore, to that union of the head and
members, the residence of Christ in our hearts, in fine, the
mystical union, we assign the highest rank, Christ when he becomes
ours making us partners with him in the gifts with which he was
endued. Hence we do not view him as at a distance and without us,
but as we have put him on, and been ingrafted into his body, he
deigns to make us one with himself, and, therefore, we glory in
having a fellowship of righteousness with him. This disposes of
Osiander's calumny, that we regard faith as righteousness; as if we
were robbing Christ of his rights when we say, that, destitute in
ourselves, we draw near to him by faith, to make way for his grace,
that he alone may fill us. But Osiander, spurning this spiritual
union, insists on a gross mixture of Christ with believers; and,
accordingly, to excite prejudice, gives the name of Zwinglians to
all who subscribe not to his fanatical heresy of essential
righteousness, because they do not hold that, in the supper, Christ
is eaten substantially. For my part, I count it the highest honor to
be thus assailed by a haughty man, devoted to his own impostures;
though he assails not me only, but writers of known reputation
throughout the world, and whom it became him modestly to venerate.
This, however, does not concern me, as I plead not my own cause, and
plead the more sincerely that I am free from every sinister feeling.
In insisting so vehemently on essential righteousness, and an
essential inhabitation of Christ within us, his meaning is, first,
that God by a gross mixture transfuses himself into us, as he
pretends that there is a carnal eating in the supper; And, secondly
that by instilling his own righteousness into us, he makes us really
righteous with himself since, according to him, this righteousness
is as well God himself as the probity, or holiness, or integrity of
God. I will not spend much time in disposing of the passages of
Scripture which he adduces, and which, though used in reference to
the heavenly life, he wrests to our present state. Peter says, that
through the knowledge of Christ "are given unto us exceeding great
and precious promises, that by them ye might be partakers of the
divine nature," (2 Pet. 1: 4;) as if we now were what the gospel
promises we shall be at the final advent of Christ; nay, John
reminds us, that "when he shall appear we shall be like him, for we
shall see him as he is", (1 John 3: 2.) I only wished to give my
readers a slender specimen of Osiander, it being my intention to
decline the discussion of his frivolities, not because there is any
difficulty in disposing of them, but because I am unwilling to annoy
the reader with superfluous labour.
    11. But more poison lurks in the second branch, when he says
that we are righteous together with God. I think I have already
sufficiently proved, that although the dogma were not so
pestiferous, yet because it is frigid and jejune, and falls by its
own vanity, it must justly be disrelished by all sound and pious
readers. But it is impossible to tolerate the impiety which, under
the pretence of a twofold righteousness, undermines our assurance of
salvation, and hurrying us into the clouds, tries to prevent us from
embracing the gift of expiation in faith, and invoking God with
quiet minds. Osiander derides us for teaching, that to be justified
is a forensic term, because it behaves us to be in reality just:
there is nothing also to which he is more opposed than the idea of
our being justified by a free imputation. Say, then, if God does not
justify us by acquitting and pardoning, what does Paul mean when he
says "God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, not
imputing their trespasses unto them"? "He made him to be sin for us
who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in
him," (2 Cor. 5: 19, 21.) Here I learn, first, that those who are
reconciled to God are regarded as righteous: then the method is
stated, God justifies by pardoning; and hence, in another place,
justification is opposed to accusation, (Rom. 8: 33;) this
antithesis clearly demonstrating that the mode of expression is
derived from forensic use. And, indeed, no man, moderately verdant
in the Hebrew tongue, (provided he is also of sedate brain,) is
ignorant that this phrase thus took its rise, and thereafter derived
its tendency and force. Now, then, when Paul says that David
"describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputeth
righteousness without works, saying, Blessed are they whose
iniquities are forgiven," (Rom. 4: 6, 7; Ps. 32: 1,) let Osiander
say whether this is a complete or only a partial definition. He
certainly does not adduce the Psalmist as a witness that pardon of
sins is a part of righteousness, or concurs with something else in
justifying, but he includes the whole of righteousness in gratuitous
forgiveness, declaring those to be blessed "whose iniquities are
forgiven, and whose sins are covered," and "to whom the Lord will
not impute sin." He estimates and judges of his happiness from this
that in this way he is righteous not in reality, but by imputation.
    Osiander objects that it would be insulting to God, and
contrary to his nature, to justify those who still remain wicked.
But it ought to be remembered, as I already observed, that the gift
of justification is not separated from regeneration, though the two
things are distinct. But as it is too well known by experience, that
the remains of sin always exist in the righteous, it is necessary
that justification should be something very different from
reformation to newness of life. This latter God begins in his elect,
and carries on during the whole course of life, gradually and
sometimes slowly, so that if placed at his judgment-seat they would
always deserve sentence of death. He justifies not partially, but
freely, so that they can appear in the heavens as if clothed with
the purity of Christ. No portion of righteousness could pacify the
conscience. It must be decided that we are pleasing to God, as being
without exception righteous in his sight. Hence it follows that the
doctrine of justification is perverted and completely overthrown
whenever doubt is instilled into the mind, confidence in salvation
is shaken, and free and intrepid prayer is retarded; yea, whenever
rest and tranquillity with spiritual joy are not established. Hence
Paul argues against objectors, that "if the inheritance be of the
law, it is no more of promise," (Gal. 3: 18.) that in this way faith
would be made vain; for if respect be had to works it fails, the
holiest of men in that case finding nothing in which they can
confide. This distinction between justification and regeneration
(Osiander confounding the two, calls them a twofold righteousness)
is admirably expressed by Paul. Speaking of his real righteousness,
or the integrity bestowed upon him, (which Osiander terms his
essential righteousness,) he mournfully exclaims, "O wretched man
that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" (Rom.
7: 24;) but retaking himself to the righteousness which is founded
solely on the mercy of God, he breaks forth thus magnificently into
the language of triumph: "Who shall lay any thing to the charge of
God's elect? It is God that justifieth." "Who shall separate us from
the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution,
or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?" (Rom. 8: 33, 35.) He
clearly declares that the only righteousness for him is that which
alone suffices for complete salvation in the presence of God, so
that that miserable bondage, the consciousness of which made him a
little before lament his lot, derogates not from his confidence, and
is no obstacle in his way. This diversity is well known, and indeed
is familiar to all the saints who groan under the burden of sin, and
yet with victorious assurance rise above all fears. Osiander's
objection as to its being inconsistent with the nature of God, falls
back upon himself; for though he clothes the saints with a twofold
righteousness as with a coat of skins, he is, however, forced to
admit, that without forgiveness no man is pleasing to God. If this
be so, let him at least admit, that with reference to what is called
the proportion of imputation, those are regarded as righteous who
are not so in reality. But how far shall the sinner extend this
gratuitous acceptance, which is substituted in the room of
righteousness? Will it amount to the whole pound, or will it be only
an ounce? He will remain in doubt, vibrating to this side and to
that, because he will be unable to assume to himself as much
righteousness as will be necessary to give confidence. It is well
that he who would prescribe a law to God is not the judge in this
cause. But this saying will ever stand true, "That thou mightest be
justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judges," (Ps.
51: 4.) What arrogance to condemn the Supreme Judge when he acquits
freely, and try to prevent the response from taking affect: "I will
have mercy on whom I will have mercy." And yet the intercession of
Moses, which God calmed by this answer, was not for pardon to some
individual, but to all alike, by wiping away the guilt to which all
were liable. And we, indeed, say, that the lost are justified before
God by the burial of their sins; for (as he hates sin) he can only
love those whom he justifies. But herein is the wondrous method of
justification, that, clothed with the righteousness of Christ, they
dread not the judgment of which they are worthy, and while they
justly condemn themselves, are yet deemed righteous out of
themselves.
    12. I must admonish the reader carefully to attend to the
mystery which he boasts he is unwilling to conceal from them. For
after contending with great prolixity that we do not obtain favor
with God through the mere imputation of the righteousness of Christ,
because (to use his own words) it were impossible for God to hold
those as righteous who are not so, he at length concludes that
Christ was given to us for righteousness, in respect not of his
human, but of his divine nature; and though this can only be found
in the person of the Mediator, it is, however, the righteousness not
of man, but of God. He does not now twist his rope of two
righteousnesses, but plainly deprives the human nature of Christ of
the office of justifying. It is worth while to understand what the
nature of his argument is. It is said in the same passage that
Christ is made unto us wisdom, (1 Cor. 1: 30;) but this is true only
of the eternal Word, and, therefore, it is not the man Christ that
is made righteousness. I answer, that the only begotten Son of God
was indeed his eternal wisdom, but that this title is applied to him
by Paul in a different way, viz., because "in him are hid all the
treasures of wisdom and righteousness," (Col. 2: 3.) That,
therefore, which he had with the Father he manifested to us; and
thus Paul's expression refers not to the essence of the Son of God,
but to our use, and is fitly applied to the human nature of Christ;
for although the light shone in darkness before he was clothed with
flesh, yet he was a hidden light until he appeared in human nature
as the Sun of Righteousness, and hence he calls himself the light of
the world. It is also foolishly objected by Osiander, that
justifying far transcends the power both of men and angels, since it
depends not on the dignity of any creature, but on the ordination of
God. Were angels to attempt to give satisfaction to God, they could
have no success, because they are not appointed for this purpose, it
being the peculiar office of Christ, who "has redeemed us from the
curse of the law, being made a curse for us," (Gal. 3: 13.) Those
who deny that Christ is our righteousness, in respect of his divine
nature, are wickedly charged by Osiander with leaving only a part of
Christ, and (what is worse) with making two Gods; because, while
admitting that God dwells in us, they still insist that we are not
justified by the righteousness of God. For though we call Christ the
author of life, inasmuch as he endured death that he might destroy
him who had the power of death, (Heb. 2: 14,) we do not thereby rob
him of this honor, in his whole character as God manifested in the
flesh. We only make a distinction as to the manner in which the
righteousness of God comes to us, and is enjoyed by us, - a matter
as to which Osiander shamefully erred. We deny not that that which
was openly exhibited to us in Christ flowed from the secret grace
and power of God; nor do we dispute that the righteousness which
Christ confers upon us is the righteousness of God, and proceeds
from him. What we constantly maintain is, that our righteousness and
life are in the death and resurrection of Christ. I say nothing of
that absurd accumulation of passages with which without selection or
common understanding, he has loaded his readers, in endeavoring to
show, that whenever mention is made of righteousness, this essential
righteousness of his should be understood; as when David implores
help from the righteousness of God. This David does more than a
hundred times, and as often Osiander hesitates not to pervert his
meaning. Not a whit more solid is his objection, that the name of
righteousness is rightly and properly applied to that by which we
are moved to act aright, but that it is God only that worketh in us
both to will and to do, (Phil. 2: 13.) For we deny not that God by
his Spirit forms us anew to holiness and righteousness of life; but
we must first see whether he does this of himself, immediately, or
by the hand of his Son, with whom he has deposited all the fulness
of the Holy Spirit, that out of his own abundance he may supply the
wants of his members. When, although righteousness comes to us from
the secret fountain of the Godhead, it does not follow that Christ,
who sanctified himself in the flesh on our account, is our
righteousness in respect of his divine nature, (John 17: 19.) Not
less frivolous is his observation, that the righteousness with which
Christ himself was righteous was divine; for had not the will of the
Father impelled him, he could not have fulfilled the office assigned
him. For although it has been elsewhere said that all the merits of
Christ flow from the mere good pleasure of God, this gives no
countenance to the phantom by which Osiander fascinates both his own
eyes and those of the simple. For who will allow him to infer, that
because God is the source and commencement of our righteousness, we
are essentially righteous, and the essence of the divine
righteousness dwells in us? In redeeming us, says Isaiah, "he (God)
put on righteousness as a breastplate, and an helmet of salvation
upon his head," (Isaiah 59: 17,) was this to deprive Christ of the
armour which he had given him, and prevent him from being a perfect
Redeemer? All that the Prophet meant was, that God borrowed nothing
from an external quarter, that in redeeming us he received no
external aid. The same thing is briefly expressed by Paul in
different terms, when he says that God set him forth "to declare his
righteousness for the remission of sins." This is not the least
repugnant to his doctrine: in another place, that "by the obedience
of one shall many be made righteous," (Rom. 5: 19.) In short, every
one who, by the entanglement of a twofold righteousness, prevents
miserable souls from resting entirely on the mere mercy of God,
mocks Christ by putting on him a crown of plaited thorns.
    13. But since a great part of mankind imagine a righteousness
compounded of faith and works let us here show that there is so wide
a difference between justification by faith and by works, that the
establishment of the one necessarily overthrows the other. The
Apostle says, "Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for
the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I
have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung,
that I may win Christ, and be found in him, not having mine own
righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the
faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith," (Phil.
3: 8, 9.) You here see a comparison of contraries, and an intimation
that every one who would obtain the righteousness of Christ must
renounce his own. Hence he elsewhere declares the cause of the
rejection of the Jews to have been, that "they being ignorant of
God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own
righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness
of God," (Rom. 10: 3.) If we destroy the righteousness of God by
establishing our own righteousness, then, in order to obtain his
righteousness, our own must be entirely abandoned. This also he
shows, when he declares that boasting is not excluded by the Law,
but by faith, (Rom. 3: 27.) Hence it follows, that so long as the
minutes portion of our own righteousness remains, we have still some
ground for boasting. Now if faith utterly excludes boasting, the
righteousness of works cannot in any way be associated with the
righteousness of faith. This meaning is so clearly expressed in the
fourth chapter to the Romans as to leave no room for cavil or
evasion. "If Abraham were justified by works he has whereof to
glory;" and then it is added, "but not before God," (Rom. 4: 2.) The
conclusion, therefore, is, that he was not justified by works. He
then employs another argument from contraries, viz., when reward is
paid to works, it is done of debt, not of grace; but the
righteousness of faith is of grace: therefore it is not of the merit
of works. Away, then, with the dream of those who invent a
righteousness compounded of faith and works, (see Calvin. ad
Concilium Tridentinum.)
    14. The Sophists, who delight in sporting with Scripture and in
empty cavils, think they have a subtle evasion when they expound
works to mean, such as unregenerated men do literally, and by the
effect of free will, without the grace of Christ, and deny that
these have any reference to spiritual works. Thus according to them,
man is justified by faith as well as by works, provided these are
not his own works, but gifts of Christ and fruits of regeneration;
Paul's only object in so expressing himself being to convince the
Jews, that in trusting to their ohm strength they foolishly
arrogated righteousness to themselves, whereas it is bestowed upon
us by the Spirit of Christ alone, and not by studied efforts of our
own nature. But they observe not that in the antithesis between
Legal and Gospel righteousness, which Paul elsewhere introduces, all
kinds of works, with whatever name adorned, are excluded, (Gal. 3:
11, 12.) For he says that the righteousness of the Law consists in
obtaining salvation by doing what the Law requires, but that the
righteousness of faith consists in believing that Christ died and
rose again, (Rom. 10: 5-9.) Moreover, we shall afterwards see, at
the proper place, that the blessings of sanctification and
justification, which we derive from Christ, are different. Hence it
follows, that not even spiritual works are taken into account when
the power of justifying is ascribed to faith. And, indeed, the
passage above quoted, in which Paul declares that Abraham had no
ground of glorying before God, because he was not justified by
works, ought not to be confined to a literal and external form of
virtue, or to the effort of free will. The meaning is, that though
the life of the Patriarch had been spiritual and almost angelic, yet
he could not by the merit of works have procured justification
before God.
    15. The Schoolmen treat the matter somewhat more grossly by
mingling their preparations with it; and yet the others instill into
the simple and unwary a no less pernicious dogma, when, under cover
of the Spirit and grace, they hide the divine mercy, which alone can
give peace to the trembling soul. We, indeed, hold with Paul, that
those who fulfill the Law are justified by God, but because we are
all far from observing the Law, we infer that the works which should
be most effectual to justification are of no avail to us, because we
are destitute of them. In regard to vulgar Papists or Schoolmen,
they are here doubly wrong, both in calling faith assurance of
conscience while waiting to receive from God the reward of merits,
and in interpreting divine grace to mean not the imputation of
gratuitous righteousness, but the assistance of the Spirit in the
study of holiness. They quote from an Apostle: "He that comes to God
must believe that he is, and that he is the rewarder of them that
diligently seek him," (Heb. 11: 6.) But they observe not what the
method of seeking is. Then in regard to the term grace, it is plain
from their writings that they labour under a delusion. For Lombard
holds that justification is given to us by Christ in two ways.
"First," says he, (Lombard, Sent. Lib. 3, Dist. 16, c. 11,) "the
death of Christ justifies us when by means of it the love by which
we are made righteous is excited in our hearts; and, secondly, when
by means of it sin is extinguished, sin by which the devil held us
captive, but by which he cannot now procure our condemnation." You
see here that the chief office of divine grace in our justification
he considers to be its directing us to good works by the agency of
the Holy Spirit. He intended, no doubt, to follow the opinion of
Augustine, but he follows it at a distance, and even wanders far
from a true imitation of him both obscuring what was clearly stated
by Augustine, and making what in him was less pure more corrupt. The
Schools have always gone from worse to worse, until at length, in
their downward path, they have degenerated into a kind of
Pelagianism. Even the sentiment of Augustine, or at least his mode
of expressing it, cannot be entirely approved of. For although he is
admirable in stripping man of all merit of righteousness, and
transferring the whole praise of it to God, yet he classes the grace
by which we are regenerated to newness of life under the head of
sanctification.
    16. Scripture, when it treats of justification by faith, leads
us in a very different direction. Turning away our view from our own
works, it bids us look only to the mercy of God and the perfection
of Christ. The order of justification which it sets before us is
this: first, God of his mere gratuitous goodness is pleased to
embrace the sinner, in whom he sees nothing that can move him to
mercy but wretchedness, because he sees him altogether naked and
destitute of good works. He, therefore, seeks the cause of kindness
in himself, that thus he may affect the sinner by a sense of his
goodness, and induce him, in distrust of his own works, to cast
himself entirely upon his mercy for salvation. This is the meaning
of faith by which the sinner comes into the possession of salvation,
when, according to the doctrine of the Gospel, he perceives that he
is reconciled by God; when, by the intercession of Christ, he
obtains the pardon of his sins, and is justified; and, though
renewed by the Spirit of God, considers that, instead of leaning on
his own works, he must look solely to the righteousness which is
treasured up for him in Christ. When these things are weighed
separately, they will clearly explain our view, though they may be
arranged in a better order than that in which they are here
presented. But it is of little consequence, provided they are so
connected with each other as to give us a full exposition and solid
confirmation of the whole subject.
    17. Here it is proper to remember the relation which we
previously established between faith and the Gospel; faith being
said to justify because it receives and embraces the righteousness
offered in the Gospel. By the very fact of its being said to be
offered by the Gospel, all consideration of works is excluded. This
Paul repeatedly declares, and in two passages, in particular, most
clearly demonstrates. In the Epistle to the Romans, comparing the
Law and the Gospel, he says, "Moses describeth the righteousness
which is of the law, That the man which does those things shall live
by them. But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this
wise, - If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and
shalt believe in thine heart that God has raised him from the dead,
thou shalt be saved," (Rom. 10: 5, 6: 9.) Do you see how he makes
the distinction between the Law and the Gospel to be, that the
former gives justification to works, whereas the latter bestows it
freely without any help from works? This is a notable passage, and
may free us from many difficulties if we understand that the
justification which is given us by the Gospel is free from any terms
of Law. It is for this reason he more than once places the promise
in diametrical opposition to the Law. "If the inheritance be of the
law, it is no more of promise," (Gal. 3: 18.) Expressions of similar
import occur in the same chapter. Undoubtedly the Law also has its
promises; and, therefore, between them and the Gospel promises there
must be some distinction and difference, unless we are to hold that
the comparison is inept. And in what can the difference consist
unless in this that the promises of the Gospel are gratuitous, and
founded on the mere mercy of God, whereas the promises of the Law
depend on the condition of works? But let no pester here allege that
only the righteousness which men would obtrude upon God of their own
strength and free will is repudiated; since Paul declares, without
exceptions that the Law gained nothing by its commands, being such
as none, not only of mankind in general, but none even of the most
perfect, are able to fulfill. Love assuredly is the chief
commandment in the Law, and since the Spirit of God trains us to
love, it cannot but be a cause of righteousness in us, though that
righteousness even in the saints is defective, and therefore of no
value as a ground of merit.
    18. The second passage is, "That no man is justified by the law
in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by
faith. And the law is not of faith: but, The man that does them
shall live in them," (Gal. 3: 11, 12; Hab. 2: 4.) How could the
argument hold unless it be true that works are not to be taken into
account, but are to be altogether separated? The Law, he says, is
different from faith. Why? Because to obtain justification by it,
works are required; and hence it follows, that to obtain
justification by the Gospel they are not required. From this
statement, it appears that those who are justified by faith are
justified independent of, nay, in the absence of, the merit of
works, because faith receives that righteousness which the Gospel
bestows. But the Gospel differs from the Law in this, that it does
not confine justification to works, but places it entirely in the
mercy of God. In like manner, Paul contends, in the Epistle to the
Romans, that Abraham had no ground of glorying, because faith was
imputed to him for righteousness, (Rom. 4: 2;) and he adds in
confirmation, that the proper place for justification by faith is
where there are no works to which reward is due. "To him that
worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt." What is
given to faith is gratuitous, this being the force of the meaning of
the words which he there employs. Shortly after he adds, "Therefore
it is of faith, that it might be by grace," (Rom. 4: 16;) and hence
infers that the inheritance is gratuitous because it is procured by
faith. How so but just because faiths without the aid of works leans
entirely on the mercy of God? And in the same sense, doubtless, he
elsewhere teaches, that the righteousness of God without the Law was
manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, (Rom. 3:
21;) for excluding the Law, he declares that it is not aided by
worlds, that we do not obtain it by working, but are destitute when
we draw near to receive it.
    19. The reader now perceives with what fairness the Sophists of
the present day cavil at our doctrine, when we say that a man is
justified by faith alone, (Rom. 4: 2.) They dare not deny that he is
justified by faith, seeing Scripture so often declares it; but as
the word alone is nowhere expressly used they will not tolerate its
being added. Is it so? What answer, then will they give to the words
of Paul, when he contends that righteousness is not of faith unless
it be gratuitous? How can it be gratuitous, and yet by works? By
what cavils, moreover, will they evade his declaration in another
place, that in the Gospel the righteousness of God is manifested?
(Rom. 1: 17.) If righteousness is manifested in the Gospel, it is
certainly not a partial or mutilated, but a full and perfect
righteousness. The Law, therefore, has no part in its and their
objection to the exclusive word alone is not only unfounded, but is
obviously absurd. Does he not plainly enough attribute everything to
faith alone when he disconnects it with works? What I would ask, is
meant by the expressions, "The righteousness of God without the law
is manifested;" "Being justified freely by his grace;" "Justified by
faith without the deeds of the law?" (Rom. 3: 21, 24, 28.) Here they
have an ingenious subterfuge, one which, though not of their own
devising but taken from Origin and some ancient writers, is most
childish. They pretend that the works excluded are ceremonial, not
moral works. Such profit do they make by their constant wrangling,
that they possess not even the first elements of logic. Do they
think the Apostle was raving when he produced, in proof of his
doctrine, these passages? "The man that does them shall live in
them," (Gal. 3: 12.) "Cursed is every one that continueth not in all
things that are written in the book of the law to do them," (Gal. 3:
10.) Unless they are themselves raving, they will not say that life
was promised to the observers of ceremonies, and the curse denounced
only against the transgressors of them. If these passages are to be
understood of the Moral Law, there cannot be a doubt that moral
works also are excluded from the power of justifying. To the same
effect are the arguments which he employs. "By the deeds of the law
there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is
the knowledge of sin," (Rom. 3: 20.) "The law worketh wrath," (Rom.
4: 15,) and therefore not righteousness. "The law cannot pacify the
conscience," and therefore cannot confer righteousness. "Faith is
imputed for righteousness," and therefore righteousness is not the
reward of works, but is given without being due. Because "we are
justified by faith," boasting is excluded. "Had there been a law
given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have
been by the law. But the Scripture has concluded all under sin, that
the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that
believe," (Gal. 3: 21, 22.) Let them maintain, if they dare, that
these things apply to ceremonies, and not to morals, and the very
children will laugh at their effrontery. The true conclusion,
therefore, is, that the whole Law is spoken of when the power of
justifying is denied to it.
    20. Should any one wonder why the Apostle, not contented with
having named works, employs this addition, the explanation is easy.
However highly works may be estimated, they have their whole value
more from the approbation of God than from their own dignity. For
who will presume to plume himself before God on the righteousness of
works, unless in so far as He approves of them? Who will presume to
demand of Him a reward except in so far as He has promised it? It is
owing entirely to the goodness of God that works are deemed worthy
of the honor and reward of righteousness; and, therefore, their
whole value consists in this, that by means of them we endeavor to
manifest obedience to God. Wherefore, in another passage, the
Apostle, to prove that Abraham could not be justified by works,
declares, "that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in
Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after,
cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect,"
(Gal. 3: 17.) The unskillful would ridicule the argument that there
could be righteous works before the promulgation of the Law, but the
Apostle, knowing that works could derive this value solely from the
testimony and honor conferred on them by God, takes it for granted
that, previous to the Law, they had no power of justifying. We see
why he expressly terms them works of Law when he would deny the
power of justifying to theme viz., because it was only with regard
to such works that a question could be raised; although he
sometimes, without addition, excepts all kinds of works whatever, as
when on the testimony of David he speaks of the man to whom the Lord
imputeth righteousness without works, (Rom. 4: 5, 6.) No cavils,
therefore, can enable them to prove that the exclusion of works is
not general. In vain do they lay hold of the frivolous subtilty,
that the faith alone, by which we are justified, "worketh by love,"
and that love, therefore, is the foundation of justification. We,
indeed, acknowledge with Paul, that the only faith which justifies
is that which works by love, (Gal. 5: G;) but love does not give it
its justifying power. Nay, its only means of justifying consists in
its bringing us into communication with the righteousness of Christ.
Otherwise the whole argument, on which the Apostle insists with so
much earnestness, would fall. to him that worketh is the reward not
reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but
believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted
for righteousness." Could he express more clearly than in this word,
that there is justification in faith only where there are no works
to which reward is due, and that faith is imputed for righteousness
only when righteousness is conferred freely without merit?
    21. Let us now consider the truth of what was said in the
definition, viz., that justification by faith is reconciliation with
God, and that this consists solely in the remission of sins. We must
always return to the axioms that the wrath of God lies upon all men
so long as they continue sinners. This is elegantly expressed by
Isaiah in these words: "Behold, the Lord's hand is not shortened,
that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: but
your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your
sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear," (Isaiah 59:
1, 2.) We are here told that sin is a separation between God and
man; that His countenance is turned away from the sinner; and that
it cannot be otherwise, since, to have any intercourse with sin is
repugnant to his righteousness. Hence the Apostle shows that man is
at enmity with God until he is restored to favour by Christ, (Rom.
5: 8-l0.) When the Lord, therefore, admits him to union, he is said
to justify him, because he can neither receive him into favor, nor
unite him to himself, without changing his condition from that of a
sinner into that of a righteous man. We adds that this is done by
remission of sins. For if those whom the Lord has reconciled to
himself are estimated by works, they will still prove to be in
reality sinners, while they ought to be pure and free from sin. It
is evident therefore, that the only way in which those whom God
embraces are made righteous, is by having their pollutions wiped
away by the remission of sins, so that this justification may be
termed in one word the remission of sins.
    22. Both of these become perfectly clear from the words of
Paul: "God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, not
imputing their trespasses unto them; and has committed unto us the
word of reconciliation." He then subjoins the sum of his embassy:
"He has made him to be sin for us who knew no sin; that we might be
made the righteousness of God in him," (2 Cor. 5: l9-21.) He here
uses righteousness and reconciliation indiscriminately, to make us
understand that the one includes the other. The mode of obtaining
this righteousness he explains to be, that our sins are not imputed
to us. Wherefore, you cannot henceforth doubt how God justifies us
when you hear that he reconciles us to himself by not imputing our
faults. In the same manner, in the Epistle to the Romans, he proves,
by the testimony of David, that righteousness is imputed without
works, because he declares the man to be blessed "whose
transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered," and "unto whom the
Lord imputeth not iniquity," (Rom. 4: 6; Ps. 32: 1, 2.) There he
undoubtedly uses blessedness for righteousness; and as he declares
that it consists in forgiveness of sins, there is no reason why we
should define it otherwise. Accordingly, Zacharias, the father of
John the Baptist, sings that the knowledge of salvation consists in
the forgiveness of sins, (Luke 1: 77.) The same course was followed
by Paul when, in addressing the people of Antioch, he gave them a
summary of salvation. Luke states that he concluded in this way:
"Through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins, and
by him all that believe are justified from all things from which ye
could not be justified by the law of Moses," (Acts 12: 38, 39.) Thus
the Apostle connects forgiveness of sins with justification in such
a way as to show that they are altogether the same; and hence he
properly argues that justification, which we owe to the indulgence
of God, is gratuitous. Nor should it seem an unusual mode of
expression to say that believers are justified before God not by
works, but by gratuitous acceptance, seeing it is frequently used in
Scripture, and sometimes also by ancient writers. Thus Augustine
says: "The righteousness of the saints in this world consists more
in the forgiveness of sins than the perfection of virtue," (August.
de Civitate Dei, lib. 19, cap. 27.) To this corresponds the
well-known sentiment of Bernard: "Not to sin is the righteousness of
God, but the righteousness of man is the indulgence of God,"
(Bernard, Serm. 22, 23 in Cant.) He previously asserts that Christ
is our righteousness in absolution, and, therefore, that those only
are just who have obtained pardon through mercy.
    23. Hence also it is proved, that it is entirely by the
intervention of Christ's righteousness that we obtain justification
before God. This is equivalent to saying that man is not just in
himself, but that the righteousness of Christ is communicated to him
by imputation, while he is strictly deserving of punishment. Thus
vanishes the absurd dogma, that man is justified by faith, inasmuch
as it brings him under the influence of the Spirit of God by whom he
is rendered righteous. This is so repugnant to the above doctrine
that it never can be reconciled with it. There can be no doubt that
he who is taught to seek righteousness out of himself does not
previously possess it in himself. This is most clearly declared by
the Apostle, when he says, that he who knew no sin was made an
expiatory victim for sin, that we might be made the righteousness of
God in him (2 Cor. 5: 21.) You see that our righteousness is not in
ourselves, but in Christ; that the only way in which we become
possessed of it is by being made partakers with Christ, since with
him we possess all riches. There is nothing repugnant to this in
what he elsewhere says: "God sending his own Son in the likeness of
sinful flesh, and for sin condemned sin in the flesh: that the
righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us," (Rom. 8: 3, 4.)
Here the only fulfillment to which he refers is that which we obtain
by imputation. Our Lord Jesus Christ communicates his righteousness
to us, and so by some wondrous ways in so far as pertains to the
justice of Gods transfuses its power into us. That this was the
Apostle's view is abundantly clear from another sentiment which he
had expressed a little before: "As by one man's disobedience many
were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made
righteous," (Rom. 5: 19.) To declare that we are deemed righteous,
solely because the obedience of Christ is imputed to us as if it
where our own, is just to place our righteousness in the obedience
of Christ. Wherefore, Ambrose appears to me to have most elegantly
adverted to the blessing of Jacob as an illustration of this
righteousness, when he says that as he who did not merit the
birthright in himself personated his brother, put on his garments
which gave forth a most pleasant odour, and thus introduced himself
to his father that he might receive a blessing to his own advantage,
though under the person of another, so we conceal ourselves under
the precious purity of Christ, our first-born brother, that we may
obtain an attestation of righteousness from the presence of God. The
words of Ambrose are, - "Isaac's smelling the odour of his garments,
perhaps means that we are justified not by works, but by faith,
since carnal infirmity is an impediment to works, but errors of
conduct are covered by the brightness of faith, which merits the
pardon of faults," (Ambrose de Jacobo et Vita Beats, Lib. 2, c. 2.)
And so indeed it is; for in order to appear in the presence of God
for salvation, we must send forth that fragrant odour, having our
vices covered and buried by his perfection.

Chapter 12.

12. Necessity of contemplating the judgment-seat of God, in order to
be seriously convinced of the doctrine of gratuitous justification.

    The divisions of this chapter are, - I. A consideration of the
righteousness of God overturns the righteousness of works, as is
plain from passages of Scripture, and the confession and example of
the saints, sec. 1-3. II. The same effect produced by a serious
examination of the conscience, and a constant citation to the divine
tribunal, sec. 4 and 5. III. Hence arises, in the hearts of the
godly, not hypocrisy, or a vain opinion of merit, but true humility.
This illustrated by the authority of Scripture and the example of
the Publican, sec. 6, 7. IV. Conclusion - arrogance and security
must be discarded, every man throwing an impediment in the way of
the divine goodness in proportion as he trusts to himself.

Sections.

1. Source of error on the subject of Justification. Sophists speak
    as if the question were to be discussed before some human
    tribunal. It relates to the majesty and justice of God. Hence
    nothing accepted without absolute perfection. Passages
    confirming this doctrine. If we descend to the righteousness of
    the Law, the curse immediately appears.
2. Source of hypocritical confidence. Illustrated by a simile.
    Exhortation. Testimony of Job, David, and Paul.
3. Confession of Augustine and Bernard.
4. Another engine overthrowing the righteousness of works, viz., a
    serious examination of the conscience, and a comparison between
    the perfection of God and the imperfection of man.
5. How it is that we so indulge this imaginary opinion of our own
    works. The proper remedy to be found in a consideration of the
    majesty of God and our own misery. A description of this
    misery.
6. Christian humility consists in laying aside the imaginary idea of
    our own righteousness, and trusting entirely to the mercy of
    God, apprehended by faith in Christ. This humility described.
    Proved by passages of Scripture.
7. The parable of the Publican explained.
8. Arrogance, security, and self-confidence, must be renounced.
    General rule, or summary of the above doctrine.

    1. Although the perfect truth of the above doctrine is proved
by clear passages of Scripture, yet we cannot clearly see how
necessary it is, before we bring distinctly into view the
foundations on which the whole discussion ought to rest. First,
then, let us remember that the righteousness which we are
considering is not that of a human, but of a heavenly tribunal; and
so beware of employing our own little standard to measure the
perfection which is to satisfy the justice of God. It is strange
with what rashness and presumption this is commonly defined. Nay, we
see that none talk more confidently, or, so to speak, more
blusteringly, of the righteousness of works than those whose
diseases are most palpable, and blemishes most apparent. This they
do because they reflect not on the righteousness of Christ, which,
if they had the slightest perception of it, they would never treat
with so much insult. It is certainly undervalued, if not recognized
to be so perfect that nothing can be accepted that is not in every
respect entire and absolute, and tainted by no impurity; such indeed
as never has been, and never will be, found in man. It is easy for
any man, within the precincts of the schools, to talk of the
sufficiency of works for justification; but when we come into the
presence of God there must be a truce to such talk. The matter is
there discussed in earnest, and is no longer a theatrical logomachy.
Hither must we turn our minds if we would inquire to any purpose
concerning true righteousness; the question must be: How shall we
answer the heavenly Judge when he calls us to account? Let us
contemplate that Judge, not as our own unaided intellect conceives
of him, but as he is portrayed to us in Scripture, (see especially
the Book of Job,) with a brightness which obscures the stars, a
strength which melts the mountains, an anger which shakes the earth,
a wisdom which takes the wise in their own craftiness, a purity
before which all things become impure, a righteousness to which not
even angels are equal, (so far is it from making the guilty
innocent,) a vengeance which once kindled burns to the lowest hell,
(Exod. 34: 7; Nahum 1: 3; Deut. 32: 22.) Let Him, I say, sit in
judgment on the actions of men, and who will feel secure in sisting
himself before his throne? "Who among us," says the prophets "shall
dwell with the devouring fire? who among us shall dwell with
everlasting burnings? He that walketh righteously, and speaketh
uprightly," &c., (Isaiah 33: 14, 15.) Let whoso will come forth.
Nay, the answer shows that no man can. For, on the other hand, we
hear the dreadful voice: "If thou, Lord, shouldst mark our
iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?" (Ps. 130: 3.) All must
immediately perish, as Job declares, "Shall mortal man be more just
than God? shall a man be more pure than his Maker? Behold, he put no
trust in his servants; and his angels he charged with folly: How
much less in them that dwell in houses of clay, whose foundation is
in the dust, which are crushed before the moth? They are destroyed
from morning to evening," (Job 4: 17-20.) Again, "Behold, he putteth
no trust in his saints; yea, the heavens are not clean in his sight.
How much more abominable and filthy is man, which drinketh iniquity
like water?" (Job 15: 15, 16.) I confess, indeed, that in the Book
of Job reference is made to a righteousness of a more exalted
description than the observance of the Law. It is of importance to
attend to this distinction; for even could a man satisfy the Law, he
could not stand the scrutiny of that righteousness which transcends
all our thoughts. Hence, although Job was not conscious of
offending, he is still dumb with astonishment, because he sees that
God could not be appeased even by the sanctity of angels, were their
works weighed in that supreme balance. But to advert no farther to
this righteousness, which is incomprehensible, I only say, that if
our life is brought to the standard of the written law, we are
lethargic indeed if we are not filled with dread at the many
maledictions which God has employed for the purpose of arousing us,
and among others, the following general one: "Cursed be he that
confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them," (Deut. 27:
26.) In short, the whole discussion of this subject will be insipid
and frivolous, unless we sist ourselves before the heavenly Judge,
and anxious for our acquittal, voluntarily humble ourselves,
confessing our nothingness.
    2. Thus then must we raise our eyes that we may learn to
tremble instead of vainly exulting. It is easy, indeed, when the
comparison is made among men, for every one to plume himself on some
quality which others ought not to despise; but when we rise to God,
that confidence instantly falls and dies away. The case of the soul
with regard to God is very analogous to that of the body in regard
to the visible firmament. The bodily eye, while employed in
surveying adjacent objects, is pleased with its own perspicacity;
but when directed to the sun, being dazzled and overwhelmed by the
refulgence, it becomes no less convinced of its weakness than it
formerly was of its power in viewing inferior objects. Therefore,
lest we deceive ourselves by vain confidence, let us recollect that
even though we deem ourselves equal or superior to other men, this
is nothing to God, by whose judgment the decision must be given. But
if our presumption cannot be tamed by these considerations, he will
answer us as he did the Pharisees, "Ye are they which justify
yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which
is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God,"
(Luke 16: 15.) Go now and make a proud boast of your righteousness
among men, while God in heaven abhors it. But what are the feelings
of the servants of God, of those who are truly taught by his Spirit?
"Enter not into judgment with thy servant; for in thy sight shall no
man living be justified," (Ps. 143: 2.) Another, though in a sense
somewhat different, says, "How should man be just with God? If he
will contend with him he cannot answer him one of a thousand," (Job
9: 2, 3.) Here we are plainly told what the righteousness of God is,
namely, a righteousness which no human works can satisfy which
charges us with a thousand sins, while not one sin can be excused.
Of this righteousness Paul, that chosen vessel of God, had formed a
just idea, when he declared, "I know nothing by myself, yet am I not
hereby justified," (1 Cor. 4: 4.)
    3. Such examples exist not in the sacred volume only; all pious
writers show that their sentiment was the same. Thus Augustine says,
"Of all pious men groaning under this burden of corruptible flesh,
and the infirmities of this life, the only hope is, that we have one
Mediator Jesus Christ the righteous, and that he intercedes for our
sins," (August. ad Bonif. lib. 3, c. 5.) What do we hear? If this is
their only hope, where is their confidence in works? When he says
only, he leaves no other. Bernard says, "And, indeed, where have the
infirm firm security and safe rest, but in the wounds of the Savior?
Hold it then the more securely, the more powerful he is to save. The
world frowns, the body presses, the devil lays snares: I fall not,
because I am founded on a firm rock. I have sinned a grievous sin:
conscience is troubled, but it shall not be overwhelmed, for I will
remember the wounds of the Lord." He afterwards concludes, "My
merit, therefore, is the compassion of the Lord; plainly I am not
devoid of merit so long as he is not devoid of commiseration. But if
the mercies of the Lord are many, equally many are my merits. Shall
I sing of my own righteousness? O Lord, I will make mention of thy
righteousness alone. That righteousness is mine also, being made
mine by God," (Bernard, Serm. 61, in Cantic.) Again, in another
passage, "Man's whole merit is to place his whole hope in him who
makes the whole man safe," (in Psal. Qui Habitat. Serm. 15.) In like
manner, reserving peace to himself, he leaves the glory to God: "Let
thy glory remain unimpaired: it is well with me if I have peace; I
altogether abjure boasting, lest if I should usurp what is not mine,
I lose also what is offered," (Serm. 13, in Cantic.) He says still
more plainly in another place: "Why is the Church solicitous about
merits? God purposely supplies her with a firmer and more secure
ground of boasting. There is no reason for asking by what merits may
we hope for blessings, especially when you hear in the prophet,
'Thus saith the Lord God, I do not this for your sakes, O house of
Israel, but for mine holy name's sake,' (Ezek. 36: 22, 32.) It is
sufficient for merit to know that merits suffice not; but as it is
sufficient for merit not to presume on merit, so to be without
merits is sufficient for condemnation," (Bernard, Serm. 68.) The
free use of the term merits for good works must be pardoned to
custom. Bernard's purpose was to alarm hypocrites, who turned the
grace of God into licentiousness, as he shortly after explains:
"Happy the church which neither wants merit without presumption, nor
presumption without merit. It has ground to presume, but not merit.
It has merit, merit to deserve, not presume. Is not the absence of
presumption itself a merit? He, therefore, to whom the many mercies
of the Lord furnish ample grounds of boasting, presumes the more
securely that he presumes not," (Bernard, Serm. 68.)
    4. Thus, indeed, it is. Aroused consciences, when they have to
do with God, feel this to be the only asylum in which they can
breathe safely. For if the stars which shine most brightly by night
lose their brightness on the appearance of the sun, what think we
will be the case with the highest purity of man when contrasted with
the purity of God? For the scrutiny will be most strict, penetrating
to the most hidden thoughts of the heart. As Paul says, it "will
bring to light the hidden things of darkness and will make manifest
the counsels of the heart," (1 Cor. 4: 5;) will compel the reluctant
and dissembling conscience to bring forward every thing, even things
which have now escaped our memory. The devil, aware of all the
iniquities which he has induced us to perpetrate, will appear as
accuser; the external show of good works, the only thing now
considered, will then be of no avail; the only thing demanded will
be the true intent of the will. Hence hypocrisy, not only that by
which a man, though consciously guilty before God, affects to make
an ostentatious display before man, but that by which each imposes
upon himself before God, (so prone are we to soothe and flatter
ourselves,) will fall confounded, how much soever it may now swell
with pride and presumption. Those who do not turn their thoughts to
this scene may be able for the moment calmly and complacently to
rear up a righteousness for themselves; but this the judgment of God
will immediately overthrow, just as great wealth amassed in a dream
vanishes the moment we awake. Those who, as in the presence of God,
inquire seriously into the true standard of righteousness, will
certainly find that all the works of men, if estimated by their own
worth, are nothing but vileness and pollution, that what is commonly
deemed justice is with God mere iniquity; what is deemed integrity
is pollution; what deemed glory is ignominy.
    5. Let us not decline to descend from this contemplation of the
divine perfection, to look into ourselves without flattery or blind
self-love. It is not strange that we are so deluded in this matter,
seeing none of us can avoid that pestilential self-indulgence,
which, as Scripture proclaims, is naturally inherent in all: "Every
way of a man is right in his own eyes," says Solomon, (Prov. 21: 2.)
And again, "All the ways of a man are clean in his own eyes," (Prov.
16: 2.) What then? does this hallucination excuse him? No, indeed,
as Solomon immediately adds, "The Lord weigheth the spirits;" that
is, while man flatters himself by wearing an external mask of
righteousness, the Lord weighs the hidden impurity of the heart in
his balance. Seeing, therefore, that nothing is gained by such
flattery, let us not voluntarily delude ourselves to our own
destruction. To examine ourselves properly, our conscience must be
called to the judgment-seat of God. His light is necessary to
disclose the secret recesses of wickedness which otherwise lie too
deeply hid. Then only shall we clearly perceive what the value of
our works is; that man, so far from being just before God, is but
rottenness and a worm, abominable and vain, drinking in "iniquity
like water." For "who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not
one," (Job 14: 5.) Then we shall experience the truth of what Job
said of himself: "If I justify myself, mine own mouth shall condemn
me: if I say I am perfect, it shall prove me perverse," (Job 9: 20.)
Nor does the complaint which the prophet made concerning Israel
apply to one age only. It is true of every age, that "all we like
sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way,"
(Isaiah 53: 6.) Indeed, he there comprehends all to whom the gift of
redemption was to come. And the strictness of the examination ought
to be continued until it have completely alarmed us, and in that way
prepared us for receiving the grace of Christ. For he is deceived
who thinks himself capable of enjoying it, until he have laid aside
all loftiness of mind. There is a well-known declaration, "God
resisteth the proud, but giveth grace to the humble," (1 Pet. 5: 5.)
    6. But what means is there of humbling us if we do not make way
for the mercy of God by our utter indigence and destitution? For I
call it not humility, so long as we think there is any good
remaining in us. Those who have joined together the two things, to
think humbly of ourselves before God and yet hold our own
righteousness in some estimation, have hitherto taught a pernicious
hypocrisy. For if we confess to God contrary to what we feel, we
wickedly lie to him; but we cannot feel as we ought without seeing
that every thing like a ground of boasting is completely crushed.
Therefore, when you hear from the prophets "thou wilt save the
afflicted people; but wilt bring down high looks" (Ps. 28: 27,)
consider, first, that there is no access to salvation unless all
pride is laid aside and true humility embraced; secondly, that that
humility is not a kind of moderation by which you yield to God some
article of your right, (thus men are called humble in regard to each
other when they neither conduct themselves haughtily nor insult over
other, though they may still entertain some consciousness of their
own excellence,) but that it is the unfeigned submission of a mind
overwhelmed by a serious conviction of its want and misery. Such is
the description every where given by the word of God. When in
Zephaniah the Lord speaks thus, "I will take away out of the midst
of thee them that rejoice in thy pride, and thou shalt no more be
haughty because of my holy mountain. I will also leave in the midst
of thee an afflicted and poor people, and they shall trust in the
name of the Lord," (Zeph. 3: 11, 12,) does he not plainly show who
are the humble, viz., those who lie afflicted by a knowledge of
their poverty? On the contrary, he describes the proud as rejoicing,
such being the mode in which men usually express their delight in
prosperity. To the humble, whom he designs to save, he leaves
nothing but hope in the Lord. Thus, also, in Isaiah, "To this man
will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and
trembleth at my word," (Isaiah 66: 2.) again, "Thus saith the high
and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell
in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and
humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the
heart of the contrite ones," (Isaiah 57: 15.) By the term contrition
which you so often hear, understand a wounded heart, which, humbling
the individual to the earth, allows him not to rise. With such
contrition must your heart be wounded, if you would, according to
the declaration of God, be exalted with the humble. If this is not
your case, you shall be humbled by the mighty hand of God to your
shame and disgrace.
    7. Our divine Master, not confining himself to words, has by a
parable set before us, as in a picture, a representation of true
humility. He brings forward a publican, who standing afar off, and
not daring to lift up his eyes to heaven, smites upon his breast,
laments aloud, and exclaims, " God be merciful to me a sinner,"
(Luke 18: 13.) Let us not suppose that he gives the signs of a
fictitious modesty when he dares not come near or lift up his eyes
to heaven, but, smiting upon his breast, confesses himself a sinner;
let us know that these are the evidences of his internal feeling.
With him our Lord contrasts the Pharisee, who thanks God "I am not
as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this
publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I
possess." In this public confession he admits that the righteousness
which he possesses is the gift of God; but because of his confidence
that he is righteous, he departs from the presence of God unaccepted
and abominated. The publican acknowledging his iniquity is
justified. Hence we may see how highly our humility is valued by the
Lord: our breast cannot receive his mercy until deprived completely
of all opinion of its own worth. When such an opinion is
entertained, the door of mercy is shut. That there might be no doubt
on this matter, the mission on which Christ was sent into the world
by his Father was "to preach good tidings to the meek," "to bind up
the broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the
opening of the prison to them that are bound; to proclaim the
acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God; to
comfort all that mourn; to appoint unto them that mourn in Zion to
give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the
garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness," (Isa. 69: 1-3.) In
fulfillment of that mission, the only persons whom he invites to
share in his beneficence are the "weary and heavy laden." In another
passage he says, " I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners
to repentance," (Matth. 11: 28; 9: 13.)
    8. Therefore if we would make way for the call of Christ, we
must put far from us all arrogance and confidence. The former is
produced by a foolish persuasion of self-righteousness, when a man
thinks that he has something in himself which deservedly recommends
him to God; the latter may exist without any confidence in works.
For many sinners, intoxicated with the pleasures of vice, think not
of the judgment of God. Lying stupefied, as it were, by a kind of
lethargy, they aspire not to the offered mercy. It is not less
necessary to shake off torpor of this description than every kind of
confidence in ourselves, in order that we may haste to Christ
unencumbered, and while hungry and empty be filled with his
blessings. Never shall we have sufficient confidence in him unless
utterly distrustful of ourselves; never shall we take courage in him
until we first despond of ourselves; never shall we have full
consolation in him until we cease to have any in ourselves. When we
have entirely discarded all self-confidence, and trust solely in the
certainty of his goodness, we are fit to apprehend and obtain the
grace of God. "When," (as Augustine says,) "forgetting our own
merits, we embrace the gifts of Christ, because if he should seek
for merits in us we should not obtain his gifts," (August. de Verb.
Apost. 8.) With this Bernard admirably accords, comparing the proud
who presume in the least on their merits, to unfaithful servants,
who wickedly take the merit of a favor merely passing through them,
just as if a wall were to boast of producing the ray which it
receives through the window, (Bernard, Serm. 13, in Cant.) Not to
dwell longer here, let us lay down this short but sure and general
rule, That he is prepared to reap the fruits of the divine mercy who
has thoroughly emptied himself, I say not of righteousness, (he has
none,) but of a vain and blustering show of righteousness; for to
whatever extent any man rests in himself, to the same extent he
impedes the beneficence of God.

Chapter 13.

13. Two things to be observed in gratuitous justification.

    The divisions of this chapter are, - I. The glory of God, and
peace of conscience, both secured by gratuitous justification. An
insult to the glory of God to glory in ourselves and seek
justification out of Christ, whose righteousness, apprehended by
faith, is imputed to all the elect for reconciliation and eternal
salvation, sec. 1, 2. II. Peace of conscience cannot be obtained in
any other way than by gratuitous justification. This fully proved,
sec. 3-5.
    
Sections.

1. The glory of God remains untarnished, when he alone is
    acknowledged to be just. This proved from Scripture.
2. Those who glory in themselves glory against God. Objection.
    Answer, confirmed by the authority of Paul and Peter.
3. Peace of conscience obtained by free justification only.
    Testimony of Solomon, of conscience itself, and the Apostle
    Paul, who contends that faith is made vain if righteousness
    come by the law.
4 The promise confirmed by faith in the mercy of Christ. This is
    confirmed by Augustine and Bernard, is in accordance with what
    has been above stated, and is illustrated by clear predictions
    of the prophets.
5. Farther demonstration by an Apostle. Refutation of a sophism.
    
    1. Here two ends must be kept specially in view, namely, that
the glory of God be maintained unimpaired, and that our consciences,
in the view of his tribunal, be secured in peaceful rest and calm
tranquillity. When the question relates to righteousness, we see how
often and how anxiously Scripture exhorts us to give the whole
praise of it to God. Accordingly, the Apostle testifies that the
purpose of the Lord in conferring righteousness upon us in Christ,
was to demonstrate his own righteousness. The nature of this
demonstration he immediately subjoins, viz., "that he might be just,
and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus," (Rom. 3: 25.)
Observe, that the righteousness of God is not sufficiently
displayed, unless He alone is held to be righteous, and freely
communicates righteousness to the undeserving. For this reason it is
his will, that "every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may
become guilty before God," (Rom. 3: 19.) For so long as a man has
any thing, however small, to say in his own defense, so long he
deducts somewhat from the glory of God. Thus we are taught in
Ezekiel how much we glorify his name by acknowledging our iniquity:
"Then shall ye remember your ways and all your doings, wherein ye
have been defiled; and ye shall loathe yourselves in your own sight,
for all your evils that ye have committed. And ye shall know that I
am the Lord, when I have wrought with you for my name's sake, not
according to your wicked ways, nor according to your corrupt
doings," (Ezek. 20: 43, 44.) If part of the true knowledge of God
consists in being oppressed by a consciousness of our own iniquity,
and in recognizing him as doing good to those who are unworthy of
it, why do we attempt, to our great injury, to steal from the Lord
even one particle of the praise of unmerited kindness? In like
manner, when Jeremiah exclaims, "Let not the wise man glory in his
wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the
rich man glory in his riches: but let him that glorieth glory" in
the Lord, (Jer. 9: 23, 24,) does he not intimate, that the glory of
the Lord is infringed when man glories in himself? To this purpose,
indeed, Paul accommodates the words when he says, that all the parts
of our salvation are treasured up with Christ, that we may glory
only in the Lord, (1 Cor. 1: 29.) For he intimates, that whosoever
imagines he has any thing of his own, rebels against God, and
obscures his glory.
    2. Thus, indeed, it is: we never truly glory in him until we
have utterly discarded our own glory. It must, therefore, be
regarded as an universal proposition, that whoso glories in himself
glories against God. Paul indeed considers, that the whole world is
not made subject to God until every ground of glorying has been
withdrawn from men, (Rom. 3: 19.) Accordingly, Isaiah, when he
declares that "in the Lord shall all the seed of Israel be
justified" adds, "and shall glory (Isa. 45: 25 ,) as if he had said
that the elect are justified by the Lord, in order that they may
glory in him, and in none else. The way in which we are to glory in
the Lord he had explained in the preceding verse, "Unto me every
knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear;" "Surely, shall one say,
in the Lord have I righteousness and strength, even to him shall men
come." Observe, that the thing required is not simple confession,
but confession confirmed by an oath, that it might not be imagined
that any kind of fictitious humility might suffice. And let no man
here allege that he does not glory, when without arrogance he
recognizes his own righteousness; such a recognition cannot take
place without generating confidence, nor such confidence without
begetting boasting. Let us remember, therefore, that in the whole
discussion concerning justification the great thing to be attended
to is, that God's glory be maintained entire and unimpaired; since
as the Apostle declares, it was in demonstration of his own
righteousness that he shed his favor upon us; it was "that he might
be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus," (Rom.
3: 26.) Hence, in another passage, having said that the Lord
conferred salvation upon us, in order that he might show forth the
glory of his name, (Eph. 1: 6,) he afterwards, as if repeating the
same thing, adds, "By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not
of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man
should boast," (Eph. 2: 8.) And Peter, when he reminds us that we
are called to the hope of salvation, "that ye should show forth the
praises of him who has called you out of darkness into his marvelous
light," (1 Pet. 2: 9,) doubtless intends thus to proclaim in the
ears of believers only the praises of God, that they may bury in
profound silence all arrogance of the flesh. The sum is, that man
cannot claim a single particle of righteousness to himself, without
at the same time detracting from the glory of the divine
righteousness.
    3. If we now inquire in what way the conscience can be quieted
as in the view of God, we shall find that the only way is by having
righteousness bestowed upon us freely by the gift of God. Let us
always remember the words of Solomon, "Who can say I have made my
heart clean, I am free from my sin?' (Prov. 20: 9.) Undoubtedly
there is not one man who is not covered with infinite pollutions.
Let the most perfect man descend into his own conscience, and bring
his actions to account, and what will the result be? Will he feel
calm and quiescent, as if all matters were well arranged between
himself and God; or will he not rather be stung with dire torment,
when he sees that the ground of condemnation is within him if he be
estimated by his works? Conscience, when it beholds God, must either
have sure peace with his justice, or be beset by the terrors of
hell. We gain nothing, therefore, by discoursing of righteousness,
unless we hold it to be a righteousness stable enough to support our
souls before the tribunal of God. When the soul is able to appear
intrepidly in the presence of God, and receive his sentence without
dismay, then only let us know that we have found a righteousness
that is not fictitious. It is not, therefore, without cause, that
the Apostle insists on this matter. I prefer giving it in his words
rather than my own: "If they which are of the law be heirs, faith is
made void, and the promise made of no effect," (Rom. 4: 14.) He
first infers that faith is made void if the promise of righteousness
has respect to the merit of our works, or depends on the observance
of the law. Never could any one rest securely in it, for never could
he feel fully assured that he had fully satisfied the law; and it is
certain that no man ever fully satisfied it by works. Not to go far
for proof of this, every one who will use his eyes aright may be his
own witness. Hence it appears how deep and dark the abyss is into
which hypocrisy plunges the minds of men, when they indulge so
securely as, without hesitations to oppose their flattery to the
judgment of God, as if they were relieving him from his office as
judge. Very different is the anxiety which fills the breasts of
believers, who sincerely examine themselves. Every mind, therefore,
would first begin to hesitate, and at length to despair, while each
determined for itself with how great a load of debt it was still
oppressed, and how far it was from coming up to the enjoined
condition. Thus, then, faith would be oppressed and extinguished. To
have faith is not to fluctuate, to vary, to be carried up and down,
to hesitate, remain in suspense, vacillate, in fine, to despair; it
is to possess sure certainty and complete security of mind, to have
whereon to rest and fix your foot.
    4. Paul, moreover, adds, that the promise itself would be
rendered null and void. For if its fulfillment depends on our merits
when pray, will we be able to come the length of meriting the favor
of God? Nay, the second clause is a consequence of the former, since
the promise will not be fulfilled unless to those who put faith in
it. Faith therefore failing, no power will remain in the promise.
"Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace, to the end the
promise might be sure to all the seed," (Rom. 4: 16.) It was
abundantly confirmed when made to rest on the mercy of God alone,
for mercy and truth are united by an indissoluble tie; that is,
whatever God has mercifully promised he faithfully performs. Thus
David, before he asks salvation according to the word of God, first
places the source of it in his mercy. "Let, I pray thee, thy
merciful kindness be for my comfort, according to thy word unto thy
servant," (Ps. 119: 76.) And justly, for nothing but mere mercy
induces God to promise. Here, then, we must place, and, as it were,
firmly fix our whole hope, paying no respect to our works, and
asking no assistance from them. And lest you should suppose that
there is any thing novel in what I say, Augustine also enjoins us so
to act. "Christ," says he, "will reign forever among his servants.
This God has promised, God has spoken; if this is not enough, God
has sworn. Therefore, as the promise stands firm, not in respect of
our merits, but in respect of his mercy, no one ought to tremble in
announcing that of which he cannot doubt," (August. in Ps. 88,
Tract. 50.) Thus Bernard also, "Who can be saved? ask the disciples
of Christ. He replies, With men it is impossible, but not with God.
This is our whole confidence, this our only consolation; this the
whole ground of our hope: but being assured of the possibility, what
are we to say as to his willingness? Who knows whether he is
deserving of love or hatred? (Eccles. 9: 1.) 'Who has known the mind
of the Lord that he may instruct him?' (1 Cor. 2: 16.) Here it is
plain, faith must come to our aid: here we must have the assistance
of truth, in order that the secret purpose of the Father respecting
us may be revealed by the Spirit, and the Spirit testifying may
persuade our hearts that we are the sons of God. But let him
persuade by calling and justifying freely by faith: in these there
is a kind of transition from eternal predestination to future
glory," (Bert. in Dedica. Templi, Serm. 5.) Let us thus briefly
conclude: Scripture indicates that the promises of God are not surer
unless they are apprehended with full assurance of conscience; it
declares that wherever there is doubt or uncertainty, the promises
are made void; on the other hand, that they can only waver and
fluctuate if they depend on our works. Therefore, either our
righteousness must perish, or without any consideration of our
works, place must be given to faith alone, whose nature it is to
prick up the ear, and shut the eye; that is, to be intent on the
promise only, to give up all idea of any dignity or merit in man.
Thus is fulfilled the celebrated prophecy of Zechariah: "I will
remove the iniquity of that land in one day. In that day, saith the
Lord of hosts, shall ye call every man his neighbor under the vine,
and under the fig-tree," (Zech. 3: 9, 10.) Here the prophet
intimates that the only way in which believers can enjoy true peace,
is by obtaining the remission of their sins. For we must attend to
this peculiarity in the prophets, that when they discourse of the
kingdom of Christ, they set forth the external mercies of God as
types of spiritual blessings. Hence Christ is called the Prince of
Peace, and our peace, Isaiah 9: 6; Eph. 2: 14,) because he calms all
the agitations of conscience. If the method is asked, we must come
to the sacrifice by which God was appeased, for no man will ever
cease to tremble, until he hold that God is propitiated solely by
that expiation in which Christ endured his anger. In short, peace
must be sought nowhere but in the agonies of Christ our Redeemer.
    5. But why employ a more obscure testimony? Paul uniformly
declares that the conscience can have no peace or quiet joy until it
is held for certain that we are justified by faith. And he at the
same time declares whence this certainty is derived, viz., when "the
love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost," (Rom.
5: 5;) as if he had said that our Souls cannot have peace until we
are fully assured that we are pleasing to God. Hence he elsewhere
exclaims in the person of believers in general, "Who shall separate
us from the love of Christ?" (Rom. 8: 35.) Until we have reached
that haven, the slightest breeze will make us tremble, but so long
as the Lord is our Shepherd, we shall walk without fear in the
valley of the shadow of death, (Ps. 23.) Thus those who pretend that
justification by faith consists in being regenerated and made just,
by living spiritually, have never tasted the sweetness of grace in
trusting that God will be propitious. Hence also, they know no more
of praying aright than do the Turks or any other heathen people.
For, as Paul declares, faith is not true, unless it suggest and
dictate the delightful name of Father; nay, unless it open our
mouths and enable us freely to cry, Abba, Father. This he expresses
more clearly in another passage, "In whom we have boldness and
access with confidence by the faith of him," (Eph. 3: 12.) This,
certainly, is not obtained by the gift of regeneration, which, as it
is always defective in the present state, contains within it many
grounds of doubt. Wherefore, we must have recourse to this remedy;
we must hold that the only hope which believers have of the heavenly
inheritance is, that being in grafted into the body of Christ, they
are justified freely. For, in regard to justification, faith is
merely passives bringing nothing of our own to procure the favor of
God, but receiving from Christ every thing that we want.

Chapter 14.

14. The beginning of justification. In what sense progressive.
    
    To illustrate what has been already said, and show what kind of
righteousness man can have during the whole course of his life,
mankind are divided into four classes. I. First class considered,
sec. 1-6. II. Second and third classes considered together, sec. 7,
8. III. Fourth class considered, sec. 9 to end.
    
Sections.

1. Men either idolatrous, profane, hypocritical, or regenerate. 1.
    Idolaters void of righteousness, full of unrighteousness, and
    hence in the sight of God altogether wretched and undone.
2. Still a great difference in the characters of men. This
    difference manifested. 1. In the gifts of God. 2. In the
    distinction between honorable and base. 3. In the blessings of
    he present life.
3. All human virtue, how praiseworthy soever it may appear, is
    corrupted. 1. By impurity of heart. 2. By the absence of a
    proper nature.
4. By the want of Christ, without whom there is no life.
5. Natural condition of man as described by Scripture. All men dead
    in sins before regeneration.
6. Passages of Scripture to this effect. Vulgar error confounding
    the righteousness of works with the redemption purchased by
    Christ.
7. The second and third classes of men, comprehending hypocrites and
    Christians in name only. Every action of theirs deserves
    condemnation. Passage from Haggai. Objection. Answer.
8. Other passages. Quotations from Augustine and Gregory.
9. The fourth class, viz., the regenerate. Though guided by the
    Spirit, corruption adheres to all they do, especially when
    brought to the bar of God.
10. One fault sufficient to efface all former righteousness. Hence
    they cannot possibly be justified by works.
11. In addition to the two former arguments, a third adduced against
    the Sophists, to show that whatever be the works of the
    regenerate, they are justified solely by faith and the free
    imputation of Christ's righteousness.
12. Sophism of the Schoolmen in opposition to the above doctrine.
    Answer.
13. Answer explained. Refutation of the fiction of partial
    righteousness, and compensation by works of supererogation.
    This fiction necessarily falls with that of satisfaction.
14. Statement of our Savior, viz., that after we have done all, we
    are still unprofitable servants.
15. Objection founded on Paul's boasting. Answer, showing the
    Apostle's meaning. Other answers, stating the general doctrine
    out of Chrysostom. Third answer, showing that supererogation is
    the merest vanity.
16. Fourth answer, showing how Scripture dissuades us from all
    confidence in works. Fifth answer, showing that we have no
    ground of boasting.
17. Sixth answer, showing, in regard to four different classes, that
    works have no part in procuring our salvation. 1. The efficient
    cause is the free love of the Father. 2. The material cause is
    Christ acquiring righteousness for us. 3. The instrumental
    cause is faith. 4. The final cause the display of the divine
    justice and praise of the divine goodness.
18. A second objection, founded on the glorying of saints. An
    answer, explaining these modes of expression. How the saints
    feel in regard to the certainty of salvation. The opinion they
    have of their own works as in the sight of God.
19. Another answer, viz., that the elect, by this kind of glorying,
    refer only to their adoption by the Father as proved by the
    fruits of their calling. The order of this glorying. Its
    foundation, structure, and parts.
20. Conclusion. The saints neither attribute anything to the merits
    of works, nor derogate in any degree from the righteousness
    which they obtain in Christ. Confirmation from a passage of
    Augustine, in which he gives two reasons why no believer will
    presume to boast before God of his works.
21. A third objection, viz., that the good works of believers are
    the causes of divine blessings. Answer. There are inferior
    causes, but these depend on free justification, which is the
    only true cause why God blesses us. These modes of expression
    designate the order of sequence rather than the cause.

    1. In farther illustration of the subject, let us consider what
kind of righteousness man can have, during the whole course of his
life, and for this purpose let us make a fourfold division. Mankind,
either endued with no knowledge of God, are sunk in idolatry; or,
initiated in the sacraments, but by the impurity of their lives
denying him whom they confess with their mouths, are Christians in
name only; or they are hypocrites, who with empty glosses hide the
iniquity of the heart; or they are regenerated by the Spirit of God,
and aspire to true holiness. In the first place, when men are judged
by their natural endowments, not a iota of good will be found from
the crown of the head to the sole of the foot, unless we are to
charge Scripture with falsehood, when it describes all the sons of
Adam by such terms as these: "The heart is deceitful above all
things, and desperately wicked." "The imagination of man's heart is
evil from his youth." "The Lord knoweth the thoughts of man that
they are vanity." "They are all gone aside: they are altogether
become filthy; there is none that does good, no, not one." In short,
that they are flesh, under which name are comprehended all those
works which are enumerated by Paul; adultery, fornication,
uncleanness, lasciviousness idolatry witchcraft, hatred, variance,
emulation, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders,
drunkenness, revellings, and all kinds of pollution and abomination
which it is possible to imagine. Such, then, is the worth on which
men are to plume themselves. But if any among them possess an
integrity of manners which presents some semblance of sanctity among
men, yet because we know that God regards not the outward
appearance, we must penetrate to the very source of action, if we
would see how far works avail for righteousness. We must, I say,
look within, and see from what affection of the heart these works
proceed. This is a very wide field of discussion, but as the matter
may be explained in few words, I will use as much brevity as I can.
    2. First, then, I deny not, that whatever excellent endowments
appear in unbelievers are divine gifts. Nor do I set myself so much
in opposition to common sense, as to contend that there was no
difference between the justice, moderation, and equity of Titus and
Trojan, and the rage, intemperance, and cruelty of Caligula, Nero,
and Domitian; between the continence of Vespasian, and the obscene
lusts of Tiberius; and (not to dwell on single virtues and vices)
between the observance of law and justice, and the contempt of them.
So great is the difference between justice and injustice, that it
may be seen even where the former is only a lifeless image. For what
order would remain in the world if we were to confound them? Hence
this distinction between honorable and base actions God has not only
engraven on the minds of each, but also often confirms in the
administration of his providence. For we see how he visits those who
cultivate virtue with many temporal blessings. Not that that
external image of virtue in the least degree merits his favor, but
he is pleased thus to show how much he delights in true
righteousness, since he does not leave even the outward semblance of
it to go unrewarded. Hence it follows, as we lately observed, that
those virtues, or rather images of virtues, of whatever kind, are
divine gifts, since there is nothing in any degree praiseworthy
which proceeds not from him.
    3. Still the observation of Augustine is true, that all who are
strangers to the true God, however excellent they may be deemed on
account of their virtues are more deserving of punishment than of
reward, because, by the pollution of their heart, they contaminate
the pure gifts of God, (August. contra Julia. Lib. 4.) For though
they are instruments of God to preserve human society by justice,
continence, friendship, temperance, fortitude, and prudence, yet
they execute these good works of God in the worst manner, because
they are kept from acting ill, not by a sincere love of goodness,
but merely by ambition or self-love, or some other sinister
affection. Seeing then that these actions are polluted as in their
very source, by impurity of heart, they have no better title to be
classed among virtues than vices, which impose upon us by their
affinity or resemblance to virtue. In short, when we remember that
the object at which righteousness always aims is the service of God,
whatever is of a different tendency deservedly forfeits the name.
Hence, as they have no regard to the end which the divine wisdom
prescribes, although from the performance the act seems good, yet
from the perverse motive it is sin. Augustine, therefore, concludes
that all the Fabriciuses, the Scipios, and Catos, in their
illustrious deeds, sinned in this, that, wanting the light of faith,
they did not refer them to the proper end, and that, therefore,
there was no true righteousness in them, because duties are
estimated not by acts but by motives.
    4. Besides, if it is true, as John says, that there is no life
without the Son of God, (1 John 5: 12,) those who have no part in
Christ, whoever they be, whatever they do or devise, are hastening
on, during their whole career, to destruction and the judgment of
eternal death. For this reason, Augustine says, "Our religion
distinguishes the righteous from the wicked, by the law, not of
works but of faith, without which works which seem good are
converted into sins," (August. ad Bonif. Lib. 3, c. 5.) He finely
expresses the same idea in another passage, when he compares the
zeal of such men to those who in a race mistake the course, (August.
Praef in Ps. 31.) He who is off the course, the more swiftly he runs
is the more distant from the goal and, therefore, the more unhappy.
It is better to limp in the way than run out of the way. Lastly, as
there is no sanctification without union with Christ, it is evident
that they are bad trees which are beautiful and fair to look upon,
and may even produce fruit, sweet to the taste, but are still very
far from good. Hence we easily perceive that every thing which man
thinks, designs, and performs, before he is reconciled to God by
faith, is cursed, and not only of no avail for justification, but
merits certain damnation. And why do we talk of this as if it were
doubtful, when it has already been proved by the testimony of an
apostle, that "without faith it is impossible to please God?" (Heb.
11: 6.)
    5. But the proof will be still clearer if divine grace is set
in opposition to the natural condition of man. For Scripture
everywhere proclaims that God finds nothing in man to induce him to
show kindness, but that he prevents him by free liberality. What can
a dead man do to obtain life? But when he enlightens us with the
knowledge of himself, he is said to raise us from the dead, and make
us new creatures, (John 5: 25.) On this ground we see that the
kindness of God toward us is often commended, especially by the
apostle: "God," says he, "who is rich in mercy, for his great love
wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins, has quickened
us together with Christ," (Eph. 2: 4.) In another passage, when
treating of the general call of believers under the type of Abraham,
he says, "God quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be
not as though they were," (Rom. 4: 17.) If we are nothing, what,
pray, can we do? Wherefore, in the Book of Job the Lord sternly
represses all arrogance in these words, "Who has prevented me, that
I should repay him? whatsoever is under the whole heaven is mine,"
(Job 41: 11.) Paul explaining this sentence applies it in this way,
- Let us not imagine that we bring to the Lord any thing but the
mere disgrace of want and destitution, (Rom. 11: 35.) Wherefore, in
the passage above quoted, to prove that we attain to the hope of
salvation, not by works but only by grace, he affirms that "we are
his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God
has before ordained that we should walk in them," (Eph. 2: 10;) as
if he had said, "Who of us can boast of having challenged God by his
righteousness, seeing our first power to act aright is derived from
regeneration? For, as we are formed by nature, sooner shall oil be
extracted from stone than good works from us. It is truly strange
how man, convicted of such ignominy, dares still to claim any thing
as his own. Let us acknowledge, therefore, with that chosen vessel,
that God "has called us with an holy calling, not according to our
works, but according to his own purpose and grace;" and "that the
kindness and love of God our Savior toward men appeared not by works
of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he
saved us;" that being justified by his grace, we might become the
heirs of everlasting life, (2 Tim. 1: 9; Tit. 3: 4, 5.) By this
confession we strip man of every particle of righteousness, until by
mere mercy he is regenerated unto the hope of eternal life, since it
is not true to say we are justified by grace, if works contribute in
any degree to our justification. The apostle undoubtedly had not
forgotten himself in declaring that justification is gratuitous,
seeing he argues in another place, that if works are of any avail,
"grace is no more grace," (Rom. 11: 6.) And what else does our Lord
mean, when he declares, "I am not come to call the righteous, but
sinners to repentance?" (Matth. 9: 13.) If sinners alone are
admitted, why do we seek admission by means of fictitious
righteousness?
    6. The thought is ever and anon recurring to me, that I am in
danger of insulting the mercy of God by laboring with so much
anxiety to maintain it, as if it were doubtful or obscure. Such,
however, is our malignity in refusing to concede to God what belongs
to him until most strongly urged that I am obliged to insist at
greater length. But as Scripture is clear enough on this subject, I
shall contend in its words rather than my own. Isaiah, after
describing the universal destruction of the human race, finely
subjoins the method of restitution. "The Lord saw it, and it
displeased him that there was no judgment. And he saw that there was
no man, and wondered that there was no intercessor: therefore his
arm brought salvation unto him; and his righteousness, it sustained
him" (Isaiah 59: 15, 16.) Where is our righteousness, if the prophet
says truly, that no man in recovering salvation gives any assistance
to the Lord? Thus another prophet, introducing the Lord as treating
concerning the reconciliation of sinners, says, "I will betroth thee
unto me for ever; yea, I will betroth thee unto me in righteousness,
and in judgment, and in loving-kindness, and in mercies." "I will
have mercy upon her that had not obtained mercy," (Hosea 2: 19, 23.)
If a covenant of this kind, evidently forming our first union with
God, depends on mercy, there is no foundation left for our
righteousness. And, indeed, I would fain know, from those who
pretend that man meets God with some righteousness of works, whether
they imagine there is any kind of righteousness save that which is
acceptable to Him. If it were insane to think so, can any thing
agreeable to God proceed from his enemies, whom he abominates with
all their deeds? Truth declares that we are all the avowed and
inveterate enemies of God until we are justified and admitted to his
friendship, (Rom. 5: 6; Col. 1: 21.) If justification is the
beginning of love, how can the righteousness of works precede it?
Hence John, to put down the arrogant idea, carefully reminds us that
God first loved us, (1 John 4: 10.) The Lord had formerly taught the
same thing by his Prophet: "I will love them freely: for mine anger
is turned away from him," (Hosea 14: 4.) Assuredly he is not
influenced by works if his love turns to us spontaneously. But the
rude and vulgar idea entertained is, that we did not merit the
interposition of Christ for our redemption, but that we are aided by
our works in obtaining possession of it. On the contrary, though we
may be redeemed by Christ, still, until we are ingrafted into union
with him by the calling of the Father, we are darkness, the heirs of
death, and the enemies of God. For Paul declares that we are not
purged and washed from our impurities by the blood of Christ until
the Spirit accomplishes that cleansing in us, (1 Cor. 6: 11.) Peter,
intending to say the same thing, declares that the sanctification of
the Spirit avails "unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of
Jesus Christ," (1 Pet. 1: 2.) If the sprinkling of the blood of
Christ by the Spirit gives us purification, let us not think that,
previous to this sprinkling, we are anything but sinners without
Christ. Let us, therefore, hold it as certain, that the beginning of
our salvation is as it were a resurrection from death unto life,
because, when it is given us on behalf of Christ to believe on him,
(Phil. 1: 29,) then only do we begin to pass from death unto life.
    7. Under this head the second and third class of men noted in
the above division is comprehended. Impurity of conscience proves
that as yet neither of these classes is regenerated by the Spirit of
God. And, again, their not being regenerated proves their want of
faith. Whence it is clear that they are not yet reconciled, not yet
justified, since it is only by faith that these blessings are
obtained. What can sinners, alienated from God, produce save that
which is abominable in his sight? Such, however, is the stupid
confidence entertained by all the wicked, and especially by
hypocrites, that however conscious that their whole heart teems with
impurity, they yet deem any spurious works which they may perform as
worthy of the approbation of God. Hence the pernicious consequence,
that though convicted of a wicked and impious minds they cannot be
induced to confess that they are devoid of righteousness. Even
acknowledging themselves to be unrighteous, because they cannot deny
it, they yet arrogate to themselves some degree of righteousness.
This vanity the Lord admirably refutes by the prophet: "Ask now the
priests concerning the law, saying, If one bear holy flesh in the
skirt of his garment, and with his skirt do touch bread, or pottage,
or wine, or oil, or any meat, shall it be holy? And the priests
answered and said, No. Then said Haggai, If one that is unclean by a
dead body touch any of these, shall it be unclean? And the priests
answered and said, It shall be unclean. Then answered Haggai, and
said, So is this people, and so is this nation before me, saith the
Lord; and so is every work of their hands; and that which they offer
there is unclean," (Haggai 2: 11-14.) I wish these sentiments could
obtain full credit with us, and be deeply fixed on our memories. For
there is no man, however flagitous the whole tenor of his life may
be, who will allow himself to be convinced of what the Lord here so
clearly declares. As soon as any person, even the most wicked, has
performed some one duty of the law, he hesitates not to impute it to
himself for righteousness; but the Lord declares that no degree of
holiness is thereby acquired, unless the heart has previously been
made pure. And not contented with this, he declares that all the
works performed by sinners are contaminated by impurity of heart.
Let us cease then to give the name of righteousness to works which
the mouth of the Lord condemns as polluted. How well is this shown
by that elegant similitude? It might be objected, that what the Lord
has commanded is inviolably holy. But he, on the contrary, replies,
that it is not strange that those things which are sanctified in the
law are contaminated by the impurity of the wicked, the unclean hand
profaning that which is sacred by handling it.
    8. The same argument is admirably followed out by Isaiah:
"Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me;
the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away
with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting. Your new moons and
your appointed feasts my foul hateth: they are a trouble unto me; I
am weary to bear them. And when ye spread forth your hands I will
hide mine eyes from you; yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not
hear: your hands are full of blood. Wash you, make you clean; put
away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes," (Isaiah 1:
13-16, compared with ch. 58) What is meant by the Lord thus
nauseating the observance of his law? Nay, indeed, he does not
repudiate any thing relating to the genuine observance of the law,
the beginning of which is as he uniformly declares the sincere fear
of his name. When this is wanting, all the services which are
offered to him are not only nugatory but vile and abominable. Let
hypocrites now go, and while keeping depravity wrapt up in their
heart, study to lay God under obligation by their works. In this way
they will only offend him more and more. "The sacrifice of the
wicked is an abomination to the Lord; but the prayer of the upright
is his delight," (Prov. 15: 8. ) We hold it, therefore, as
indubitable, indeed it should be notorious to all tolerably verdant
with Scriptures that the most splendid works performed by men, who
are not yet truly sanctified, are so far from being righteousness in
the sight of the Lord, that he regards them as sins. And, therefore
it is taught with perfect truth, that no man procures favor with God
by means of works, but that, on the contrary, works are not pleasing
to God unless the person has previously found favor in his sight.
Here we should carefully observe the order which scripture sets
before us. Moses says that "the Lord had respect unto Abel and to
his offering," (Gen. 4: 4.) Observe how he says that the Lord was
propitious (had respect) to Abel, before he had respect to his
works. Wherefore, purification of heart ought to precede, in order
that the works performed by us may be graciously accepted by God:
for the saying of Jeremiah is always true, "O Lord, are not thine
eyes upon the truth?" (Jer. 5: 3.) Moreover the Holy Spirit declared
by the mouth of Peter, that it is by faith alone the heart is
purified, (Acts 15: 9.) Hence it is evident, that the primary
foundation is in true and living faith.
    9. Let us now see what kind of righteousness belongs to those
persons whom we have placed in the fourth class. We admits that when
God reconciles us to himself by the intervention of the
righteousness of Christ, and bestowing upon us the free pardon of
sins regards us as righteous, his goodness is at the same time
conjoined with mercy, so that he dwells in us by means of his Holy
Spirit, by whose agency the lusts of our flesh are every day more
and more mortified while that we ourselves are sanctified; that is
consecrated to the Lord for true purity of life, our hearts being
trained to the obedience of the law. It thus becomes our leading
desire to obey his will, and in all things advance his glory only.
Still, however while we walk in the ways of the Lord, under the
guidance of the Holy Spirit, lest we should become unduly elated,
and forget ourselves, we have still remains of imperfection which
serve to keep us humble: "There is no man that sinneth not," saith
Scripture, (1 Kings 8: 46.) What righteousness then can men obtain
by their works? First, I say, that the best thing which can be
produced by them is always tainted and corrupted by the impurity of
the flesh, and has, as it were, some mixture of dross in it. Let the
holy servant of God, I say, select from the whole course of his life
the action which he deems most excellent, and let him ponder it in
all its parts; he will doubtless find in it something that savors of
the rottenness of the flesh, since our alacrity in well-doing is
never what it ought to be, but our course is always retarded by much
weakness. Although we see theft the stains by which the works of the
righteous are blemished, are by no means unapparent, still, granting
that they are the minutest possible, will they give no offense to
the eye of God, before which even the stars are not clean? We thus
see, that even saints cannot perform one work which, if judged on
its own merits, is not deserving of condemnation.
    10. Even were it possible for us to perform works absolutely
pure, yet one sin is sufficient to efface and extinguish all
remembrance of former righteousness, as the prophet says, (Ezek. 18:
24.) With this James agrees, "Whosoever shall keep the whole law,
and yet offend in one point, is guilty of all," (James 2: 10.) And
since this mortal life is never entirely free from the taint of sin,
whatever righteousness we could acquire would ever and anon be
corrupted, overwhelmed, and destroyed, by subsequent sins, so that
it could not stand the scrutiny of God, or be imputed to us for
righteousness. In short, whenever we treat of the righteousness of
works, we must look not to the legal work but to the command.
Therefore, when righteousness is sought by the Law, it is in vain to
produce one or two single works; we must show an uninterrupted
obedience. God does not (as many foolishly imagine) impute that
forgiveness of sins once for all, as righteousness; so that having
obtained the pardon of our past life we may afterwards seek
righteousness in the Law. This were only to mock and delude us by
the entertainment of false hopes. For since perfection is altogether
unattainable by us, so long as we are clothed with flesh, and the
Law denounces death and judgment against all who have not yielded a
perfect righteousness, there will always be ground to accuse and
convict us unless the mercy of God interpose, and ever and anon
absolve us by the constant remission of sins. Wherefore the
statement which we set out is always true, If we are estimated by
our own worthiness, in every thing that we think or devise, with all
our studies and endeavors we deserve death and destruction.
    11. We must strongly insist on these two things: That no
believer ever performed one work which, if tested by the strict
judgment of God, could escape condemnation; and, moreover, that were
this granted to be possible, (though it is not,) yet the act being
vitiated and polluted by the sins of which it is certain that the
author of it is guilty, it is deprived of its merit. This is the
cardinal point of the present discussion. There is no controversy
between us and the sounder Schoolmen as to the beginning of
justification. They admit that the sinner, freely delivered from
condemnation, obtains justification, and that by forgiveness of
sins; but under the term justification they comprehend the
renovation by which the Spirit forms us anew to the obedience of the
Law; and in describing the righteousness of the regenerate man,
maintain that being once reconciled to God by means of Christ, he is
afterwards deemed righteous by his good works, and is accepted in
consideration of them. The Lord, on the contrary, declares, that he
imputed Abraham's faith for righteousness, (Rom. 4: 3,) not at the
time when he was still a worshipper of idols, but after he had been
many years distinguished for holiness. Abraham had long served God
with a pure heart, and performed that obedience of the Law which a
mortal man is able to perform: yet his righteousness still consisted
in faith. Hence we infer, according to the reasoning of Paul, that
it was not of works. In like manners when the prophet says, "The
just shall live by his faith," (Hab. 2: 4,) he is not speaking of
the wicked and profane, whom the Lord justifies by converting them
to the faith: his discourse is directed to believers, and life is
promised to them by faith. Paul also removes every doubt, when in
confirmation of this sentiment he quotes the words of David,
"Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is
covered," (Ps. 32: 1.) It is certain that David is not speaking of
the ungodly but of believers such as he himself was, because he was
giving utterance to the feelings of his own mind. Therefore we must
have this blessedness not once only, but must hold it fast during
our whole lives. Moreover, the message of free reconciliation with
God is not promulgated for one or two days, but is declared to be
perpetual in the Church, (2 Cor. 5: 18, 19.) Hence believers have
not even to the end of life any other righteousness than that which
is there described. Christ ever remains a Mediator to reconcile the
Father to us, and there is a perpetual efficacy in his death, viz.,
ablution, satisfaction, expiation; in short, perfect obedience, by
which all our iniquities are covered. In the Epistle to the
Ephesians, Paul says not that the beginning of salvation is of
grace, but "by grace are ye saved," "not of works, lest any man
should boast," (Eph. 2: 8, 9.)
    12. The subterfuges by which the Schoolmen here endeavor to
escape will not disentangle them. They say that good works are not
of such intrinsic worth as to be sufficient to procure
justification, but it is owing to accepting grace that they have
this effect. Then because they are forced to confess that here the
righteousness of works is always imperfect, they grant that so long
as we are in this life we stand in need of the forgiveness of sin in
order to supply the deficiency of works, but that the faults which
are committed are compensated by works of supererogation. I answer,
that the grace which they call accepting, is nothing else than the
free goodness with which the Father embraces us in Christ when he
clothes us with the innocence of Christ, and accepts it as ours, so
that in consideration of it he regards us as holy, pure, and
innocent. For the righteousness of Christ (as it alone is perfect,
so it alone can stand the scrutiny of God) must be sisted for us,
and as a surety represent us judicially. Provided with this
righteousness, we constantly obtain the remission of sins through
faith. Our imperfection and impurity, covered with this purity, are
not imputed but are as it were buried, so as not to come under
judgment until the hour arrive when the old man being destroyed, and
plainly extinguished in us, the divine goodness shall receive us
into beatific peace with the new Adam, there to await the day of the
Lord, on which, being clothed with incorruptible bodies, we shall be
translated to the glory of the heavenly kingdom.
    13. If these things are so, it is certain that our works cannot
in themselves make us agreeable and acceptable to God, and even
cannot please God, except in so far as being covered with the
righteousness of Christ we thereby please him and obtain forgiveness
of sins. God has not promised life as the reward of certain works,
but only declares, "which if a man do, he shall live in them," (Lev.
18: 5,) denouncing the well-known curse against all who do not
continue in all things that are written in the book of the Law to do
them. In this way is completely refuted the fiction of a partial
righteousness, the only righteousness acknowledged in heaven being
the perfect observance of the Law. There is nothing more solid in
their dogma of compensation by means of works of supererogation. For
must they not always return to the proposition which has already
been disproved, viz., that he who observes the Law in part is so far
justified by works? This, which no man of sound judgment will
concede to them, they are not ashamed to take for granted. The Lord
having so often declared that he recognizes no justification by
works unless they be works by which the Law is perfectly fulfilled,
- how perverse is it, while we are devoid of such works, to endeavor
to secure some ground of glorying to ourselves; that is not to yield
it entirely to God, by boasting of some kind of fragments of works,
and trying to supply the deficiency by other satisfactions?
Satisfactions have already been so completely disposed of, that we
ought never again even to dream of them. Here all I say is, that
those who thus trifle with sin do not at all consider how execrable
it is in the sight of God; if they did, they would assuredly
understand, that all the righteousness of men collected into one
heap would be inadequate to compensate for a single sin. For we see
that by one sin man was so cast off and forsaken by God, that he at
the same time lost all power of recovering salvation. He was,
therefore, deprived of the power of giving satisfaction. Those who
flatter themselves with this idea will never satisfy God, who cannot
possibly accept or be pleased with anything that proceeds from his
enemies. But all to whom he imputes sin are enemies, and, therefore,
our sins must be covered and forgiven before the Lord has respect to
any of our works. From this it follows, that the forgiveness of sins
is gratuitous, and this forgiveness is wickedly insulted by those
who introduce the idea of satisfaction. Let us, therefore, after the
example of the Apostle, "forgetting those things which are behind,
and reaching forth unto those things which are before," "press
toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Jesus
Christ," (Philip. 3: 13, 14.)
    14. How can boasting in works of supererogation agree with the
command given to us: "When ye shall have done all those things which
are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants: we have done
that which was our duty to do?" (Luke 17: 10.) To say or speak in
the presence of God is not to feign or lie, but to declare what we
hold as certain. Our Lord, therefore, enjoins us sincerely to feel
and consider with ourselves that we do not perform gratuitous
duties, but pay him service which is due. And truly. For the
obligations of service under which we lie are so numerous that we
cannot discharge them though all our thoughts and members were
devoted to the observance of the Law; and, therefore, when he says
"When ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you,"
it is just as if he had said that all the righteousness of men would
not amount to one of these things. Seeing, then, that every one is
very far distant from that goal, how can we presume to boast of
having accumulated more than is due? It cannot be objected that a
person, though failing in some measure in what is necessary, may yet
in intention go beyond what is necessary. For it must ever be held
that in whatever pertains to the worship of God, or to charity,
nothing can ever be thought of that is not comprehended under the
Law. But if it is part of the Law, let us not boast of voluntary
liberality in matters of necessary obligation.
    15. On this subject, they ceaselessly allege the boast of Paul,
that among the Corinthians he spontaneously renounced a right which,
if he had otherwise chosen, he might have exercised, (1 Cor. 9: 15;)
thus not only paying what he owed them in duty, but gratuitously
bestowing upon them more than duty required. They ought to have
attended to the reason there expressed, that his object was to avoid
giving offense to the weak. For wicked and deceitful workmen
employed this pretence of kindness that they might procure favor to
their pernicious dogmas, and excite hatred against the Gospel, so
that it was necessary for Paul either to peril the doctrine of
Christ, or to thwart their schemes. Now, if it is a matter of
indifference to a Christian man whether or not he cause a scandal
when it is in his power to avoid it, then I admit that the Apostle
performed a work of supererogation to his Master; but if the thing
which he did was justly required in a prudent minister of the
Gospel, then I say he did what he was bound to do. In short, even
when no such reason appears, yet the saying of Chrysostom is always
true, that everything which we have is held on the same condition as
the private property of slaves; it is always due to our Master.
Christ does not disguise this in the parable, for he asks in regard
to the master who, on return from his labour, requires his servant
to gird himself and serve him, "Does he thank that servant because
he did the things that were commanded him? I trow not," (Luke 17:
9.) But possibly the servant was more industrious than the master
would have ventured to exact. Be it so: still he did nothing to
which his condition as a servant did not bind him, because his
utmost ability is his master's. I say nothing as to the kind of
supererogations on which these men would plume themselves before
God. They are frivolities which he never commanded, which he
approves not, and will not accept when they come to give in their
account. The only sense in which we admit works of supererogation is
that expressed by the prophet, when he says, "Who has required this
at your hand?" (Isaiah 1: 12.) But let them remember what is
elsewhere said of them: "Wherefore do ye spend money for that which
is not bread? and your labour for that which satisfieth not?"
(Isaiah 55: 2.) It is, indeed, an easy matter for these indolent
Rabbis to carry on such discussions sitting in their soft chairs
under the shade, but when the Supreme Judge shall sit on his
tribunal, all these blustering dogmas will behave to disappear.
This, this I say, was the true question: not what we can fable and
talk in schools and corners, but what ground of defense we can
produce at his judgment-seat.
    16. In this matter the minds of men must be specially guarded
against two pestiferous dogmas, viz., against putting any confidence
in the righteousness of works, or ascribing any glory to them. From
all such confidence the Scriptures uniformly dissuade us when they
declare that our righteousness is offensive in the sight of God
unless it derives a sweet odour from the purity of Christ: that it
can have no other effect than to excite the divine vengeance unless
sustained by his indulgent mercy. Accordingly, the only thing they
leave to us is to deprecate our Judge with that confession of David:
"Enter not into judgment with thy servant: for in thy sight shall no
living be justified," (Psalm 143: 2.) And when Job says, "If I be
wicked, woe unto me: and if I be righteous, yet will I not lift up
my head," (Job 10: 15.) Although he refers to that spotless
righteousness of God, before which even angels are not clean, he
however shows, that when brought to the bar of Gods all that mortals
can do is to stand dumb. He does not merely mean that he chooses
rather to give way spontaneously than to risk a contest with the
divine severity, but that he was not conscious of possessing any
righteousness that would not fall the very first moment it was
brought into the presence of God. Confidence being banished, all
glorying must necessarily cease. For who can attribute any merit of
righteousness to works, which instead of giving confidence, only
make us tremble in the presence of God? We must, therefore, come to
what Isaiah invites us: "In the Lord shall all the seed of Israel be
justified, and shall glory," (Isaiah 45: 25;) for it is most true,
as he elsewhere says, that we are "the planting of the Lord, that he
might be glorified," (Isaiah 61: 3.) Our soul, therefore, will not
be duly purified until it ceases to have any confidence, or feel any
exultation in works. Foolish men are puffed up to this false and
lying confidence by the erroneous idea that the cause of their
salvation is in works.
    17. But if we attend to the four kinds of causes which
philosophers bring under our view in regard to effects, we shall
find that not one of them is applicable to works as a cause of
salvation. The efficient cause of our eternal salvation the
Scripture uniformly proclaims to be the mercy and free love of the
heavenly Father towards us; the material cause to be Christ, with
the obedience by which he purchased righteousness for us; and what
can the formal or instrumental cause be but faith? John includes the
three in one sentence when he says, "God so loved the world, that he
gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should
not perish but have everlasting life," (John 3: 16.) The Apostle,
moreover, declares that the final cause is the demonstration of the
divine righteousness and the praise of his goodness. There also he
distinctly mentions the other three causes; for he thus speaks to
the Romans: "All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God,
being justified freely by his grace," (Rom. 3: 23, 24.) You have
here the head and primary source - God has embraced us with free
mercy. The next words are, "through the redemption that is in Christ
Jesus;" this is as it were the material cause by which righteousness
is procured for us. "Whom God has set forth to be a propitiation
through faith." Faith is thus the instrumental cause by which
righteousness is applied to us. He lastly subjoins the final cause
when he says, "To declare at this time his righteousness; that he
might be just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus."
And to show by the way that this righteousness consists in
reconciliation, he says that Christ was "set forth to be a
propitiation." Thus also, in the Epistle to the Ephesians, he tells
us that we are received into the favor of God by mere mercy; that
this is done by the intervention of Christ; that it is apprehended
by faith; the end of all being that the glory of the divine goodness
may be fully displayed. When we see that all the parts of our
salvation thus exist without us, what ground can we have for
glorying or confiding in our works? Neither as to the efficient nor
the final cause can the most sworn enemies of divine grace raise any
controversy with us unless they would abjure the whole of Scripture.
In regard to the material or formal cause they make a gloss, as if
they held that our works divide the merit with faith and the
righteousness of Christ. But here also Scripture reclaims, simply
affirming that Christ is both righteousness and life, and that the
blessing of justification is possessed by faith alone.
    18. When the saints repeatedly confirm and console themselves
with the remembrance of their innocence and integrity, and sometimes
even abstain not from proclaiming them, it is done in two ways:
either because by comparing their good cause with the bad cause of
the ungodly, they thence feel secure of victory, not so much from
commendation of their own righteousness, as from the just and
merited condemnation of their adversaries; or because, reviewing
themselves before God, even without any comparison with others the
purity of their conscience gives them some comfort and security. The
former reason will afterwards be considered, (chap. 17, sec. 14, and
chap. 20, sec. 10;) let us now briefly show, in regard to the
latter, how it accords with what we have above said, that we can
have no confidence in works before the bar of God, that we cannot
glory in any opinion of their worth. The accordance lies here, that
when the point considered is the constitution and foundation of
salvation, believers, without paying any respect to works, direct
their eyes to the goodness of God alone. Nor do they turn to it only
in the first instance, as to the commencement of blessedness, but
rest in it as the completion. Conscience being thus founded, built
up, and established is farther established by the consideration of
works, inasmuch as they are proofs of God dwelling and reigning in
us. Since, then, this confidence in works has no place unless you
have previously fixed your whole confidence on the mercy of God, it
should not seem contrary to that on which it depends. Wherefore,
when we exclude confidence in works, we merely mean, that the
Christian mind must not turn back to the merit of works as an aid to
salvation, but must dwell entirely on the free promise of
justification. But we forbid no believer to confirm and support this
faith by the signs of the divine favor towards him. For if when we
call to mind the gifts which God has bestowed upon us, they are like
rays of the divine countenance, by which we are enabled to behold
the highest light of his goodness; much more is this the case with
the gift of good works, which shows that we have received the Spirit
of adoption.
    19. When believers therefore feel their faith strengthened by a
consciousness of integrity, and entertain sentiments of exultation,
it is just because the fruits of their calling convince them that
the Lord has admitted them to a place among his children.
Accordingly, when Solomon says, "In the fear of the Lord is strong
confidence," (Prov. 14: 26,) and when the saints sometimes beseech
the Lord to hear them, because they walked before his face in
simplicity and integrity, (Gen. 24: 10; 2 Kings 20: 3,) these
expressions apply not to laying the foundation of a firm conscience,
but are of force only when taken a posteriori. For there is no where
such a fear of God as can give full security, and the saints are
always conscious that any integrity which they may possess is
mingled with many remains of the flesh. But as the fruits of
regeneration furnish them with a proof of the Holy Spirit dwelling
in them, experiencing God to be a Father in a matter of so much
moment, they are strengthened in no slight degree to wait for his
assistance in all their necessities. Even this they could not do,
had they not previously perceived that the goodness of God is sealed
to them by nothing but the certainty of the promise. Should they
begin to estimate it by their good works, nothing will be weaker or
more uncertain; works, when estimated by themselves, no less proving
the divine displeasure by their imperfection, than his good-will by
their incipient purity. In short, while proclaiming the mercies of
the Lord, they never lose sight of his free favor, with all its
"breadth and length, and depth and height," testified by Paul, (Eph.
3: 18;) as if he had said, Whithersoever the believer turns, however
loftily he climbs, however far and wide his thoughts extend, he must
not go farther than the love of Christ, but must be wholly occupied
in meditating upon it, as including in itself all dimensions.
Accordingly, he declares that it "passeth knowledge," that "to know
the love of Christ" is to "be filled with all the fulness of God,"
(Eph. 3: 19.) In another passage, where he glories that believers
are victorious in every contest, he adds the reason, "through him
that loved us," (Rom. 8: 37.)
    20. We now see that believers have no such confidence in works
as to attribute any merit to them, (since they regard them only as
divine gifts, in which they recognize his goodness, and signs of
calling, in which they discern their election;) nor such confidence
as to derogate in any respect from the free righteousness of Christ;
since on this it depends, and without this cannot subsist. The same
thing is briefly but elegantly expressed by Augustine when he says,
"I do not say to the Lord, Despise not the works of my hands; I have
sought the Lord with my hands, and have not been deceived. But I
commend not the works of my hands, for I fear that when thou
examinest them thou wilt find more faults than merits. This only I
say, this asks this desire, Despise not the works of thy hands. See
in me thy work, not mine. If thou sees mine, thou condemnest; if
thou sees thine own, thou crownest. Whatever good works I have are
of thee," (August. in Ps. 137.) He gives two reasons for not
venturing to boast of his works before God: first, that if he has
any good works, he does not see in them any thing of his own; and,
secondly, that these works are overwhelmed by a multitude of sins.
Whence it is, that the conscience derives from them more fear and
alarm than security. Therefore, the only way in which he desires God
to look at any work which he may have done aright is, that he may
therein see the grace of his calling, and perfect the work which he
has begun.
    21. Moreover, when Scripture intimates that the good works of
believers are causes why the Lord does them good, we must still
understand the meaning so as to hold unshaken what has previously
been said, viz., that the efficient cause of our salvation is placed
in the love of God the Father; the material cause in the obedience
of the Son; the instrumental cause in the illumination of the
Spirit, that is, in faith; and the final cause in the praise of the
divine goodness. In this, however, there is nothing to prevent the
Lord from embracing works as inferior causes. But how so? In this
way: Those whom in mercy he has destined for the inheritance of
eternal life, he, in his ordinary administration, introduces to the
possession of it by means of good works. What precedes in the order
of administration is called the cause of what follows. For this
reason, he sometimes makes eternal life a consequent of works; not
because it is to be ascribed to them, but because those whom he has
elected he justifies, that he may at length glorify, (Rom. 8: 30;)
he makes the prior grace to be a kind of cause, because it is a kind
of step to that which follows. But whenever the true cause is to be
assigned, he enjoins us not to take refuge in works, but to keep our
thoughts entirely fixed on the mercy of God; "The wages of sin is
death; but the gift of God is eternal life," (Rom. 6: 23.) Why, as
he contrasts life with death, does he not also contrast
righteousness with sin? Why, when setting down sin as the cause of
death, does he not also set down righteousness as the cause of life?
The antithesis which would otherwise be complete is somewhat marred
by this variation; but the Apostle employed the comparison to
express the fact, that death is due to the deserts of men, but that
life was treasured up solely in the mercy of God. In short, by these
expressions, the order rather than the cause is noted. The Lord
adding grace to grace, takes occasion from a former to add a
subsequent, so that he may omit no means of enriching his servants.
Still, in following out his liberality, he would have us always look
to free election as its source and beginning. For although he loves
the gifts which he daily bestows upon us, inasmuch as they proceed
from that fountain, still our duty is to hold fast by that
gratuitous acceptance, which alone can support our souls; and so to
connect the gifts of the Spirit, which he afterwards bestows, with
their primary cause, as in no degree to detract from it.

Chapter 15.

15. The boasted merit of works subversive both of the glory of God,
in bestowing righteousness, and of the certainty of salvation.

    The divisions of this chapter are, - I. To the doctrine of free
justification is opposed the question, Whether or not works merit
favor with God, sec. 1. This question answered, sec. 2 and 3. II. An
exposition of certain passages of Scripture produced in support of
the erroneous doctrine of merit, sec. 4 and 5. III. Sophisms of
Semipelagian Schoolmen refuted, sec. 6 and 7. IV. Conclusion,
proving the sufficiency of the orthodox doctrine, sec. 8.
    
Sections.

1. After a brief recapitulation, the question, Whether or not good
    works merit favor with God, considered.
2. First answer, fixing the meaning of the term Merit. This term
    improperly applied to works, but used in a good sense, as by
    Augustine, Chrysostom, Bernard.
3. A second answer to the question. First by a negative, then by a
    concession. In the rewarding of works what to be attributed to
    God, and what to man. Why good works please God, and are
    advantageous to those who do them. The ingratitude of seeking
    righteousness by works. This shown by a double similitude.
4. First objection taken from Ecclesiasticus. Second objection from
    the Epistle to the Hebrews. Two answers to both objections. A
    weak distinction refuted.
5. A third and most complete answer, calling us back to Christ as
    the only foundation of salvation. How Christ is our
    righteousness. Whence it is manifest that we have all things in
    Christ and he nothing in us.
6. We must abhor the sophistry which destroys the merit of Christ,
    in order to establish that of man. This impiety refuted by
    clear passages of Scripture.
7. Errors, of the younger Sophists extracted from Lombard. Refuted
    by Augustine. Also by Scripture.
8. Conclusion, showing that the foundation which has been laid is
    sufficient for doctrine, exhortation, and comfort. Summery of
    the orthodox doctrine of Justification.
    
    1. The principal point in this subject has been now explained:
as justifications if dependent upon works, cannot possibly stand in
the sight of God, it must depend solely on the mercy of God and
communion with Christ, and therefore on faith alone. But let us
carefully attend to the point on which the whole subject hinges,
lest we get entangled in the common delusion, not only of the
vulgar, but of the learned. For the moment the question is raised as
to the justification by faith or works, they run off to those
passages which seem to ascribe some merit to works in the sight of
God, just as if justification by works were proved whenever it is
proved that works have any value with God. Above we have clearly
shown that justification by works consists only in a perfect and
absolute fulfillment of the law, and that, therefore, no man is
justified by works unless he has reached the summit of perfection,
and cannot be convicted of even the smallest transgression. But
there is another and a separate question, Though works by no means
suffice to justify, do they not merit favor with God?
    2. First, I must premise with regard to the term Merit, that
he, whoever he was, that first applied it to human works, viewed in
reference to the divine tribunal, consulted very ill for the purity
of the faith. I willingly abstain from disputes about words, but I
could wish that Christian writers had always observed this soberness
- that when there was no occasion for it, they had never thought of
using terms foreign to the Scriptures - terms which might produce
much offense, but very little fruit. I ask, what need was there to
introduce the word Merit, when the value of works might have been
fully expressed by another term, and without offense? The quantity
of offense contained in it the world shows to its great loss. It is
certain that, being a high sounding term, it can only obscure the
grace of God, and inspire men with pernicious pride. I admit it was
used by ancient ecclesiastical writers, and I wish they had not by
the abuse of one term furnished posterity with matter of heresy,
although in some passages they themselves show that they had no wish
to injure the truth. For Augustine says, "Let human merits, which
perished by Adam, here be silent, and let the grace of God reign by
Jesus Christ," (August. de Praedest. Sanct.) Again, "The saints
ascribe nothing to their merits; every thing will they ascribe
solely to thy mercy, O God," (August. in Psal. 139.) Again, "And
when a man sees that whatever good he has he has not of himself, but
of his God, he sees that every thing in him which is praised is not
of his own merits, but of the divine mercy," (August. in Psal. 88.)
You see how he denies man the power of acting aright, and thus lays
merit prostrate. Chrysostom says, "If any works of ours follow the
free calling of God, they are return and debt; but the gifts of God
are grace, and beneficence, and great liberality." But to say
nothing more of the name, let us attend to the thing. I formerly
quoted a passage from Bernard: "As it is sufficient for merit not to
presume on merit, so to be without merit is sufficient for
condemnation," (Bernard in Cantic. Serm. 98.) He immediately adds an
explanation which softens the harshness of the expression, when he
says, "Hence be careful to have merits; when you have them, know
that they were given; hope for fruit from the divine mercy, and you
have escaped all the perils of poverty, ingratitude, and
presumption. Happy the Church which neither wants merit without
presumption, nor presumption without merit." A little before he had
abundantly shown that he used the words in a sound sense, saying,
"Why is the Church anxious about merits? God has furnished her with
a firmer and surer ground of boasting. God cannot deny himself; he
will do what he has promised. Thus there is no reason for asking by
what merits may we hope for blessings; especially when you hear,
'Thus saith the Lord God; I do not this for your sakes, 0 house of
Israel, but for mine holy name's sake,' (Ezek. 36: 22.) It suffices
for merit to know that merits suffice not."
    3. What all our works can merit Scripture shows when it
declares that they cannot stand the view of God, because they are
full of impurity; it next shows what the perfect observance of the
law (if it can any where be found) will merit when it enjoins, "So
likewise ye, when ye shall have done all those things which are
commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants, we have done that
which was our duty to do," (Luke 17: 10;) because we make no
free-offering to God, but only perform due service by which no favor
is deserved. And yet those good works which the Lord has bestowed
upon us he counts ours also, and declares, that they are not only
acceptable to him, but that he will recompense them. It is ours in
return to be animated by this great promise, and to keep up our
courage, that we may not weary in well-doing, but feel duly grateful
for the great kindness of God. There cannot be a doubt, that every
thing in our works which deserves praise is owing to divine grace,
and that there is not a particle of it which we can properly ascribe
to ourselves. If we truly and seriously acknowledge this, not only
confidence, but every idea of merit vanishes. I say we do not, like
the Sophists share the praise of works between God and man, but we
keep it entire and unimpaired for the Lord. All we assign to man is
that, by his impurity he pollutes and contaminates the very works
which were good. The most perfect thing which proceeds from man is
always polluted by some stain. Should the Lords therefore bring to
judgment the best of human works, he would indeed behold his own
righteousness in them; but he would also behold man's dishonor and
disgrace. Thus good works please God, and are not without fruit to
their authors, since, by way of recompense, they obtain more ample
blessings from God, not because they so deserve, but because the
divine benignity is pleased of itself to set this value upon them.
Such, however is our malignity, that not contented with this
liberality on the part of God, which bestows rewards on works that
do not at all deserve them, we with profane ambition maintain that
that which is entirely due to the divine munificence is paid to the
merit of works. Here I appeal to every man's common sense. If one
who by another's liberality possesses the usufruct of a field, rear
up a claim to the property of it, does he not by his ingratitude
deserve to lose the possession formerly granted? In like manner, if
a slave, who has been manumitted, conceals his humble condition of
freedman, and gives out that he was free-born, does he not deserve
to be reduced to his original slavery? A benefit can only be
legitimately enjoyed when we neither arrogate more to our selves
than has been given, nor defraud the author of it of his due praise;
nay, rather when we so conduct ourselves as to make it appear that
the benefit conferred still in a manner resides with him who
conferred it. But if this is the moderation to be observed towards
men, let every one reflect and consider for himself what is due to
God.
    4. I know that the Sophists abuse some passages in order to
prove that the Scriptures use the term merit with reference to God.
They quote a passage from Ecclesiasticus: "Mercy will give place to
every man according to the merit of his works," (Ecclesiasticus 16:
14;) and from the Epistle to the Hebrews: "To do good and
communicate forget not; for with such sacrifices God is well
pleased," (Heb. 13: 16.) I now renounce my right to repudiate the
authority of Ecclesiasticus; but I deny that the words of
Ecclesiasticus, whoever the writer may have been, are faithfully
quoted. The Greek is as follows: "Pasei ele-emosunei poiesei topon;
hekastos gar kata ta erga houtou heuresei". "He will make room for
all mercy: for each shall find according to his works." That this is
the genuine reading, and has been corrupted in the Latin version, is
plain, both from the very structure of the sentence, and from the
previous context. In the Epistle to the Hebrews there is no room for
their quibbling on one little word, for in the Greek the Apostle
simply says, that such sacrifices are pleasing and acceptable to
God. This alone should amply suffice to quell and beat down the
insolence of our pride, and prevent us from attaching value to works
beyond the rule of Scripture. It is the doctrine of Scripture,
moreover, that our good works are constantly covered with numerous
stains by which God is justly offended and made angry against us, so
far are they from being able to conciliate him, and call forth his
favor towards us; and yet because of his indulgence, he does not
examine them with the utmost strictness, he accepts them just as if
they were most pure; and therefore rewards them, though undeserving,
with innumerable blessings, both present and future. For I admit not
the distinction laid down by otherwise learned and pious men, that
good works merit the favors which are conferred upon us in this
life, whereas eternal life is the reward of faith only. The
recompense of our toils, and crown of our contest, our Lord almost
uniformly places in heaven. On the other hand, to attribute to the
merit of works, so as to deny it to grace, that we are loaded with
other gifts from the Lord, is contrary to the doctrine of Scripture.
For though Christ says, "Unto every one that has shall be given;"
"thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler
over many things," (Matth. 25: 29, 21,) he, at the same time, shows
that all additional gifts to believers are of his free benignity:
"Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that
has no money, come ye, buy, and eat: yea, come, buy wine and milk,
without money and without price," (Isaiah 55: 1.) Therefore, every
help to salvation bestowed upon believers, and blessedness itself,
are entirely the gift of God, and yet in both the Lord testifies
that he takes account of works, since to manifest the greatness of
his love toward us, he thus highly honors not ourselves only, but
the gifts, which he has bestowed upon us.
    5. Had these points been duly handled and digested in past
ages, never could so many tumults and dissensions have arisen. Paul
says, that in the architecture of Christian doctrine, it is
necessary to retain the foundation which he had laid with the
Corinthians, "Other foundation can no man lay than that which is
laid, which is Jesus Christ," (1 Cor. 3: 11.) What then is our
foundation in Christ? Is it that he begins salvation and leaves us
to complete it? Is it that he only opened up the way, and left us to
follow it in our own strength? By no means, but as Paul had a little
before declared, it is to acknowledge that he has been given us for
righteousness. No man, therefore, is well founded in Christ who has
not entire righteousness in him, since the Apostle says not that he
was sent to assist us in procuring, but was himself to be our
righteousness. Thus, it is said that God "has chosen us in him
before the foundation of the world," not according to our merit, but
"according to the good pleasure of his will;" that in him "we have
redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins;" that
peace has been made "through the blood of his cross;" that we are
reconciled by his blood; that, placed under his protection, we are
delivered from the danger of finally perishing; that thus ingrafted
into him we are made partakers of eternal life, and hope for
admission into the kingdom of God. Nor is this all. Being admitted
to participation in him, though we are still foolish, he is our
wisdom; though we are still sinners he is our righteousness; though
we are unclean, he is our purity; though we are weak, unarmed, and
exposed to Satan, yet ours is the power which has been given him in
heaven and in earth, to bruise Satan under our feet, and burst the
gates of hell, (Matth. 28: 18;) though we still bear about with us a
body of death, he is our life; in short, all things of his are ours,
we have all things in him, he nothing in us. On this foundation, I
say, we must be built, if we would grow up into a holy temple in the
Lord.
    6. For a long time the world has been taught very differently.
A kind of good works called moral has been found out, by which men
are rendered agreeable to God before they are ingrafted into Christ;
as if Scripture spoke falsely when it says, "He that has the Son has
life, and he that has not the Son of God has not life," (1 John 5:
12.) How can they produce the materials of life if they are dead? Is
there no meaning in its being said that "whatsoever is not of faith
is sin?" (Rom. 14: 23;) or can good fruit be produced from a bad
tree? What have these most pestilential Sophists left to Christ on
which to exert his virtue? They say that he merited for us the first
grace, that is, the occasion of meriting, and that it is our part
not to let slip the occasion thus offered. O the daring effrontery
of impiety! Who would have thought that men professing the name of
Christ would thus strip him of his power, and all but trample him
under foot? The testimony uniformly borne to him in Scripture is
that whose believeth in him is justified; the doctrine of these men
is, that the only benefit which proceeds from him is to open up a
way for each to justify himself. I wish they could get a taste of
what is meant by these passages: "He that has the Son has life." "He
Hedthat hearth my word, and believeth on him that sent me," "is
passed from death unto life." Whose believeth in him "is passed from
death unto life." "Being justified freely by his grace, through the
redemption that is in Christ Jesus." "He that keepeth his
commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him." God "has raised us up
together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ."
"Who has delivered us from the power of darkness, and has translated
us into the kingdom of his dear Son." There are similar passages
without number. Their meaning is not, that by faith in Christ an
opportunity is given us of procuring justifications or acquiring
salvation, but that both are given us. Hence, so soon as you are
ingrafted into Christ by faith, you are made a son of God, an heir
of heaven, a partaker of righteousness, a possessor of life, and
(the better to manifest the false tenets of these men) you have not
obtained an opportunity of meriting, but all the merits of Christ,
since they are communicated to you.
    7. In this way the schools of Sorbonne, the parents of all
heresies, have deprived us of justification by faith, which lies at
the root of all godliness. They confess, indeed, in word, that men
are justified by a formed faith, but they afterwards explain this to
mean that of faith they have good works which avail to
justification, so that they almost seem to use the term faith in
mockery, because they were unable, without incurring great obloquy,
to pass it in silence, seeing it is so often repeated by Scripture.
And yet not contented with this, they by the praise of good works
transfer to man what they steal from God. And seeing that good works
give little ground for exultation, and are not even properly called
merits, if they are regarded as the fruits of divine grace, they
derive them from the power of free-will; in other words extract oil
out of stone. They deny not that the principal cause is in grace;
but they contend that there is no exclusion of free-will through
which all merit comes. This is the doctrine, not only of the later
Sophists, but of Lombard their Pythagoras, (Sent. Lib. 2, Dist. 28,)
who, in comparison of them, may be called sound and sober. It was
surely strange blindness, while he had Augustine so often in his
mouth, not to see how cautiously he guarded against ascribing a
single particle of praise to man because of good works. Above, when
treating of free-will, we quoted some passages from him to this
effect, and similar passages frequently occur in his writings, (see
in Psal. 104; Ep. 105,) as when he forbids us ever to boast of our
merits, because they themselves also are the gifts of God, and when
he says that all our merits are only of grace, are not provided by
our sufficiency, but are entirely the production of grace, &c. It is
less strange that Lombard was blind to the light of Scripture, in
which it is obvious that he had not been a very successful student.
Still there cannot be a stronger declaration against him and his
disciples than the words of the Apostles who, after interdicting all
Christians from glorying, subjoins the reason why glorying is
unlawful: "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto
good works, which God has before ordained that we should walk in
them," (Eph. 2: 10.) Seeing, then, that no good proceeds from us
unless in so far as we are regenerated - and our regeneration is
without exception wholly of God - there is no ground for claiming to
ourselves one iota in good works. Lastly, while these men constantly
inculcate good works, they, at the same time, train the conscience
in such a way as to prevent it from venturing to confide that works
will render God favorable and propitious. We, on the contrary,
without any mention of merit, give singular comfort to believers
when we teach them that in their works they please, and doubtless
are accepted of God. Nay, here we even insist that no man shall
attempt or enter upon any work without faith, that is, unless he
previously have a firm conviction that it will please God.
    8. Wherefore, let us never on any account allow ourselves to be
drawn away one nail's breadth from that only foundation. After it is
laid, wise architects build upon it rightly and in order. For
whether there is need of doctrine or exhortation, they remind us
that "for this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might
destroy the works of the devil;" that "whosoever is born of God does
not commit sin;" that "the time past of our life may suffice us to
have wrought the will of the Gentiles;" that the elect of God are
vessels of mercy, appointed "to honor," purged, "sanctified, and
meet for the Master's use, and prepared unto every good work." The
whole is expressed at once, when Christ thus describes his
disciples, "If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and
take up his cross daily, and follow me." He who has denied himself
has cut off the root of all evils so as no longer to seek his own;
he who has taken up his cross has prepared himself for all meekness
and endurance. The example of Christ includes this and all offices
of piety and holiness. He obeyed his Father even unto death; his
whole life was spent in doing the works of God; his whole soul was
intent on the glory of his Father; he laid down his life for the
brethren; he did good to his enemies, and prayed for them. And when
there is need of comfort, it is admirably afforded in these words:
"We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed; we are
perplexed, but not in despair; persecuted but not forsaken; cast
down, but not destroyed; always bearing about in the body the dying
of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made
manifest in our body." " For if we be dead with him we shall also
live with him; if we suffer, we shall also reign with him;" by means
of "the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto
his death;" the Father having predestinated us "to be conformed to
the image of his Son, that he might be the first-born among many
brethren." Hence it is, that "neither death, nor life, nor angels,
nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to
come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able
to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our
Lord;" nay, rather all things will work together for our good. See
how it is that we do not justify men before God by works, but say,
that all who are of God are regenerated and made new creatures, so
that they pass from the kingdom of sin into the kingdom of
righteousness. In this way they make their calling sure, and, like
trees, are judged by their fruits.

Chapter 16.

16. Refutation of the calumnies by which it is attempted to throw
odium on this doctrine.
    
    The divisions of this chapter are, - I. The calumnies of the
Papists against the orthodox doctrine of Justification by Faith are
reduced to two classes. The first class, with its consequences,
refuted, sec. 1-3. II. The second class, which is dependent on the
first, refuted in the last section.
    
Sections.

1. Calumnies of the Papists. 1. That we destroy good works, and give
    encouragement to sin. Refutation of the first calumny. 1.
    Character of those who censure us. 2. Justification by faith
    establishes the necessity of good works.
2. Refutation of a consequent of the former calumny, viz., that men
    are dissuaded from well-doing when we destroy merit. Two modes
    of refutation. First mode confirmed by many invincible
    arguments.
3. The Apostles make no mention of merit, when they exhort us to
    good works. On the contrary, excluding merit, they refer us
    entirely to the mercy of God. Another mode of refutation.
4. Refutation of the second calumny and of an inference from it,
    viz., that the obtaining righteousness is made too easy, when
    it is made to consist in the free remission of sins.
    
    1. Our last sentence may refute the impudent calumny of certain
ungodly men, who charge us, first, with destroying good works and
leading men away from the study of them, when we say, that men are
not justified, and do not merit salvation by works; and, secondly,
with making the means of justification too easy, when we say that it
consists in the free remission of sins, and thus alluring men to sin
to which they are already too much inclined. These calumnies, I say,
are sufficiently refuted by that one sentence; however, I will
briefly reply to both. The allegation is that justification by faith
destroys good works. I will not describe what kind of zealots for
good works the persons are who thus charge us. We leave them as much
liberty to bring the charge, as they take license to taint the whole
world with the pollution of their lives. They pretend to lament,
that when faith is so highly extolled works are deprived of their
proper place. But what if they are rather ennobled and established?
We dream not of a faith which is devoid of good works, nor of a
justification which can exist without them: the only difference is,
that while we acknowledge that faith and works are necessarily
connected, we, however, place justification in faith, not in works.
How this is done is easily explained, if we turn to Christ only, to
whom our faith is directed and from whom it derives all its power.
Why, then, are we justified by faith? Because by faith we apprehend
the righteousness of Christ, which alone reconciles us to God. This
faith, however, you cannot apprehend without at the same time
apprehending sanctification; for Christ "is made unto us wisdom, and
righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption," (1 Cor. 1: 30.)
Christ, therefore, justifies no man without also sanctifying him.
These blessings are conjoined by a perpetual and inseparable tie.
Those whom he enlightens by his wisdom he redeems; whom he redeems
he justifies; whom he justifies he sanctifies. But as the question
relates only to justification and sanctification, to them let us
confine ourselves. Though we distinguish between them, they are both
inseparably comprehended in Christ. Would ye then obtain
justification in Christ? You must previously possess Christ. But you
cannot possess him without being made a partaker of his
sanctification: for Christ cannot be divided. Since the Lord,
therefore, does not grant us the enjoyment of these blessings
without bestowing himself, he bestows both at once but never the one
without the other. Thus it appears how true it is that we are
justified not without, and yet not by works, since in the
participation of Christ, by which we are justified, is contained not
less sanctification than justification.
    2. It is also most untrue that men's minds are withdrawn from
the desire of well-doing when we deprive them of the idea of merit.
Here, by the way, the reader must be told that those men absurdly
infer merit from reward, as I will afterwards more clearly explain.
They thus infer, because ignorant of the principle that God gives no
less a display of his liberality when he assigns reward to works,
than when he bestows the faculty of well-doing. This topic it will
be better to defer to its own place. At present, let it be
sufficient merely to advert to the weakness of their objection. This
may be done in two ways. For, first, they are altogether in error
when they say that, unless a hope of reward is held forth, no regard
will be had to the right conduct of life. For if all that men do
when they serve God is to look to the reward, and hire out or sell
their labour to him, little is gained: he desires to be freely
worshipped, freely loved: I say he approves the worshipper who, even
if all hope of reward were cut off, would cease not to worship him.
Moreover, when men are to be urged, there cannot be a stronger
stimulus than that derived from the end of our redemption and
calling, such as the word of God employs when it says, that it were
the height of impiety and ingratitude not to "love him who first
loved us;" that by "the blood of Christ" our conscience is purged
"from dead works to serve the living God;" that it were impious
sacrilege in any one to count "the blood of the covenant, wherewith
he was sanctified, an unholy thing;" that we have been "delivered
out of the hands of our enemies," that we "might serve him without
fear, in holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our
life;" that being "made free from sin," we "become the servants of
righteousness;" "that our old man is crucified with him," in order
that we might rise to newness of life. Again, "if ye then be risen
with Christ, (as becomes his members,) seek those things which are
above," living as pilgrims in the world, and aspiring to heaven,
where our treasure is. "The grace of God has appeared to all men,
bringing salvation, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and
worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in
this present world; looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious
appearing of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ." "For God
has not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation through our
Lord Jesus Christ." "Know ye not that ye are the temples of the Holy
Spirit," which it were impious to profane? "Ye were sometimes
darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as the children of
light." "God has not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness."
"For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye
should abstain" from all illicit desires: ours is a "holy calling,"
and we respond not to it except by purity of life. "Being then made
free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness." Can there
be a stronger argument in eliciting us to charity than that of John?
"If God so loved us, we ought also to love one another." "In this
the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil:
whosoever does not righteousness is not of God, neither he that
loveth not his brother. Similar is the argument of Paul, "Know ye
not that your bodies are the members of Christ?" "For as the body is
one, and has many members, and all the members of that one body
being many, are one body, so also is Christ." Can there be a
stronger incentive to holiness than when we are told by John, "Every
man that has this hope in him purifieth himself; even as he is
pure?" and by Paul, "Having, therefore, these promises, dearly
beloved, cleanse yourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and
spirit;" or when we hear our Savior hold forth himself as an example
to us that we should follow his steps?
    3. I have given these few passages merely as a specimen; for
were I to go over them all, I should form a large volume. All the
Apostles abound in exhortations, admonitions and rebukes, for the
purpose of training the man of God to every good work, and that
without any mention of merit. Nay, rather their chief exhortations
are founded on the fact, that without any merit of ours, our
salvation depends entirely on the mercy of God. Thus Paul, who
during a whole Epistle had maintained that there was no hope of life
for us save in the righteousness of Christ, when he comes to
exhortations beseeches us by the mercy which God has bestowed upon
us, (Rom. 12: 1.) Andy indeed this one reason ought to have been
sufficient, that God may be glorified in us. But if any are not so
ardently desirous to promote the glory of God, still the remembrance
of his kindness is most sufficient to incite them to do good, (see
Chrysost. Homily. in Genes.) But those men, because, by introducing
the idea of merit, they perhaps extract some forced and servile
obedience of the Law, falsely allege, that as we do not adopt the
same course, we have no means of exhorting to good works. As if God
were well pleased with such services when he declares that he loves
a cheerful giver, and forbids any thing to be given him grudgingly
or of necessity, (2 Cor. 9: 7.) I say not that I would reject that
or omit any kind of exhortation which Scripture employs, its object
being not to leave any method of animating us untried. For it
states, that the recompense which God will render to every one is
according to his deeds; but, first, I deny that that is the only,
or, in many instances, the principal motive; and, secondly, I admit
not that it is the motive with which we are to begin. Moreover, I
maintain that it gives not the least countenance to those merits
which these men are always preaching. This will afterwards be seen.
Lastly, there is no use in this recompense, unless we have
previously embraced the doctrine that we are justified solely by the
merits of Christ as apprehended by faith, and not by any merit of
works; because the study of piety can be fitly prosecuted only by
those by whom this doctrine has been previously imbibed. This is
beautifully intimated by the Psalmist when he thus addresses God,
"There is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared," (Ps.
130: 4.) For he shows that the worship of God cannot exist without
acknowledging his mercy, on which it is founded and established.
This is specially deserving of notice, as showing us not only that
the beginning of the due worship of God is confidence in his mercy;
but that the fear of God (which Papists will have to be meritorious)
cannot be entitled to the name of merit, for this reason, that it is
founded on the pardon and remission of sins.
    4. But the most futile calumny of all is, that men are invited
to sin when we affirm that the pardon in which we hold that
justification consists is gratuitous. Our doctrine is, that
justification is a thing of such value, that it cannot be put into
the balance with any good quality of ours; and, therefore, could
never be obtained unless it were gratuitous: moreover, that it is
gratuitous to us, but not also to Christ, who paid so dearly for it;
namely his own most sacred blood, out of which there was no price of
sufficient value to pay what was due to the justice of God. When men
are thus taught they are reminded that it is owing to no merit of
theirs that the shedding of that most sacred blood is not repeated
every time they sin. Moreover, we say that our pollution is so
great, that it can never be washed away save in the fountain of his
pure blood. Must not those who are thus addressed conceive a greater
horror of sin than if it were said to be wiped off by a sprinkling
of good works? If they have any reverence for God, how can they,
after being once purified, avoid shuddering at the thought of again
wallowing in the mire, and as much as in them lies troubling and
polluting the purity of this fountain? "I have washed my feet,"
(says the believing soul in the Song of Solomon, 5: 3,) "how shall I
defile them?" It is now plain which of the two makes the forgiveness
of sins of less value, and derogates from the dignity of
justification. They pretend that God is appeased by their frivolous
satisfactions; in other words, by mere dross. We maintain that the
guilt of sin is too heinous to be so frivolously expiated; that the
offense is too grave to be forgiven to such valueless satisfactions;
and, therefore, that forgiveness is the prerogative of Christ's
blood alone. They say that righteousness, wherever it is defective,
is renewed and repaired by works of satisfaction. We think it too
precious to be balanced by any compensation of works, and,
therefore, in order to restore it, recourse must be had solely to
the mercy of God. For the other points relating to the forgiveness
of sins, see the following chapter.

Chapter 17.

17. The promises of the Law and the Gospel reconciled.

    In the following chapter, the arguments of Sophists, who would
destroy or impair the doctrine of Justification by Faith, are
reduced to two classes. The former is general, the latter special,
and contains some arguments peculiar to itself. I. The first class,
which is general, and in a manner contains the foundation of all the
arguments, draws an argument from the promises of the law. This is
considered from sec. 1-3. II. The second class following from the
former, and containing special proofs. An argument drawn from the
history of Cornelius explained, sec. 4, 5. III. A full exposition of
those passages of Scripture which represent God as showing mercy and
favor to the cultivators of righteousness, sec. 6. IV. A third
argument from the passages which distinguish good works by the name
of righteousness, and declare that men are justified by them, sec.
7, 8. V. The adversaries of justification by faith placed in a
dilemma. Their partial righteousness refuted, sec. 9, 10. VI. A
fourth argument, setting the Apostle James in opposition to Paul,
considered, sec. 11, 12. VII. Answer to a fifth argument, that,
according to Paul, not the hearers but the doors of the law are
justified, sec. 13. VIII. Consideration of a sixth argument, drawn
from those passages in which believers boldly submit their
righteousness to the judgment of God, and ask him to decide
according to it, sec. 14. IX. Examination of the last argument,
drawn from passages which ascribe righteousness and life to the ways
of believers, sec. 15.

Sections.

1. Brief summary of Chapters 15 and 16. Why justification is denied
    to works. Argument of opponents founded on the promises of the
    law. The substance of this argument. Answer. Those who would be
    justified before God must be exempted from the power of the
    law. How this is done.
2. Confirmation of the answer ab impossibili, and from the testimony
    of an Apostle and of David.
3. Answer to the objection, by showing why these promises were
    given. Refutation of the sophistical distinction between the
    intrinsic value of works, and their value er parts.
4. Argument from the history of Cornelius. Answer, by distinguishing
    between two kinds of acceptance. Former kind. Sophistical
    objection refuted.
5. Latter kind. Plain from this distinction that Cornelius was
    accepted freely before his good works could be accepted.
    Similar explanations to be given of the passage in which God is
    represented as merciful and propitious to the cultivators of
    righteousness.
6. Exposition of these passages. Necessary to observe whether the
    promise is legal or evangelical. The legal promise always made
    under the condition that we "do," the evangelical under the
    condition that we "believe."
7. Argument from the passages which distinguish good works by the
    name of righteousness, and declare that man is justified by
    them. Answer to the former part of the argument respecting the
    name. Why the works of the saints called works of
    righteousness. Distinction to be observed.
8. Answer to the second part of the argument, viz., that man is
    justified by works. Works of no avail by themselves; we are
    justified by faith only. This kind of righteousness defined.
    Whence the value set on good works.
9. Answer confirmed and fortified by a dilemma.
10. In what sense the partial imperfect righteousness of believers
    accepted. Conclusion of the refutation.
11. Argument founded on the Epistle of James. First answer. One
    Apostle cannot be opposed to another. Second answer. Third
    answer, from the scope of James. A double paralogism in the
    term Faith. In James the faith said not to justify is a mere
    empty opinion; in Paul it is the instrument by which we
    apprehend Christ our righteousness.
12. Another paralogism on the word justify. Paul speaks of the
    cause, James of the effects, of justification. Sum of the
    discussion.
13. Argument founded on Rom. 2: 13. Answer, explaining the Apostles
    meaning. Another argument, containing a reduction ad
    impossibili. Why Paul used the argument.
14. An argument founded on the passages in which believers
    confidently appeal to their righteousness. Answer, founded on a
    consideration of two circumstances. 1. They refer only to a
    special cause. 2. They claim righteousness in comparison with
    the wicked.
16. Last argument from those passages which ascribe righteousness
    and life to the ways of believers. Answer. This proceeds from
    the paternal kindness of God. What meant by the perfection of
    saints.
    
    1. Let us now consider the other arguments which Satan by his
satellites invents to destroy or impair the doctrine of
Justification by Faith. I think we have already put it out of the
power of our calumniators to treat us as if we were the enemies of
good works - justification being denied to works not in order that
no good works may be done or that those which are done may be denied
to be good; but only that we may not trust or glory in them, or
ascribe salvation to them. Our only confidence and boasting, our
only anchor of salvation is, that Christ the Son of God is ours, and
that we are in him sons of God and heirs of the heavenly kingdom,
being called, not by our worth, but the kindness of God, to the hope
of eternal blessedness. But since, as has been said, they assail us
with other engines, let us now proceed to demolish them also. First,
they recur to the legal promises which the Lord proclaimed to the
observers of the law, and they ask us whether we hold them to be
null or effectual. Since it were absurd and ridiculous to say they
are null, they take it for granted that they have some efficacy.
Hence they infer that we are not justified by faith only. For the
Lord thus speaks: "Wherefore it shall come to pass, if ye hearken to
these judgments, and keep and do them, that the Lord thy God shall
keep unto thee the covenant and the mercy which he sware unto thy
fathers; and he will love thee, and bless thee and multiply thee,"
(Deut. 7: 12, 13.) Again, "If ye thoroughly amend your ways and your
doings; if ye thoroughly execute judgment between a man and his
neighbor; if ye oppress not the stranger, the fatherless, and the
widow, and shed not innocent blood in this place, neither walk after
other gods to your hurt: then will I cause you to dwell in this
place, in the land that I gave to your fathers, for ever and ever,"
(Jer. 7: 5-7.) It were to no purpose to quote a thousand similar
passages, which, as they are not different in meaning, are to be
explained on the same principle. In substance, Moses declares that
in the law is set down "a blessing and a curse," life and death,
(Deut. 11: 26;) and hence they argue, either that that blessing is
become inactive and unfruitful, or that justification is not by
faith only. We have already shown, that if we cleave to the law we
are devoid of every blessing, and have nothing but the curse
denounced on all transgressors. The Lord does not promise any thing
except to the perfect observers of the law; and none such are any
where to be found. The results therefore is that the whole human
race is convicted by the law, and exposed to the wrath and curse of
God: to be saved from this they must escape from the power of the
law, and be as it were brought out of bondage into freedom, - not
that carnal freedom which indisposes us for the observance of the
law, tends to licentiousness, and allows our passions to wanton
unrestrained with loosened reins; but that spiritual freedom which
consoles and raises up the alarmed and smitten conscience,
proclaiming its freedom from the curse and condemnation under which
it was formerly held bound. This freedom from subjection to the law,
this manumission, if I may so express it, we obtain when by faith we
apprehend the mercy of God in Christ, and are thereby assured of the
pardon of sins, with a consciousness of which the law stung and
tortured us.
    2. For this reason, the promises offered in the law would all
be null and ineffectual, did not God in his goodness send the gospel
to our aid, since the condition on which they depend, and under
which only they are to be performed, viz., the fulfillment of the
law, will never be accomplished. Still, however the aid which the
Lord gives consists not in leaving part of justification to be
obtained by works, and in supplying part out of his indulgence, but
in giving us Christ as in himself alone the fulfillment of
righteousness. For the Apostle, after premising that he and the
other Jews, aware that "a man is not justified by the works of the
law," had "believed in Jesus Christ," adds as the reason, not that
they might be assisted to make up the sum of righteousness by faith
in Christ, but that they "might be justified by the faith of Christ,
and not by the works of the law," (Gal. 2: 16.) If believers
withdraw from the law to faith, that in the latter they may find the
justification which they see is not in the former, they certainly
disclaim justification by the law. Therefore, whose will, let him
amplify the rewards which are said to await the observer of the law,
provided he at the same time understand, that owing to our
depravity, we derive no benefit from them until we have obtained
another righteousness by faith. Thus David after making mention of
the reward which the Lord has prepared for his servants, (Ps. 25
almost throughout,) immediately descends to an acknowledgment of
sins, by which the reward is made void. In Psalm 19, also, he loudly
extols the benefits of the law; but immediately exclaims, "Who can
understand his errors? cleanse thou me from secret faults," (Ps. 19:
12.) This passage perfectly accords with the former, when, after
saying, "the paths of the Lord are mercy and truth unto such as keep
his covenant and his testimonies," he adds, "For thy name's sake, O
Lord, pardon mine iniquity: for it is great," (Ps. 25: 10, 11.)
Thus, too, we ought to acknowledge that the favor of God is offered
to us in the law, provided by our works we can deserve it; but that
it never actually reaches us through any such desert.
    3. What then? Were the promises given that they might vanish
away without fruit? I lately declared that this is not my opinion. I
say, indeed, that their efficacy does not extend to us so long as
they have respect to the merit of works, and, therefore, that,
considered in themselves, they are in some sense abolished. Hence
the Apostle shows, that the celebrated promise, "Ye shall therefore
keep my statutes and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live
in them," (Levit. 18: 5; Ezek. 20: 10,) will, if we stop at it, be
of no avail, and will profit us not a whit more than if it were not
given, being inaccessible even to the holiest servants of God, who
are all far from fulfilling the law, being encompassed with many
infirmities. But when the gospel promises are substituted, promises
which announce the free pardon of sins, the result is not only that
our persons are accepted of God, but his favor also is shown to our
works, and that not only in respect that the Lord is pleased with
them, but also because he visits them with the blessings which were
due by agreement to the observance of his law. I admit, therefore,
that the works of the faithful are rewarded with the promises which
God gave in his law to the cultivators of righteousness and
holiness; but in this reward we should always attend to the cause
which procures favor to works. This cause, then, appears to be
threefold. First, God turning his eye away from the works of his
servants which merit reproach more than praise, embraces them in
Christ, and by the intervention of faith alone reconciles them to
himself without the aid of works. Secondly the works not being
estimated by their own worth, he, by his fatherly kindness and
indulgence, honors so far as to give them some degree of value.
Thirdly, he extends his pardon to them, not imputing the
imperfection by which they are all polluted, and would deserve to be
regarded as vices rather than virtues. Hence it appears how much
Sophists were deluded in thinking they admirably escaped all
absurdities when they said, that works are able to merit salvation,
not from their intrinsic worth, but according to agreement, the Lord
having, in his liberality, set this high value upon them. But,
meanwhile, they observed not how far the works which they insisted
on regarding as meritorious must be from fulfilling the condition of
the promises, were they not preceded by a justification founded on
faith alone, and on forgiveness of sins - a forgiveness necessary to
cleanse even good works from their stains. Accordingly, of the three
causes of divine liberality to which it is owing that good works are
accepted, they attended only to one: the other two, though the
principal causes, they suppressed.
    4. They quote the saying of Peter as given by Luke in the Acts,
"Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: but in
every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is
accepted with him" (Acts 10: 34, 35.) And hence they infer, as a
thing which seems to them beyond a doubt, that if man by right
conduct procures the favor of God, his obtaining salvation is not
entirely the gift of God. Nay, that when God in his mercy assists
the sinner, he is inclined to mercy by works. There is no way of
reconciling the passages of Scripture, unless you observe that man's
acceptance with God is twofold. As man is by nature, God finds
nothing in him which can incline him to mercy, except merely big
wretchedness. If it is clear then that man, when God first
interposes for him, is naked and destitute of all good, and, on the
other hand, loaded and filled with all kinds of evil, - for what
quality, pray, shall we say that he is worthy of the heavenly
kingdom? Where God thus clearly displays free mercy, have done with
that empty imagination of merit. Another passage in the same book,
viz., where Cornelius hears from the lips of an angel, "Thy prayer
and thine alms are come up for a memorial before God," (Acts 10: 4,)
is miserably wrested to prove that man is prepared by the study of
good works to receive the favor of God. Cornelius being endued with
true wisdom, in other words, with the fear of God, must have been
enlightened by the Spirit of wisdom, and being an observer of
righteousness, must have been sanctified by the same Spirit;
righteousness being, as the Apostle testifies, one of the most
certain fruits of the Spirit, (Gal. 5: 5.) Therefore, all those
qualities by which he is said to have pleased God he owed to divine
grace: so far was he from preparing himself by his own strength to
receive it. Indeed, not a syllable of Scripture can be produced
which does not accord with the doctrine, that the only reason why
God receives man into his favor is, because he sees that he is in
every respect lost when left to himself; lost, if he does not
display his mercy in delivering him. We now see that in thus
accepting, God looks not to the righteousness of the individual, but
merely manifests the divine goodness towards miserable sinners, who
are altogether undeserving of this great mercy.
    5. But after the Lord has withdrawn the sinner from the abyss
of perdition, and set him apart for himself by means of adoption,
having begotten him again and formed him to newness of life, he
embraces him as a new creature, and bestows the gifts of his Spirit.
This is the acceptance to which Peter refers, and by which believers
after their calling are approved by God even in respect of works;
for the Lord cannot but love and delight in the good qualities which
he produces in them by means of his Spirit. But we must always bear
in mind, that the only way in which men are accepted of God in
respect of works is, that whatever good works he has conferred upon
those whom he admits to favor, he by an increase of liberality
honors with his acceptance. For whence their good works, but just
that the Lord having chosen them as vessels of honor, is pleased to
adorn them with true purity? And how are their actions deemed good
as if there was no deficiency in them, but just that their merciful
Father indulgently pardons the spots and blemishes which adhere to
them? In one word, the only meaning of acceptance in this passage
is, that God accepts and takes pleasure in his children, in whom he
sees the traces and lineaments of his own countenance. We have else
here said, that regeneration is a renewal of the divine image in us.
Since God, therefore, whenever he beholds his own face, justly loves
it and holds it in honor, the life of believers, when formed to
holiness and justice, is said, not without cause, to be pleasing to
him. But because believers, while encompassed with mortal flesh, are
still sinners, and their good works only begun savor of the
corruption of the flesh, God cannot be propitious either to their
persons or their works, unless he embraces them more in Christ than
in themselves. In this way are we to understand the passages in
which God declares that he is clement and merciful to the
cultivators of righteousness. Moses said to the Israelites, "Know,
therefore, that the Lord thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which
keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his
commandments, to a thousand generations." These words afterwards
became a common form of expression among the people. Thus Solomon in
his prayer at the dedication says, "Lord God of Israel, there is no
God like thee, in heaven above, or on earth beneath, who keepest
covenant and mercy with thy servants that walk before thee with all
their heart," (1 Kings 8: 23.) The same words are repeated by
Nehemiah, (Neh. 1: 5.) As the Lord in all covenants of mercy
stipulates on his part for integrity and holiness of life in his
servants, (Deut. 29: 18,) lest his goodness might be held in
derision, or any one, puffed up with exultation in it, might speak
flatteringly to his soul while walking in the depravity of his
heart, so he is pleased that in this way those whom he admits to
communion in the covenant should be kept to their duty. Still,
however, the covenant was gratuitous at first, and such it ever
remains. Accordingly, while David declares, "according to the
cleanness of my hands has he recompensed me," yet does he not omit
the fountain to which I have referred; "he delivered me, because he
delighted in me," (2 Sam. 22: 20, 21.) In commending the goodness of
his cause, he derogates in no respect from the free mercy which
takes precedence of all the gifts of which it is the origin.
    6. Here, by the way, it is of importance to observe how those
forms of expression differ from legal promises. By legal promises, I
mean not those which lie scattered in the books of Moses, (for there
many Evangelical promises occur,) but those which properly belong to
the legal dispensation. All such promises, by whatever name they may
be called, are made under the condition that the reward is to be
paid on the things commanded being done. But when it is said that
the Lord keeps a covenant of mercy with those who love him, the
words rather demonstrate what kind of servants those are who have
sincerely entered into the covenant, than express the reason why the
Lord blesses them. The nature of the demonstration is this: As the
end for which God bestows upon us the gift of eternal life is, that
he may be loved, feared, and worshipped by us, so the end of all the
promises of mercy contained in Scripture justly is that we may
reverence and serve their author. Therefore, whenever we hear that
he does good to those that observe his law, let us remember that the
sons of God are designated by the duty which they ought perpetually
to observe, that his reason for adopting us is, that we may
reverence him as a father. Hence, if we would not deprive ourselves
of the privilege of adoption, we must always strive in the direction
of our calling. On the other hand, however, let us remember, that
the completion of the Divine mercy depends not on the works of
believers, but that God himself fulfill the promise of salvation to
those who by right conduct correspond to their calling, because he
recognizes the true badges of sons in those only who are directed to
good by his Spirit. To this we may refer what is said of the members
of the Church, "Lord, who shall abide in thy tabernacle? who shall
dwell in thy holy hill? He that walketh uprightly, and worketh
righteousness, and speaketh the truth in his heart," &c., (Ps. 15:
1, 2.) Again, in Isaiah, "Who among us shall dwell with the
devouring fire? who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings?
He that walketh righteously," &c., (Isa. 33: 14, 15.) For the thing
described is not the strength with which believers can stand before
the Lord, but the manner in which our most merciful Father
introduces them into his fellowship, and defends and confirms them
therein. For as he detests sin and loves righteousness, so those
whom he unites to himself he purifies by his Spirit, that he may
render them conformable to himself and to his kingdom. Therefore, if
it be asked, What is the first cause which gives the saints free
access to the kingdom of God, and a firm and permanent footing in
it? the answer is easy. The Lord in his mercy once adopted and ever
defends them. But if the question relates to the manner, we must
descend to regeneration, and the fruits of it, as enumerated in the
fifteenth Psalm.
    7. There seems much more difficulty in those passages which
distinguish good works by the name of righteousness, and declare
that man is justified by them. The passages of the former class are
very numerous, as when the observance of the commandments is termed
justification or righteousness. Of the other classes we have a
description in the words of Moses, "It shall be our righteousness,
if we observe to do all these commandments," (Deut. 6: 25.) But if
you object, that it is a legal promise, which, having an impossible
condition annexed to it, proves nothing, there are other passages to
which the same answer cannot be made; for instance, "If the man be
poor," "thou shalt deliver him the pledge again when the sun goes
down:" "and it shall be righteousness unto thee before the Lord thy
God," (Deut. 24: 13.) Likewise the words of the prophet, "Then stood
up Phinehas, and executed judgment: and so the plague was stayed.
And that was counted unto him for righteousness unto all generations
for evermore," (Psal. 106: 30,, 31.) Accordingly the Pharisees of
our day think they have here full scope for exultation. For, as we
say, that when justification by faith is established, justification
by works falls; they argue on the same principle, If there is a
justification by works, it is false to say that we are justified by
faith only. When I grant that the precepts of the law are termed
righteousness, I do nothing strange: for they are so in reality. I
must, however, inform the reader, that the Hebrew word "chukim" has
been rendered by the Septuagint, not very appropriately,
"dikaiomata", justifications, instead of edicts. But I readily give
up any dispute as to the word. Nor do I deny that the Law of God
contains a perfect righteousness. For although we are debtors to do
all the things which it enjoins, and, therefore, even after a full
obedience, are unprofitable servants; yet, as the Lord has deigned
to give it the name of righteousness, it is not ours to take from it
what he has given. We readily admit, therefore, that the perfect
obedience of the law is righteousness, and the observance of any
precept a part of righteousness, the whole substance of
righteousness being contained in the remaining parts. But we deny
that any such righteousness ever exists. Hence we discard the
righteousness of the law, not as being in itself maimed and
defective, but because of the weakness of our flesh it nowhere
appears. But then Scripture does not merely call the precepts of the
law righteousness, it also gives this name to the works of the
saints: as when it states that Zacharias and his wife "were both
righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances
of the Lord blameless," (Luke 1: 6.) Surely when it thus speaks, it
estimates works more according to the nature of the law than their
own proper character. And here, again, I must repeat the observation
which I lately made, that the law is not to be ascertained from a
careless translation of the Greek interpreter. Still, as Luke chose
not to make any change on the received version, I will not contend
for this. The things contained in the law God enjoined upon man for
righteousness but that righteousness we attain not unless by
observing the whole law: every transgression whatever destroys it.
While, therefore, the law commands nothing but righteousness, if we
look to itself, every one of its precepts is righteousness: if we
look to the men by whom they are performed, being transgressors in
many things, they by no means merit the praise of righteousness for
one work, and that a work which, through the imperfection adhering
to it, is always in some respect vicious.
    8. I come to the second class, (sec. 1, 7, ad init.,) in which
the chief difficulty lies. Paul finds nothing stronger to prove
justification by faith than that which is written of Abraham, he
"believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness," (Rom.
4: 3; Gal. 3: 6.) Therefore, when it is said that the achievement of
Phinehas "was counted unto him for righteousness," (Psal. 106: 30,
Al,) we may argue that what Paul contends for respecting faith
applies also to works. Our opponents, accordingly, as if the point
were proved, set it down that though we are not justified without
faith, it is not by faith only; that our justification is completed
by works. Here I beseech believers, as they know that the true
standard of righteousness must be derived from Scripture alone, to
consider with me seriously and religiously, how Scripture can be
fairly reconciled with that view. Paul, knowing that justification
by faith was the refuge of those who wanted righteousness of their
own, confidently infers, that all who are justified by faith are
excluded from the righteousness of works. But as it is clear that
this justification is common to all believers, he with equal
confidence infers that no man is justified by works; nay, more, that
justification is without any help from works. But it is one thing to
determine what power works have in themselves, and another to
determine what place they are to hold after justification by faith
has been established. If a price is to be put upon works according
to their own worth, we hold that they are unfit to appear in the
presence of God: that man, accordingly, has no works in which he can
glory before God, and that hence, deprived of all aid from works, he
is justified by faith alone. Justification, moreover, we thus
define: The sinner being admitted into communion with Christ is, for
his sake, reconciled to God; when purged by his blood he obtains the
remission of sins, and clothed with righteousness, just as if it
were his own, stands secure before the judgment-seat of heaven.
Forgiveness of sins being previously given, the good works which
follow have a value different from their merit, because whatever is
imperfect in them is covered by the perfection of Christ, and all
their blemishes and pollutions are wiped away by his purity, so as
never to come under the cognizance of the divine tribunal. The guilt
of all transgressions, by which men are prevented from offering God
an acceptable service, being thus effaced, and the imperfection
which is wont to sully even good works being buried, the good works
which are done by believers are deemed righteous, or; which is the
same thing, are imputed for righteousness.
    9. Now, should any one state this to me as an objection to
justification by faith, I would first ask him, Whether a man is
deemed righteous for one holy work or two, while in all the other
acts of his life lie is a transgressor of the law? This were,
indeed, more than absurd. I would next ask, Whether he is deemed
righteous on account of many good works if he is guilty of
transgression in some one part? Even this he will not venture to
maintain in opposition to the authority of the law, which
pronounces, "Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this
law to do them," (Deut. 27: 26.) I would go still farther and ask,
Whether there be any work which may not justly be convicted of
impurity or imperfection? How, then, will it appear to that eye
before which even the heavens are not clean, and angels are
chargeable with folly? (Job 4: 18.) Thus he will be forced to
confess that no good work exists that is not defiled, both by
contrary transgression and also by its own corruption, so that it
cannot be honored as righteousness. But if it is certainly owing to
justification by faith that works, otherwise impure, unclean,
defective, unworthy of the sight, not to say of the love of God, are
imputed for righteousness, why do they by boasting of this
imputation aim at the destruction of that justification, but for
which the boast were vain? Are they desirous of having a viper's
birth? To this their ungodly language tends. They cannot deny that
justification by faith is the beginning, the foundation, the cause,
the subject, the substance, of works of righteousness, and yet they
conclude that justification is not by faith, because good works are
counted for righteousness. Let us have done then with this
frivolity, and confess the fact as it stands; if any righteousness
which works are supposed to possess depends on justification by
faith, this doctrine is not only not impaired, but on the contrary
confirmed, its power being thereby more brightly displayed. Nor let
us suppose, that after free justification works are commended, as if
they afterwards succeeded to the office of justifying, or shared the
office with faith. For did not justification by faith always remain
entire, the impurity of works would be disclosed. There is nothing
absurd in the doctrine, that though man is justified by faith, he is
himself not only not righteous, but the righteousness attributed to
his works is beyond their own deserts.
    10. In this way we can admit not only that there is a partial
righteousness in works, (as our adversaries maintain,) but that they
are approved by God as if they were absolutely perfect. If we
remember on what foundation this is rested, every difficulty will be
solved. The first time when a work begins to be acceptable is when
it is received with pardon. And whence pardon, but just because God
looks upon us and all that belongs to us as in Christ? Therefore, as
we ourselves when ingrafted into Christ appear righteous before God,
because our iniquities are covered with his innocence; so our works
are, and are deemed righteous, because every thing otherwise
defective in them being buried by the purity of Christ is not
imputed. Thus we may justly say, that not only ourselves, but our
works also, are justified by faith alone. Now, if that righteousness
of works, whatever it be, depends on faith and free justification,
and is produced by it, it ought to be included under it and, so to
speak, made subordinate to it, as the effect to its cause; so far is
it from being entitled to be set up to impair or destroy the
doctrine of justification. Thus Paul, to prove that our blessedness
depends not on our works, but on the mercy of God, makes special use
of the words of David, "Blessed is he whose transgression is
forgiven, whose sin is covered;" "Blessed is the man unto whom the
Lord imputeth not iniquity." Should any one here obtrude the
numberless passages in which blessedness seems to be attributed to
works, as, "Blessed is the man that feareth the Lord;" "He that has
mercy on the poor, happy is he;" "Blessed is the man that walketh
not in the counsel of the ungodly," and "that endureth temptation;"
"Blessed are they that keep judgment," that are "pure in heart,"
"meek," "merciful," &c., they cannot make out that Paul's doctrine
is not true. For seeing that the qualities thus extolled never all
so exist in man as to obtain for him the approbation of God, it
follows, that man is always miserable until he is exempted from
misery by the pardon of his sins. Since, then, all the kinds of
blessedness extolled in the Scripture are vain so that man derives
no benefit from them until he obtains blessedness by the forgiveness
of sins, a forgiveness which makes way for them, it follows that
this is not only the chief and highest, but the only blessedness,
unless you are prepared to maintain that it is impaired by things
which owe their entire existence to it. There is much less to
trouble us in the name of righteous which is usually given to
believers. I admit that they are so called from the holiness of
their lives, but as they rather exert themselves in the study of
righteousness than fulfill righteousness itself, any degree of it
which they possess must yield to justification by faith, to which it
is owing that it is what it is.
    11. But they say that we have a still more serious business
with James, who in express terms opposes us. For he asks, "Was not
Abraham our father justified by works?" and adds "You see then how
that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only," (James 2:
21, 24.) What then? Will they engage Paul in a quarrel with James?
If they hold James to be a servant of Christ, his sentiments must be
understood as not dissenting from Christ speaking by the mouth of
Paul. By the mouth of Paul the Spirit declares that Abraham obtained
justification by faith, not by works; we also teach that all are
justified by faith without the works of the law. By James the same
Spirit declares that both Abraham's justification and ours consists
of works, and not of faith only. It is certain that the Spirit
cannot be at variance with himself. Where, then, will be the
agreement? It is enough for our opponents, provided they can tear up
that justification by faith which we regard as fixed by the deepest
roots: to restore peace to the conscience is to them a matter of no
great concern. Hence you may see, that though they indeed carp at
the doctrine of justification by faith, they meanwhile point out no
goal of righteousness at which the conscience may rest. Let them
triumph then as they will, so long as the only victory they can
boast of is, that they have deprived righteousness of all its
certainty. This miserable victory they will indeed obtain when the
light of truth is extinguished, and the Lord permits them to darken
it with their lies. But wherever the truth of God stands they cannot
prevail. I deny, then, that the passage of James which they are
constantly holding up before us as if it were the shield of
Achilles, gives them the slightest countenance. To make this plain,
let us first attend to the scope of the Apostle, and then show
wherein their hallucination consists. As at that time (and the evil
has existed in the Church ever since) there were many who, while
they gave manifest proof of their infidelity, by neglecting and
omitting all the works peculiar to believers, ceased not falsely to
glory in the name of faith, James here dissipates their vain
confidence. His intention therefore is, not to derogate in any
degree from the power of true faith, but to show how absurdly these
triflers laid claim only to the empty name, and resting satisfied
with it, felt secure in unrestrained indulgence in vice. This state
of matters being understood, it will be easy to see where the error
of our opponents lies. They fall into a double paralogism, the one
in the term faith, the other in the term justifying. The Apostle, in
giving the name of faith to an empty opinion altogether differing
from true faith, makes a concession which derogates in no respect
from his case. This he demonstrates at the outset by the words,
"What does it profit, my brethren, though a man say he has faith,
and have not works?" (James 2: 14.) He says not, "If a man have
faith without works," but "if he say that he has." This becomes
still clearer when a little after he derides this faith as worse
than that of devils, and at last when he calls it "dead." You may
easily ascertain his meaning by the explanation, "Thou believest
that there is one God." Surely if a11 which is contained in that
faith is a belief in the existence of God, there is no wonder that
it does not justify. The denial of such a power to it cannot be
supposed to derogate in any degree from Christian faith, which is of
a very different description. For how does true faith justify unless
by uniting us to Christ, so that being made one with him, we may be
admitted to a participation in his righteousness? It does not
justify because it forms an idea of the divine existence, but
because it reclines with confidence on the divine mercy.
    12. We have not made good our point until we dispose of the
other paralogism: since James places a part of justification in
works. If you would make James consistent with the other Scriptures
and with himself, you must give the word justify, as used by him, a
different meaning from what it has with Paul. In the sense of Paul
we are said to be justified when the remembrance of our
unrighteousness is obliterated and we are counted righteous. Had
James had the same meaning it would have been absurd for him to
quote the words of Moses, "Abraham believed God," &c. The context
runs thus: "Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he
had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith
wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the
Scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it
was imputed unto him for righteousness." If it is absurd to say that
the effect was prior to its cause, either Moses falsely declares in
that passage that Abraham's faith was imputed for righteousness or
Abraham, by his obedience in offering up Isaac, did not merit
righteousness. Before the existence of Ishmael, who was a grown
youth at the birth of Isaac, Abraham was justified by his faith. How
thee can we say that he obtained justification by an obedience which
followed long after? Wherefore, either James erroneously inverts the
proper order, (this it were impious to suppose,) or he meant not to
say that he was justified, as if he deserved to be deemed just. What
then? It appears certain that he is speaking of the manifestation,
not of the imputation of righteousness, as if he had said, Those who
are justified by true faith prove their justification by obedience
and good works, not by a bare and imaginary semblance of faith. In
one word, he is not discussing the mode of justification, but
requiring that the justification of believers shall be operative.
And as Paul contends that men are justified without the aid of
works, so James will not allow any to be regarded as justified who
are destitute of good works. Due attention to the scope will thus
disentangle every doubt; for the error of our opponents lies chiefly
in this, that they think James is defining the mode of
justification, whereas his only object is to destroy the depraved
security of those who vainly pretended faith as an excuse for their
contempt of good works. Therefore, let them twist the words of James
as they may, they will never extract out of them more than the two
propositions: That an empty phantom of faith does not justify, and
that the believer, not contented with such an imagination, manifests
his justification by good works.
    13. They gain nothing by quoting from Paul to the same effect,
that "not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers
of the law shall be justified," (Rom. 2: 13.) I am unwilling to
evade the difficulty by the solution of Ambrose, that Paul spoke
thus because faith in Christ is the fulfillment of the law. This I
regard as a mere subterfuge, and one too for which there is no
occasion, as the explanation is perfectly obvious. The Apostle's
object is to suppress the absurd confidence of the Jews who gave out
that they alone had a knowledge of the law, though at the very time
they where its greatest despisers. That they might not plume
themselves so much on a bare acquaintance with the law, he reminds
them that when justification is sought by the law, the thing
required is not the knowledge but the observance of it. We certainly
mean not to dispute that the righteousness of the law consists in
works, and not only so, but that justification consists in the
dignity and merits of works. But this proves not that we are
justified by works unless they can produce some one who has
fulfilled the law. That Paul had no other meaning is abundantly
obvious from the context. After charging Jews and Gentiles in common
with unrighteousness, he descends to particulars and says, that "as
many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law,"
referring to the Gentiles, and that "as many as have sinned in the
law shall be judged by the law," referring to the Jews. Moreover, as
they, winking at their transgressions, boasted merely of the law, he
adds most appropriately, that the law was passed with the view of
justifying not those who only heard it, but those only who obeyed
it; as if he had said, Do you seek righteousness in the law? do not
bring forward the mere hearing of it, which is in itself of little
weight, but bring works by which you may show that the law has not
been given to you in vain. Since in these they were all deficient,
it followed that they had no ground of boasting in the law. Paul's
meaning, therefore, rather leads to an opposite argument. The
righteousness of the law consists in the perfection of works; but no
man can boast of fulfilling the law by works, and, therefore, there
is no righteousness by the law.
    14. They now retake themselves to those passages in which
believers boldly submit their righteousness to the judgment of God,
and wish to be judged accordingly; as in the following passages:
"Judge me, O Lord, according to my righteousness, and according to
mine integrity that is in me." Again, "Hear the right, O Lord;"
"Thou hast proved mine heart; thou hast visited me in the night;
thou hast tried me, and shalt find nothing." Again "The Lord
regarded me according to my righteousness; according to the
cleanness of my hands has he recompensed me. For I have kept the
ways of the Lord, and have not wickedly departed from my God." "I
was also upright before him, and I kept myself from mine iniquity."
Again, "Judge me, O Lord; for I have walked in mine integrity;" "I
have not sat with vain persons; neither will I go in with
dissemblers;" "Gather not my soul with sinners, nor my life with
bloody men; in whose hands is mischief, and their right hand is full
of bribes. But as for me, I will walk in mine integrity." I have
already spoken of the confidence which the saints seem to derive
simply from works. The passages now quoted will not occasion much
difficulty, if we attend to their "peristasis", their connection, or
(as it is commonly called) special circumstances. These are of two
kinds; for those who use them have no wish that their whole life
should be brought to trial, so that they may be acquitted or
condemned according to its tenor; all they wish is, that a decision
should be given on the particular case; and even here the
righteousness which they claim is not with reference to the divine
perfection, but only by comparison with the wicked and profane. When
the question relates to justification, the thing required is not
that the individual have a good ground of acquittal in regard to
some particular matter, but that his whole life be in accordance
with righteousness. But when the saints implore the divine justice
in vindication of their innocence, they do not present themselves as
free from fault, and in every respect blameless but while placing
their confidence of salvation in the divine goodness only, and
trusting that he will vindicate his poor when they are afflicted
contrary to justice and equity, they truly commit to him the cause
in which the innocent are oppressed. And when they sist themselves
with their adversaries at the tribunal of God, they pretend not to
an innocence corresponding to the divine purity were inquiry
strictly made, but knowing that in comparison of the malice,
dishonesty, craft, and iniquity of their enemies, their sincerity
justice, simplicity, and purity, are ascertained and approved by
God, they dread not to call upon him to judge between them. Thus
when David said to Saul, "The Lord render to every man his
righteousness and his faithfulness," (1 Sam. 26: 23,) he meant not
that the Lord should examine and reward every one according to his
deserts, but he took the Lord to witness how great his innocence was
in comparison of Saul's injustice. Paul, too, when he indulges in
the boast, "Our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience,
that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but
by the grace of God, we have had our conversation in the world, and
more abundantly to you-ward," (2 Cor. 1: 12,) means not to call for
the scrutiny of God, but compelled by the calumnies of the wicked he
appeals, in contradiction of all their slanders, to his faith and
probity, which he knew that God had indulgently accepted. For we see
how he elsewhere says, "I know nothing by myself; yet am I not
hereby justified," (1 Cor. 4: 4;) in other words, he was aware that
the divine judgment far transcended the blind estimate of man.
Therefore, however believers may, in defending their integrity
against the hypocrisy of the ungodly, appeal to God as their witness
and judge, still when the question is with God alone, they all with
one mouth exclaim, "If thou, Lord, should mark iniquities, 0 Lord,
who shall stand?" Again, "Enter not into judgment with thy servant;
for in thy sight shall no man living be justified." Distrusting
their own words, they gladly exclaim, "Thy loving-kindness is better
than life," (Ps. 130: 3; 143: 2; 63: 3.)
    15. There are other passages not unlike those quoted above, at
which some may still demur. Solomon says, "The just man walketh in
his integrity," (Prov. 20: 7.) Again, "In the way of righteousness
is life; and in the pathway thereof there is no death," (Prov. 12:
28.) For this reason Ezekiel says, He that "has walked in my
statutes, and has kept my judgments, to deal truly; he is just, he
shall surely live," (Ezek. 18: 9, 21; 23: 15.) None of these
declarations do we deny or obscure. But let one of the sons of Adam
come forward with such integrity. If there is none, they must perish
from the presence of God, or retake themselves to the asylum of
mercy. Still we deny not that the integrity of believers, though
partial and imperfect, is a step to immortality. How so, but just
that the works of those whom the Lord has assumed into the covenant
of grace, he tries not by their merit, but embraces with paternal
indulgence. By this we understand not with the Schoolmen, that works
derive their value from accepting grace. For their meaning is, that
works otherwise unfit to obtain salvation in terms of law, are made
fit for such a purpose by the divine acceptance. On the other hand,
I maintain that these works being sullied both by other
transgressions and by their own deficiencies, have no other value
than this, that the Lord indulgently pardons them; in other words,
that the righteousness which he bestows on man is gratuitous. Here
they unseasonably obtrude those passages in which the Apostle prays
for all perfection to believers, "To the end he may establish your
hearts unblamable in holiness before God, even our Father," (1
Thess. 3: 13, and elsewhere.) These words were strongly urged by the
Celestines of old, in maintaining the perfection of holiness in the
present life. To this we deem it sufficient briefly to reply with
Augustine, that the goal to which all the pious ought to aspire is,
to appear in the presence of God without spot and blemish; but as
the course of the present life is at best nothing more than
progress, we shall never reach the goal until we have laid aside the
body of sin, and been completely united to the Lord. If any one
choose to give the name of perfection to the saints, I shall not
obstinately quarrel with him, provided he defines this perfection in
the words of Augustine, "When we speak of the perfect virtue of the
saints, part of this perfection consists in the recognition of our
imperfection both in truth and in humility," (August. ad Bonif. lib.
3, c. 7.)

Chapter 18.

18. The righteousness of works improperly inferred from rewards.

    There are three divisions in this chapter, - I. A solution of
two general objections which are urged in support of justification
by works. First, That God will render to every one according to his
works, sec. 1. Second, That the reward of works is called eternal,
sec. 2-6. II. Answer to other special objections derived from the
former, and a perversion of passages of Scripture, sec. 6-9. III.
Refutation of the sophism that faith itself is called a work, and,
therefore, justification by it is by works, sec. 10.
    
1. Two general objections. The former solved and explained. What
    meant by the term working.
2. Solution of the second general objection. 1. Works not the cause
    of salvation. This shown from the name and nature of
    inheritance. 2. A striking example that the Lord rewards the
    works of believers with blessings which he had promised before
    the works were thought of.
3. First reason why eternal life said to be the reward of works.
    This confirmed by passages of Scripture. The concurrence of
    Ambrose. A rule to be observed. Declarations of Christ and an
    Apostle.
4. Other four reasons. Holiness the way to the kingdom, not the
    cause of obtaining it. Proposition of the Sophists.
5. Objection that God crowns the works of his people. Three answers
    from Augustine. A fourth from Scripture.
6. First special objection, viz., that we are ordered to lay up
    treasure in heaven. Answer, showing in what way this can be
    done.
7. Second objection, viz., that the righteous enduring affliction
    are said to be worthy of the kingdom of heaven. Answer. What
    meant by righteousness.
8. A third objection founded on three passages of Paul. Answer.
9. Fourth objection founded on our Savior's words, "If ye would
    enter into life, keep the commandments." Answer, giving an
    exposition of the passage.
10. Last objection, viz., that faith itself is called a work. Answer
    - it is not as a work that faith justifies.
    
    1. Let us now proceed to those passages which affirm that God
will render to every one according to his deeds. Of this description
are the following: "We must all appear before the judgment-seat of
Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body,
according to that he has done, whether it be good or bad;" "Who will
render to every man according to his deeds: to them who by patient
continuance in well-doing seek for glory, and honor, and
immortality, eternal life;" but "tribulation and anguish upon every
soul of man that does evil;" "They that have done good, unto the
resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the
resurrection of damnation;" "Come, ye blessed of my Father;" "For I
was an hungered, and ye gave me meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me
drink," &c. To these we may add the passages which describe eternal
life as the reward of works, such as the following: "The recompense
of a man's hands shall be rendered unto him;" "He that feareth the
commandment shall be rewarded;" "Rejoice and be exceeding glad, for
great is your reward in heaven;" "Every man shall receive his own
rewards according to his own labour." The passages in which it is
said that God will reward every man according to his works are
easily disposed of. For that mode of expression indicates not the
cause but the order of sequence. Now, it is beyond a doubt that the
steps by which the Lord in his mercy consummates our salvation are
these, "Whom he did predestinate, them he also called; and whom he
called, them he also justified; and whom he justified, them he also
glorified" (Rom. 8: 30.) But though it is by mercy alone that God
admits his people to life, yet as he leads them into possession of
it by the course of good works, that he may complete his work in
them in the order which he has destined, it is not strange that they
are said to be crowned according to their works, since by these
doubtless they are prepared for receiving the crown of immortality.
Nay, for this reason they are aptly said to work out their own
salvation, (Phil. 2: 12,) while by exerting themselves in good works
they aspire to eternal life, just as they are elsewhere told to
labour for the meat which perisheth not, (John 6: 27,) while they
acquire life for themselves by believing in Christ; and yet it is
immediately added, that this meat "the Son of man shall give unto
you." Hence it appears, that working is not at all opposed to grace,
but refers to pursuit, and, therefore, it follows not that believers
are the authors of their own salvation, or that it is the result of
their works. What then? The moment they are admitted to fellowship
with Christ, by the knowledge of the gospel, and the illumination of
the Holy Spirit, their eternal life is begun, and then He which has
begun a good work in them "will perform it until the day of Jesus
Christ," (Phil. 1: 6.) And it is performed when in righteousness and
holiness they bear a resemblance to their heavenly Father, and prove
that they are not degenerate sons.
    2. There is nothing in the term reward to justify the inference
that our works are the cause of salvation. First, let it be a fixed
principle in our hearts, that the kingdom of heaven is not the hire
of servants, but the inheritance of sons, (Eph. 1: 18;) an
inheritance obtained by those only whom the Lord has adopted as
sons, and obtained for no other cause than this adoption, "The son
of the bond-women shall not be heir with the son of the free-woman,"
(Gal. 4: 30.) And hence in those very passages in which the Holy
Spirit promises eternal glory as the reward of works, by expressly
calling it an inheritance, he demonstrates that it comes to us from
some other quarter. Thus Christ enumerates the works for which he
bestows heaven as a recompense, while he is calling his elect to the
possession of it, but he at the same time adds, that it is to be
possessed by right of inheritance, (Matth. 25: 34.) Paul, too,
encourages servants, while faithfully doing their duty, to hope for
reward from the Lord, but adds, "of the inheritance," (Col. 3: 24.)
You see how, as it were, in formal terms they carefully caution us
to attribute eternal blessedness not to works, but to the adoption
of God. Why, then, do they at the same time make mention of works?
This question will be elucidated by an example from Scripture, (Gen.
15: 5; 17: 1.) Before the birth of Isaac, Abraham had received
promise of a seed in whom all the families of the earth should be
blessed; the propagation of a seed that for number should equal the
stars of heaven, and the sand of the sea, &c. Many years after he
prepares, in obedience to a divine message, to sacrifice his son.
Having done this act of obedience, he receives the promise, "By
myself have I sworn, saith the Lord, for because thou hast done this
thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son; that in
blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy
seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the
sea-shore, and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; and
in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because
thou hast obeyed my voice," (Gen. 22: 16-18.) What is it we hear?
Did Abraham by his obedience merit the blessing which had been
promised him before the precept was given? Here assuredly we see
without ambiguity that God rewards the works of believers with
blessings which he had given them before the works were thought of,
there still being no cause for the blessings which he bestows but
his own mercy.
    3. And yet the Lord does not act in vain, or delude us when he
says, that he renders to works what he had freely given previous to
works. As he would have us to be exercised in good works, while
aspiring to the manifestation, or, if I may so speak, the fruition
of the things which he has promised, and by means of them to hasten
on to the blessed hope set before us in heaven, the fruit of the
promises is justly ascribed to those things by which it is brought
to maturity. Both things were elegantly expressed by the Apostle,
when he told the Colossians to study the offices of charity, "for
the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, whereof ye heard before
in the word of the truth of the gospel," (Col. 1: 5.) For when he
says that the gospel informed them of the hope which was treasured
up for them in heaven, he declares that it depends on Christ alone,
and not at all upon works. With this accords the saying of Peter,
that believers "are kept by the power of God through faith unto
salvation, ready to be revealed in the last time," (1 Pet. 1: 5.)
When he says that they strive on account of it, he intimates that
believers must continue running during the whole course of their
lives in order that they may attain it. But to prevent us from
supposing that the reward which is promised becomes a kind of merit,
our Lord introduced a parable, in which he represented himself as a
householder, who sent all the laborers whom he met to work in his
vineyard, some at the first hour of the day, others at the second,
others at the third, some even at the eleventh; at evening he paid
them all alike. The interpretation of this parable is briefly and
truly given by that ancient writer (whoever he was) who wrote the
book De Vocatione Gentium, which goes under the name of Ambrose. I
will give it in his words rather than my own: "By means of this
comparison, our Lord represented the many various modes of calling
as pertaining to grace alone, where those who were introduced into
the vineyard at the eleventh hour and made equal to those who had
toiled the whole day, doubtless represent the case of those whom the
indulgence of God, to commend the excellence of grace, has rewarded
in the decline of the day and the conclusion of life; not paying the
price of labor, but shedding the riches of his goodness on those
whom he chose without works; in order that even those who bore the
heat of the day, and yet received no more than those who came last,
may understand that they received a gift of grace, not the hire of
works," (Lib. 1, cap. 5.) Lastly, it is also worthy of remark, that
in those passages in which eternal life is called the reward of
works, it is not taken simply for that communion which we have with
God preparatory to a blessed immortality, when with paternal
benevolence he embraces us in Christ, but for the possession, or, as
it is called, the fruition of blessedness, as the very words of
Christ express it, "in the world to come eternal life," (Mark 10:
30,) and elsewhere, "Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the
kingdom," &c., (Matth. 25: 34.) For this reasons also, Paul gives
the name of adoption to that revelation of adoption which shall be
made at the resurrection; and which adoption he afterwards
interprets to mean, the redemption of our body, (Rom. 8: 23.) But,
otherwise, as alienation from God is eternal death, - so when man is
received into favor by God that he may enjoy communion with him and
become one with him, he passes from death unto life. This is owing
to adoption alone. Although after their manner they pertinaciously
urge the term reward, we can always carry them back to the
declaration of Peter, that eternal life is the reward of faith, (1
Pet. 1: 9.)
    4. Let us not suppose, then, that the Holy Spirit, by this
promise, commends the dignity of our works, as if they were
deserving of such a reward. For Scripture leaves us nothing of which
we may glory in the sight of God. Nay, rather its whole object is to
repress, humble, cast down, and completely crush our pride. But in
this way help is given to our weakness, which would immediately give
way were it not sustained by this expectation, and soothed by this
comfort. First, let every man reflect for himself how hard it is not
only to leave all things, but to leave and abjure one's self. And
yet this is the training by which Christ initiates his disciples,
that is, all the godly. Secondly, he thus keeps them all their
lifetime under the discipline of the cross, lest they should allow
their heart to long for or confide in present good. In short, his
treatment is usually such, that wherever they turn their eyes, as
far as this world extends, they see nothing before them but despair;
and hence Paul says "If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we
are of all men most miserable," (1 Cor. 15: 19.) That they may not
fail in these great straits, the Lord is present reminding them to
lift their head higher and extend their view farther, that in him
they may find a happiness which they see not in the world: to this
happiness he gives the name of reward, hire, recompense, not as
estimating the merit of works, but intimating that it is a
compensation for their straits, sufferings, and affronts, &c.
Wherefore, there is nothing to prevent us from calling eternal life
a recompense after the example of Scripture, because in it the Lord
brings his people from labour to quiet, from affliction to a
prosperous and desirable condition, from sorrow to joy, from poverty
to affluence, from ignominy to glory; in short, exchanges all the
evils which they endured for blessings. Thus there will be no
impropriety in considering holiness of life as the way, not indeed
the way which gives access to the glory of the heavenly kingdom; but
a way by which God conducts his elect to the manifestation of that
kingdom, since his good pleasure is to glorify those whom he has
sanctified, (Rom. 8: 30.) Only let us not imagine that merit and
hire are correlative terms, a point on which the Sophists absurdly
insist, from not attending to the end to which we have adverted. How
preposterous is it when the Lord calls us to one end to look to
another? Nothing is clearer than that a reward is promised to good
works, in order to support the weakness of our flesh by some degree
of comfort; but not to inflate our minds with vain glory. He,
therefore, who from merit infers reward, or weighs works and reward
in the same balance, errs very widely from the end which God has in
view.
    5. Accordingly, when the Scripture speaks of "a crown of
righteousness which God the righteous Judge shall give" "at that
day," (2 Tim. 4: 8,) I not only say with Augustine, "To whom could
the righteous Judge give the crown if the merciful Father had not
given grace, and how could there have been righteousness but for the
precedence of grace which justified the ungodly? how could these be
paid as things due were not things not due previously given?"
(Angust. ad Valent. de Grat. et Lib. Art.;) but I also add, how
could he impute righteousness to our works, did not his indulgence
hide the unrighteousness that is in them? How could he deem them
worthy of reward, did he not with boundless goodness destroy what is
unworthy in them? Augustine is wont to give the name of grace to
eternal life, because, while it is the recompense of works, it is
bestowed by the gratuitous gifts of God. But Scripture humbles us
more, and at the same time elevates us. For besides forbidding us to
glory in works, because they are the gratuitous gifts of God, it
tells us that they are always defiled by some degrees of impurity,
so that they cannot satisfy God when they are tested by the standard
of his justice; but that lest our activity should be destroyed, they
please merely by pardon. But though Augustine speaks somewhat
differently from us, it is plain from his words that the difference
is more apparent than real. After drawing a contrast between two
individuals the one with a life holy and perfect almost to a
miracle; the other honest indeed, and of pure morals, yet not so
perfect as not to leave much room for desiring better, he at length
infers, "He who seems inferior in conduct, yet on account of the
true faith in God by which he lives, (Hab. 2: 4,) and in conformity
to which he accuses himself in all his faults, praises God in all
his good works, takes shame to himself, and ascribes glory to God,
from whom he receives both forgiveness for his sins, and the love of
well-doing, the moment he is set free from this life is translated
into the society of Christ. Why, but just on account of his faith?
For though it saves no man without works, (such faith being
reprobate and not working by love,) yet by means of it sins are
forgiven; for the just lives by faith: without it works which seem
good are converted into sins," (August. ad Bonifac., Lib. 3, c. 5.)
Here he not obscurely acknowledges what we so strongly maintains
that the righteousness of good works depends on their being approved
by God in the way of pardon.
    6. In a sense similar to the above passages our opponents quote
the following: "Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of
unrighteousness; that when ye fail, they may receive you into
everlasting habitations," (Luke 16: 9.) "Charge them that are rich
in this world, that they be not high-minded, nor trust in uncertain
riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to
enjoy: that they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to
distribute, willing to communicate; laying up in store for
themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may
lay hold on eternal life," (1 Tim. 6: 17-19.) For the good works
which we enjoy in eternal blessedness are compared to riches. I
answer, that we shall never attain to the true knowledge of these
passages unless we attend to the scope of the Spirit in uttering
them. If it is true, as Christ says, "Where your treasure is, there
will your heart be also," (Matth. 6: 21,) then, as the children of
the world are intent on providing those things which form the
delight of the present life, so it is the duty of believers, after
they have learned that this life will shortly pass away like a
dream, to take care that those things which they would truly enjoy
be transmitted thither where their entire life is to be spent. We
must, therefore, do like those who begin to remove to any place
where they mean to fix their abode. As they send forward their
effects, and grudge not to want them for a season, because they
think the more they have in their future residence, the happier they
are; so, if we think that heaven is our country, we should send our
wealth thither rather than retain it here, where on our sudden
departure it will be lost to us. But how shall we transmit it? By
contributing to the necessities of the poor, the Lord imputing to
himself whatever is given to them. Hence that excellent promise, "He
that has pity on the poor lendeth to the Lord," (Prov. 19: 17;
Matth. 25: 40;) and again, "He which soweth bountifully shall reap
also bountifully," (2 Cor. 9: 6.) What we give to our brethren in
the exercise of charity is a deposit with the Lord, who, as a
faithful depositary, will ultimately restore it with abundant
interest. Are our duties, then, of such value with God that they are
as a kind of treasure placed in his hand? Who can hesitate to say so
when Scripture so often and so plainly attests it? But if any one
would leap from the mere kindness of God to the merit of works, his
error will receive no support from these passages. For all you can
properly infer from them is the inclination on the part of God to
treat us with indulgence. For, in order to animate us in well-doing,
he allows no act of obedience, however unworthy of his eye, to pass
unrewarded.
    7. But they insist more strongly on the words of the apostle
when, in consoling the Thessalonians under their tribulations, he
tells them that these were sent, "that ye may be counted worthy of
the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer; seeing it is a
righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that
trouble you; and to you who are troubled, rest with us, when the
Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels," (2
Thess. 1: 6-7.) The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews says, "God
is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love, which ye
have showed towards his name, in that ye have ministered to the
saints, and do minister," (Heb. 6: 10.) To the former passage I
answer, that the worthiness spoken of is not that of merit, but as
God the Father would have those whom he has chosen for sons to be
conformed to Christ the first born, and as it behaved him first to
suffer, and then to enter into his glory, so we also, through much
tribulation, enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, while we suffer
tribulation for the name of Christ, we in a manner receive the marks
with which God is wont to stamp the sheep of his flock, (Gal. 6:
17.) Hence we are counted worthy of the kingdom of God, because we
bear in our body the marks of our Lord and Master, these being the
insignia of the children of God. In this sense are we to understand
the passages: "Always bearing about in the body the dying of the
Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in
our body," (2 Cor. 4: 10.) "That I may know him and the power of his
resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made
conformable unto his death," (Phil. 3: 10.) The reason which is
subjoined is intended not to prove any merit, but to confirm our
hope of the kingdom of God; as if he had said, As it is befitting
the just judgment of God to take vengeance on your enemies for the
tribulation which they have brought upon you, so it is also
befitting to give you release and rest from these tribulations. The
other passage, which speaks as if it were becoming the justice of
God not to overlook the services of his people, and almost
insinuates that it were unjust to forget them, is to be thus
explained: God, to arouse us from sloth, assures us that every
labour which we undertake for the glory of his name shall not be in
vain. Let us always remember that this promise, like all other
promises, will be of no avail unless it is preceded by the free
covenant of mercy, on which the whole certainty of our salvation
depends. Trusting to it, however, we ought to feel secure that
however unworthy our services, the liberality of God will not allow
them to pass unrewarded. To confirm us in this expectation, the
Apostle declares that God is not unrighteous; but will act
consistently with the promise once given. Righteousness, therefore,
refers rather to the truth of the divine promise than to the equity
of paying what is due. In this sense there is a celebrated saying of
Augustine, which, as containing a memorable sentiment, that holy man
declined not repeatedly to employ, and which I think not unworthy of
being constantly remembered: "Faithful is the Lord, who has made
himself our debtor, not by receiving any thing from us, but by
promising us all things," (August. in Ps. 32, 109, et alibi.)
    8. Our opponents also adduce the following passages from Paul:
"Though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have
not charity, I am nothing," (1 Cor. 13: 2.) Again, "Now abideth
faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is
charity," (1 Cor. 13: 13.) "Above all these things put on charity,
which is the bond of perfectness," (Col. 3: 14.) From the two first
passages our Pharisees contend that we are justified by charity
rather than by faith, charity being, as they say, the better virtue.
This mode of arguing is easily disposed of I have elsewhere shown
that what is said in the first passage refers not to true faith. In
the second passage we admit that charity is said to be greater than
true faith, but not because charity is more meritorious, but because
it is more fruitful, because it is of wider extent, of more general
service, and always flourishes, whereas the use of faith is only for
a time. If we look to excellence, the love of God undoubtedly holds
the first place. Of it, however, Paul does not here speak; for the
only thing he insists on is, that we should by mutual charity edify
one another in the Lord. But let us suppose that charity is in every
respect superior to faith, what man of sound judgment, nay, what man
with any soundness in his brain, would argue that it therefore does
more to justify? The power of justifying which belongs to faith
consists not in its worth as a work. Our justification depends
entirely on the mercy of God and the merits of Christ: when faith
apprehends these, it is said to justify. Now, if you ask our
opponents in what sense they ascribe justification to charity, they
will answer, Being a duty acceptable to God, righteousness is in
respect of its merit imputed to us by the acceptance of the divine
goodness. Here you see how beautifully the argument proceeds. We say
that faith justifies not because it merits justification for us by
its own worth, but because it is an instrument by which we freely
obtain the righteousness of Christ. They overlooking the mercy of
God, and passing by Christ, the sum of righteousness, maintain that
we are justified by charity as being superior to faith; just as if
one were to maintain that a king is fitter to make a shoe than a
shoemaker, because the king is infinitely the superior of the two.
This one syllogism is ample proof that all the schools of Sorbonne
have never had the slightest apprehension of what is meant by
justification by faith. Should any disputant here interpose, and ask
why we give different meanings to the term faith as used by Paul in
passages so near each other, I can easily show that I have not
slight grounds for so doing. For while those gifts which Paul
enumerates are in some degree subordinate to faith and hope, because
they relate to the knowledge of God, he by way of summary
comprehends them all under the name of faith and hope; as if he had
said, Prophecy and tongues, and the gift of interpreting, and
knowledge, are all designed to lead us to the knowledge of God. But
in this life it is only by faith and hope that we acknowledge God.
Therefore, when I name faith and hope, I at the same time comprehend
the whole. "Now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three;" that is,
how great soever the number of the gifts, they are all to be
referred to them; but "the greatest of these is charity." From the
third passage they infer, If charity is the bond of perfection, it
must be the bond of righteousness, which is nothing else than
perfection. First, without objecting that the name of perfection is
here given by Paul to proper union among the members of a rightly
constituted church, and admitting that by charity we are perfected
before God, what new result do they gain by it? I will always object
in reply, that we never attain to that perfection unless we fulfill
all the parts of charity; and will thence infer, that as all are
most remote from such fulfillment, the hope of perfection is
excluded.
    9. I am unwilling to discuss all the things which the foolish
Sorbonnists have rashly laid hold of in Scripture as it chanced to
come in their way, and throw out against us. Some of them are so
ridiculous, that I cannot mention them without laying myself open to
a charge of trifling. I will, therefore, conclude with an exposition
of one of our Savior's expressions with which they are wondrously
pleased. When the lawyer asked him, "Good Master, what good thing
shall I do, that I may have eternal life?" he answers, "If thou wilt
enter into life, keep the commandments," (Matth. 19: 16, 17.) What
more (they ask) would we have, when the very author of grace bids us
acquire the kingdom of heaven by the observance of the commandments?
As if it were not plain that Christ adapted his answers to the
characters of those whom he addressed. Here he is questioned by a
Doctor of the Law as to the means of obtaining eternal life; and the
question is not put simply, but is, What can men do to attain it?
Both the character of the speaker and his question induced our Lord
to give this answer. Imbued with a persuasion of legal
righteousness, the lawyer had a blind confidence in works. Then all
he asked was, what are the works of righteousness by which salvation
is obtained? Justly, therefore, is he referred to the law, in which
there is a perfect mirror of righteousness. We also distinctly
declare, that if life is sought in works, the commandments are to be
observed. And the knowledge of this doctrine is necessary to
Christians; for how should they retake themselves to Christ, unless
they perceived that they had fallen from the path of life over the
precipice of death? Or how could they understand how far they have
wandered from the way of life unless they previously understand what
that way is? Then only do they feel that the asylum of safety is in
Christ when they see how much their conduct is at variance with the
divine righteousness, which consists in the observance of the law.
The sum of the whole is this, If salvation is sought in works, we
must keep the commandments, by which we are instructed in perfect
righteousness. But we cannot remain here unless we would stop short
in the middle of our course; for none of us is able to keep the
commandments. Being thus excluded from the righteousness of the law,
we must retake ourselves to another remedy, viz., to the faith of
Christ. Wherefore, as a teacher of the law, whom our Lord knew to be
puffed up with a vain confidence in works, was here directed by him
to the law, that he might learn he was a sinner exposed to the
fearful sentence of eternal death; so others, who were already
humbled with this knowledge, he elsewhere solaces with the promise
of grace, without making any mention of the law. "Come unto me, all
ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." "Take
my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart:
and ye shall find rest unto your souls," (Matth. 11: 28, 29.)
    10. At length, after they have wearied themselves with
perverting Scripture, they have recourse to subtleties and sophisms.
One cavil is, that faith is somewhere called a work, (John 6: 29;)
hence they infer that we are in error in opposing faith to works; as
if faith, regarded as obedience to the divine will, could by its own
merit procure our justification, and did not rather, by embracing
the mercy of God, thereby seal upon our hearts the righteousness of
Christ, which is offered to us in the preaching of the gospel. My
readers will pardon me if I stay not to dispose of such absurdities;
their own weakness, without external assault, is sufficient to
destroy them. One objection, however, which has some semblance of
reason, it will be proper to dispose of in passing, lest it give any
trouble to those less experienced. As common sense dictates that
contraries must be tried by the same rule, and as each sin is
charged against us as unrighteousness, so it is right (say our
opponents) that each good work should receive the praise of
righteousness. The answer which some give, that the condemnation of
men proceeds on unbelief alone, and not on particular sins does not
satisfy me. I agree with them, indeed, that infidelity is the
fountain and root of all evil; for it is the first act of revolt
from God, and is afterwards followed by particular transgressions of
the law. But as they seem to hold, that in estimating righteousness
and unrighteousness, the same rule is to be applied to good and bad
works, in this I dissent from them. The righteousness of works
consists in perfect obedience to the law. Hence you cannot be
justified by works unless you follow this straight line (if I may so
call it) during the whole course of your life. The moment you
decline from it you have fallen into unrighteousness. Hence it
appears, that righteousness is not obtained by a few works, but by
an indefatigable and inflexible observance of the divine will. But
the rule with regard to unrighteousness is very different. The
adulterer or the thief is by one act guilty of death, because he
offends against the majesty of God. The blunder of these arguers of
ours lies here: they attend not to the words of James, "Whosoever
shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty
of all. For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not
kill," &c., (James 2: 10, 11.) Therefore, it should not seem absurd
when we say that death is the just recompense of every sin, because
each sin merits the just indignation and vengeance of God. But you
reason absurdly if you infer the converse, that one good work will
reconcile a man to God notwithstanding of his meriting wrath by many
sins.

Chapter 19.

19. Of Christian Liberty

    The three divisions of this chapter are, - I. Necessity of the
doctrine of Christian Liberty, sec. 1. The principal parts of this
liberty explained, sec. 2-8. II. The nature and efficacy of this
liberty against the Epicureans and others who take no account
whatever of the weak, sec. 9 and 10. III. Of offense given and
received. A lengthened and not unnecessary discussion of this
subject, sec. 11-16.
    
Sections.

1. Connection of this chapter with the previous one on
    Justification. A true knowledge of Christian liberty useful and
    necessary. 1. It purifies the conscience. 2. It checks
    licentiousness. 3. It maintains the merits of Christ, the truth
    of the Gospel, and the peace of the soul.
2. This liberty consists of three parts. First, Believers renouncing
    the righteousness of the law, look only to Christ. Objection.
    Answer, distinguishing between Legal and Evangelical
    righteousness.
3. This first part clearly established by the whole Epistle to the
    Galatians.
4. The second part of Christian liberty, viz., that the conscience,
    freed from the yoke of the law, voluntarily obeys the will of
    God. This cannot be done so long as we are under the law.
    Reason.
5. When freed from the rigorous exactions of the law, we can
    cheerfully and with much alacrity answer the call of God.
6. Proof of this second part from an Apostle. The end of this
    liberty.
7. Third part of liberty, viz., the free rise of things indifferent.
    The knowledge of this part necessary to remove despair and
    superstition. Superstition described.
8. Proof of this third part from the Epistle to the Romans. Those
    who observe it not only use evasion. 1. Despisers of God. 2.
    The desperate. 3. The ungrateful. The end and scope of this
    third part.
9. Second part of the chapter, showing the nature and efficacy of
    Christian liberty, in opposition to the Epicureans. Their
    character described. Pretext and allegation. Use of things
    indifferent. Abuse detected. Mode of correcting it.
10. This liberty maintained in opposition to those who pay no regard
    to the weak. Error of this class of men refuted. A most
    pernicious error. Objection. Reply.
11. Application of the doctrine of Christian liberty to the subject
    of offenses. These of two kinds. Offense given. Offense
    received. Of offense given, a subject comprehended by few. Of
    Pharisaical offense, or offense received.
12. Who are to be regarded as weak and Pharisaical. Proved by
    examples and the doctrine of Paul. The just moderation of
    Christian liberty. necessity of vindicating it. No regard to be
    paid to hypocrites. Duty of edifying our weak neighbors.
18. Application of the doctrine to things indifferent. Things
    necessary not to be omitted from any fear of offense.
14. Refutation of errors in regard to Christian liberty. The
    consciences of the godly not to be fettered by human traditions
    in matters of indifference.
15. Distinction to be made between Spiritual and Civil government.
    These must not be confounded. How far conscience can be bound
    by human constitutions. Definition of conscience. Definition
    explained by passages from the Apostolic writings.
16. The relation which conscience bears to external obedience;
    first, in things good and evil; secondly, in things
    indifferent.

    1. We are now to treat of Christian Liberty, the explanation
of which certainly ought not to be omitted by any one proposing to
give a compendious summary of Gospel doctrine. For it is a matter of
primary necessity, one without the knowledge of which the conscience
can scarcely attempt any thing without hesitation, in many must
demur and fluctuate, and in all proceed with fickleness and
trepidation. In particular, it forms a proper appendix to
Justification, and is of no little service in understanding its
force. Nay, those who seriously fear God will hence perceive the
incomparable advantages of a doctrine which wicked scoffers are
constantly assailing with their jibes; the intoxication of mind
under which they labour leaving their petulance without restraint.
This, therefore, seems the proper place for considering the subject.
Moreover, though it has already been occasionally adverted to, there
was an advantage in deferring the fuller consideration of it till
now, for the moment any mention is made of Christian liberty lust
begins to boil, or insane commotions arise, if a speedy restraint is
not laid on those licentious spirits by whom the best things are
perverted into the worst. For they either, under pretext of this
liberty, shake off all obedience to God, and break out into
unbridled licentiousness, or they feel indignant, thinking that all
choice, order, and restraint, are abolished. What can we do when
thus encompassed with straits? Are we to bid adieu to Christian
liberty, in order that we may cut off all opportunity for such
perilous consequences? But, as we have said, if the subject be not
understood, neither Christ, nor the truth of the Gospel, nor the
inward peace of the soul, is properly known. Our endeavor must
rather be, while not suppressing this very necessary part of
doctrine, to obviate the absurd objections to which it usually gives
rise.
    2. Christian liberty seems to me to consist of three parts.
First, the consciences of believers, while seeking the assurance of
their justification before God, must rise above the law, and think
no more of obtaining justification by it. For while the law, as has
already been demonstrated, (supra, chap. 17, sec. 1,) leaves not one
man righteous, we are either excluded from all hope of
justification, or we must be loosed from the law, and so loosed as
that no account at all shall be taken of works. For he who imagines
that in order to obtain justification he must bring any degree of
works whatever, cannot fix any mode or limit, but makes himself
debtor to the whole law. Therefore, laying aside all mention of the
law, and all idea of works, we must in the matter of justification
have recourse to the mercy of God only; turning away our regard from
ourselves, we must look only to Christ. For the question is, not how
we may be righteous, but how, though unworthy and unrighteous, we
may be regarded as righteous. If consciences would obtain any
assurance of this, they must give no place to the law. Still it
cannot be rightly inferred from this that believers have no need of
the law. It ceases not to teach, exhort, and urge them to good,
although it is not recognized by their consciences before the
judgment-seat of God. The two things are very different, and should
be well and carefully distinguished. The whole lives of Christians
ought to be a kind of aspiration after piety, seeing they are called
unto holiness, (Eph. 1: 4; 1 Thess. 4: 5.) The office of the law is
to excite them to the study of purity and holiness, by reminding
them of their duty. For when the conscience feels anxious as to how
it may have the favor of God, as to the answer it could give, and
the confidence it would feel, if brought to his judgment-seat, in
such a case the requirements of the law are not to be brought
forward, but Christ, who surpasses all the perfection of the law, is
alone to be held forth for righteousness.
    3. On this almost the whole subject of the Epistle to the
Galatians hinges; for it can be proved from express passages that
those are absurd interpreters who teach that Paul there contends
only for freedom from ceremonies. Of such passages are the
following: "Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being
made a curse for us." "Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty
wherewith Christ has made us free, and be not entangled again with
the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be
circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to
every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole
law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are
justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace," (Gal. 3: 13; 5: 1-
4.) These words certainly refer to something of a higher order than
freedom from ceremonies. I confess, indeed, that Paul there treats
of ceremonies, because he was contending with false apostles, who
were plotting, to bring back into the Christian Church those ancient
shadows of the law which were abolished by the advent of Christ.
But, in discussing this question, it was necessary to introduce
higher matters, on which the whole controversy turns. First, because
the brightness of the Gospel was obscured by those Jewish shadows,
he shows that in Christ we have a full manifestation of all those
things which were typified by Mosaic ceremonies. Secondly, as those
impostors instilled into the people the most pernicious opinion,
that this obedience was sufficient to merit the grace of God, he
insists very strongly that believers shall not imagine that they can
obtain justification before God by any works, far less by those
paltry observances. At the same time, he shows that by the cross of
Christ they are free from the condemnation of the law, to which
otherwise all men are exposed, so that in Christ alone they can rest
in full security. This argument is pertinent to the present subject,
(Gal. 4: 5, 21, &c.) Lastly, he asserts the right of believers to
liberty of conscience, a liberty which may not be restrained without
necessity.
    4. Another point which depends on the former is, that
consciences obey the law, not as if compelled by legal necessity;
but being free from the yoke of the law itself, voluntarily obey the
will of God. Being constantly in terror so long as they are under
the dominion of the law, they are never disposed promptly to obey
God, unless they have previously obtained this liberty. Our meaning
shall be explained more briefly and clearly by an example. The
command of the law is, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all
thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might," (Deut.
6: 5.) To accomplish this, the soul must previously be divested of
every other thought and feeling, the heart purified from all its
desires, all its powers collected and united on this one object.
Those who, in comparison of others, have made much progress in the
way of the Lord, are still very far from this goal. For although
they love God in their mind, and with a sincere affection of heart,
yet both are still in a great measure occupied with the lusts of the
flesh, by which they are retarded and prevented from proceeding with
quickened pace towards God. They indeed make many efforts, but the
flesh partly enfeebles their strength, and partly binds them to
itself. What can they do while they thus feel that there is nothing
of which they are less capable than to fulfill the law? They wish,
aspire, endeavor; but do nothing with the requisite perfection. If
they look to the law, they see that every work which they attempt or
design is accursed. Nor can any one deceive himself by inferring
that the work is not altogether bad, merely because it is imperfect,
and, therefore, that any good which is in it is still accepted of
God. For the law demanding perfect love condemns all imperfection,
unless its rigor is mitigated. Let any man therefore consider his
work which he wishes to be thought partly good, and he will find
that it is a transgression of the law by the very circumstance of
its being imperfect.
    5. See how our works lie under the curse of the law if they are
tested by the standard of the law. But how can unhappy souls set
themselves with alacrity to a work from which they cannot hope to
gain any thing in return but cursing? On the other hand, if freed
from this severe exaction, or rather from the whole rigor of the
law, they hear themselves invited by God with paternal levity, they
will cheerfully and alertly obey the call, and follow his guidance.
In one word, those who are bound by the yoke of the law are like
servants who have certain tasks daily assigned them by their
masters. Such servants think that nought has been done; and they
dare not come into the presence of their masters until the exact
amount of labour has been performed. But sons who are treated in a
more candid and liberal manner by their parents, hesitate not to
offer them works that are only begun or half finished, or even with
something faulty in them, trusting that their obedience and
readiness of mind will be accepted, although the performance be less
exact than was wished. Such should be our feelings, as we certainly
trust that our most indulgent Parent will approve our services,
however small they may be, and however rude and imperfect. Thus He
declares to us by the prophet, "I will spare them as a man spareth
his own son that serveth him," (Gal. 3: 17;) where the word spare
evidently means indulgence, or connivance at faults, while at the
same time service is remembered. This confidence is necessary in no
slight degree, since without it every thing should be attempted in
vain; for God does not regard any sock of ours as done to himself,
unless truly done from a desire to serve him. But how can this be
amidst these terrors, while we doubt whether God is offended or
served by our work?
    6. This is the reason why the author of the Epistle to the
Hebrews ascribes to faith all the good works which the holy
patriarchs are said to have performed, and estimates them merely by
faith, (Heb. 11: 2.) In regard to this liberty there is a remarkable
passage in the Epistle to the Romans, where Paul argues, "Sin shall
not have dominion over you; for ye are not under the law, but under
grace," (Rom. 6: 14.) For after he had exhorted believers, "Let not
sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in
the lusts thereof: Neither yield ye your members as instruments of
unrighteousness unto sin; but yield yourselves unto God, as those
that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of
righteousness unto God;" they might have objected that they still
bore about with them a body full of lust, that sin still dwelt in
them. He therefore comforts them by adding, that they are freed from
the law; as if he had said, Although you feel that sin is not yet
extinguished, and that righteousness does not plainly live in you,
you have no cause for fear and dejection, as if God were always
offended because of the remains of sin, since by grace you are freed
from the law, and your works are not tried by its standard. Let
those, however who infer that they may sin because they are not
under the law, understand that they have no right to this liberty,
the end of which is to encourage us in well-doing.
    7. The third part of this liberty is that we are not bound
before God to any observance of external things which are in
themselves indifferent, ("adiafora") but that we are now at full
liberty either to use or omit them. The knowledge of this liberty is
very necessary to us; where it is wanting our consciences will have
no rest, there will be no end of superstition. In the present day
many think us absurd in raising a question as to the free eating of
flesh, the free use of dress and holidays, and similar frivolous
trifles, as they think them; but they are of more importance than is
commonly supposed. For when once the conscience is entangled in the
net, it enters a long and inextricable labyrinth, from which it is
afterwards most difficult to escape. When a man begins to doubt
whether it is lawful for him to use linen for sheets, shirts,
napkins, and handkerchiefs, he will not long be secure as to hemp,
and will at last have doubts as to tow; for he will revolve in his
mind whether he cannot sup without napkins, or dispense with
handkerchiefs. Should he deem a daintier food unlawful, he will
afterwards feel uneasy for using loafbread and common eatables,
because he will think that his body might possibly be supported on a
still meaner food. If he hesitates as to a more genial wine, he will
scarcely drink the worst with a good conscience; at last he will not
dare to touch water if more than usually sweet and pure. In fine, he
will come to this, that he will deem it criminal to trample on a
straw lying in his way. For it is no trivial dispute that is here
commenced, the point in debate being, whether the use of this thing
or that is in accordance with the divine will, which ought to take
precedence of all our acts and counsels. Here some must by despair
be hurried into an abyss, while others, despising God and casting
off his fear, will not be able to make a way for themselves without
ruin. When men are involved in such doubts whatever be the direction
in which they turn, every thing they see must offend their
conscience.
    8. "I know," says Paul, "that there is nothing unclean of
itself," (by unclean meaning unholy;) "but to him that esteemeth any
thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean," (Rom. 14: 14.) By these
words he makes all external things subject to our liberty, provided
the nature of that liberty approves itself to our minds as before
God. But if any superstitious idea suggests scruples, those things
which in their own nature were pure are to us contaminated.
Wherefore the apostle adds, "Happy is he that condemneth not himself
in that which he alloweth. And he that doubteth is damned if he eat,
because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is
sin," (Rom. 14: 22, 23.) When men, amid such difficulties, proceed
with greater confidence, securely doing whatever pleases them, do
they not in so far revolt from God? Those who are thoroughly
impressed with some fear of God, if forced to do many things
repugnant to their consciences are discouraged and filled with
dread. All such persons receive none of the gifts of God with
thanksgiving, by which alone Paul declares that all things are
sanctified for our use, (1 Tim. 4: 5.) By thanksgiving I understand
that which proceeds from a mind recognizing the kindness and
goodness of God in his gifts. For many, indeed, understand that the
blessings which they enjoy are the gifts of God, and praise God in
their words; but not being persuaded shalt these have been given to
them, how can they give thanks to God as the giver? In one word, we
see whither this liberty tends viz., that we are to use the gifts of
God without any scruple of conscience, without any perturbation of
mind, for the purpose for which he gave them: in this way our souls
may both have peace with him, and recognize his liberality towards
us. For here are comprehended all ceremonies of free observance, so
that while our consciences are not to be laid under the necessity of
observing them, we are also to remember that, by the kindness of
God, the use of them is made subservient to edification.
    9. It is, however, to be carefully observed, that Christian
liberty is in all its parts a spiritual matter, the whole force of
which consists in giving peace to trembling consciences, whether
they are anxious and disquieted as to the forgiveness of sins, or as
to whether their imperfect works, polluted by the infirmities of the
flesh, are pleasing to God, or are perplexed as to the use of things
indifferent. It is, therefore, perversely interpreted by those who
use it as a cloak for their lusts, that they may licentiously abuse
the good gifts of God, or who think there is no liberty unless it is
used in the presence of men, and, accordingly, in using it pay no
regard to their weak brethren. Under this head, the sins of the
present age are more numerous. For there is scarcely any one whose
means allow him to live sumptuously, who does not delight in
feasting, and dress, and the luxurious grandeur of his house, who
wishes not to surpass his neighbor in every kind of delicacy, and
does not plume himself amazingly on his splendor. And all these
things are defended under the pretext of Christian liberty. They say
they are things indifferent: I admit it, provided they are used
indifferently. But when they are too eagerly longed for, when they
are proudly boasted of, when they are indulged in luxurious
profusion, things which otherwise were in themselves lawful are
certainly defiled by these vices. Paul makes an admirable
distinction in regard to things indifferent: "Unto the pure all
things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is
nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled" (Tit.
1: 15.) For why is a woe pronounced upon the rich who have received
their consolation? (Luke 6: 24,) who are full, who laugh now, who
"lie upon beds of ivory and stretch themselves upon their couches;"
"join house to house," and "lay field to field;" "and the harp and
the viol, the tablet and pipe, and wine, are in their feasts," (Amos
6: 6; Isa. 5: 8, 10.) Certainly ivory and gold, and riches, are the
good creatures of God, permitted, nay destined, by divine providence
for the use of man; nor was it ever forbidden to laugh, or to be
full, or to add new to old and hereditary possessions, or to be
delighted with music, or to drink wine. This is true, but when the
means are supplied to roll and wallow in luxury, to intoxicate the
mind and soul with present and be always hunting after new
pleasures, is very far from a legitimate use of the gifts of God.
Let them, therefore, suppress immoderate desire, immoderate
profusion, vanity, and arrogance, that they may use the gifts of God
purely with a pure conscience. When their mind is brought to this
state of soberness, they will be able to regulate the legitimate
use. On the other hand, when this moderation is wanting, even
plebeian and ordinary delicacies are excessive. For it is a true
saying, that a haughty mind often dwells in a coarse and homely
garb, while true humility lurks under fine linen and purple. Let
every one then live in his own station, poorly or moderately, or in
splendor; but let all remember that the nourishment which God gives
is for life, not luxury, and let them regard it as the law of
Christian liberty, to learn with Paul in whatever state they are,
"therewith to be content," to know "both how to be abased," and "how
to abound," "to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to
suffer need," (Phil. 4: 11.)
    10. Very many also err in this: as if their liberty were not
safe and entire, without having men to witness it, they use it
indiscriminately and imprudently, and in this way often give offense
to weak brethren. You may see some in the present day who cannot
think they possess their liberty unless they come into possession of
it by eating flesh on Friday. Their eating I blame not, but this
false notion must be driven from their minds: for they ought to
think that their liberty gains nothing new by the sight of men, but
is to be enjoyed before God, and consists as much in abstaining as
in using. If they understand that it is of no consequence in the
sight of God whether they eat flesh or eggs, whether they are
clothed in red or in black, this is amply sufficient. The conscience
to which the benefit of this liberty was due is loosed. Therefore,
though they should afterwards, during their whole life, abstain from
flesh, and constantly wear one color, they are not less free. Nay,
just because they are free, they abstain with a free conscience. But
they err most egregiously in paying no regard to the infirmity of
their brethren, with which it becomes us to bear, so as not rashly
to give them offense. But it is sometimes also of consequence that
we should assert our liberty before men. This I admit: yet must we
use great caution in the mode, lest we should cast off the care of
the weak whom God has specially committed to us.
    11. I will here make some observations on offenses, what
distinctions are to be made between them, what kind are to be
avoided and what disregarded. This will afterwards enable us to
determine what scope there is for our liberty among men. We are
pleased with the common division into offense given and offense
taken, since it has the plain sanction of Scripture, and not
improperly expresses what is meant. If from unseasonable levity or
wantonness, or rashness, you do any thing out of order or not in its
own place, by which the weak or unskillful are offended, it may be
said that offense has been given by you, since the ground of offense
is owing to your fault. And in general, offense is said to be given
in any matter where the person from whom it has proceeded is in
fault. Offense is said to be taken when a thing otherwise done, not
wickedly or unseasonably, is made an occasion of offense from
malevolence or some sinister feeling. For here offense was not
given, but sinister interpreters ceaselessly take offense. By the
former kind, the weak only, by the latter, the ill-tempered and
Pharisaical are offended. Wherefore, we shall call the one the
offense of the weak, the other the offense of Pharisees, and we will
so temper the use of our liberty as to make it yield to the
ignorance of weak brethren, but not to the austerity of Pharisees.
What is due to infirmity is fully shown by Paul in many passages.
"Him that is weak in the faith receive ye." Again, "Let us not judge
one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a
stumbling-block, or an occasion to fall, in his brother's way;" and
many others to the same effect in the same place, to which, instead
of quoting them here, we refer the reader. The sum is, "We then that
are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to
please ourselves. Let every one of us please his neighbor for his
good to edification." elsewhere he says, "Take heed lest by any
means this liberty of yours become a stumbling-block to them that
are weak." Again "Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat,
asking no question for conscience sake." "Conscience, I say, not
thine own, but of the other." Finally, "Give none offense, neither
to the Jews nor to the Gentiles nor to the Church of God." Also in
another passage, "Brethren, ye have been called into liberty, only
use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one
another." Thus, indeed, it is: our liberty was not given us against
our weak neighbors, whom charity enjoins us to serve in all things,
but rather that, having peace with God in our minds, we should live
peaceably among men. What value is to be set upon the offense of the
Pharisees we learn from the words of our Lord, in which he says,
"Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind," (Matth. 15:
14.) The disciples had intimated that the Pharisees were offended at
his words. He answers that they are to be let alone that their
offense is not to be regarded.
    12. The matter still remains uncertain, unless we understand
who are the weak and who the Pharisees: for if this distinction is
destroyed, I see not how, in regard to offenses, any liberty at all
would remain without being constantly in the greatest danger. But
Paul seems to me to have marked out most clearly, as well by example
as by doctrine, how far our liberty, in the case of offense, is to
be modified or maintained. When he adopts Timothy as his companion,
he circumcises him: nothing can induce him to circumcise Titus,
(Acts 16: 3; Gal. 2: 3.) The acts are different, but there is no
difference in the purpose or intention; in circumcising Timothy, as
he was free from all men, he made himself the servant of all: "Unto
the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that
are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are
under the law; to them that are without law, as without law, (being
not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might
gain them that are without law. To the weak became I as weak that I
might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might
by all means save some" (1 Cor. 9: 20-22.) We have here the proper
modification of liberty, when in things indifferent it can be
restrained with some advantage. What he had in view in firmly
resisting the circumcision of Titus, he himself testifies when he
thus writes: "But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was
compelled to be circumcised: and that because of false brethren
unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty
which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into
bondage: to whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour,
that the truth of the gospel might continue with you," (Gal. 2:
3-5.) We here see the necessity of vindicating our liberty when, by
the unjust exactions of false apostles, it is brought into danger
with weak consciences. In all cases we must study charity, and look
to the edification of our neighbor. "All things are lawful for me,"
says he, "but all things are not expedient; all things are lawful
for me, but all things edify not. Let no man seek his own, but every
man another's wealth," (1 Cor. 10: 23, 24.) There is nothing plainer
than this rule, that we are to use our liberty if it tends to the
edification of our neighbor, but if inexpedient for our neighbor, we
are to abstain from it. There are some who pretend to imitate this
prudence of Paul by abstinence from liberty, while there is nothing
for which they less employ it than for purposes of charity.
Consulting their own ease, they would have all mention of liberty
buried, though it is not less for the interest of our neighbor to
use liberty for their good and edification, than to modify it
occasionally for their advantage. It is the part of a pious man to
think, that the free power conceded to him in external things is to
make him the readier in all offices of charity.
    13. Whatever I have said about avoiding offenses, I wish to be
referred to things indifferent. Things which are necessary to be
done cannot be omitted from any fear of offense. For as our liberty
is to be made subservient to charity, so charity must in its turn be
subordinate to purity of faith. Here, too, regard must be had to
charity, but it must go as far as the altar; that is, we must not
offend God for the sake of our neighbor. We approve not of the
intemperance of those who do every thing tumultuously, and would
rather burst through every restraint at once than proceed step by
step. But neither are those to be listened to who, while they take
the lead in a thousand forms of impiety, pretend that they act thus
to avoid giving offense to their neighbor, as if in the meantime
they did not train the consciences of their neighbors to evil,
especially when they always stick in the same mire without any hope
of escape. When a neighbor is to be instructed, whether by doctrine
or by example, then smooth-tongued men say that he is to be fed with
milk, while they are instilling into him the worst and most
pernicious opinions. Paul says to the Corinthians, "I have fed you
with milk, and not with meat," (1 Cor. 3: 2;) but had there then
been a Popish mass among them, would he have sacrificed as one of
the modes of giving them milk? By no means: milk is not poison. It
is false then to say they nourish those whom, under a semblance of
soothing they cruelly murder. But granting that such dissimulation
may be used for a time, how long are they to make their pupils drink
that kind of milk? If they never grow up so as to be able to bear at
least some gentle food, it is certain that they have never been
reared on milk. Two reasons prevent me from now entering farther
into contest with these people, first, their follies are scarcely
worthy of refutation, seeing all men of sense must nauseate them;
and, secondly, having already amply refuted them in special
treatises, I am unwilling to do it over again. Let my readers only
bear in mind, first, that whatever be the offenses by which Satan
and the world attempt to lead us away from the law of God, we must,
nevertheless, strenuously proceed in the course which he prescribes;
and, secondly, that whatever dangers impend, we are not at liberty
to deviate one nail's breadth from the command of God, that on no
pretext is it lawful to attempt any thing but what he permits.
    14. Since by means of this privilege of liberty which we have
described, believers have derived authority from Christ not to
entangle themselves by the observance of things in which he wished
them to be free, we conclude that their consciences are exempted
from all human authority. For it were unbecoming that the gratitude
due to Christ for his liberal gift should perish or that the
consciences of believers should derive no benefit from it. We must
not regard it as a trivial matter when we see how much it cost our
Savior, being purchased not with silver or gold, but with his own
blood, (1 Pet. 1: 18, 19;) so that Paul hesitates not to say that
Christ has died in vain, if we place our souls under subjection to
men, (Gal. 5: 1, 4; 1 Cor. 7: 23.) Several chapters of the Epistle
to the Galatians are wholly occupied with showing that Christ is
obscured, or rather extinguished to us, unless our consciences
maintain their liberty; from which they have certainly fallen, if
they can be bound with the chains of laws and constitutions at the
pleasure of men. But as the knowledge of this subject is of the
greatest importance, so it demands a longer and clearer exposition.
For the moment the abolition of human constitutions is mentioned,
the greatest disturbances are excited, partly by the seditious, and
partly by calumniators, as if obedience of every kind were at the
same time abolished and overthrown.
    15. Therefore, lest this prove a stumbling-block to any, let us
observe that in man government is twofold: the one spiritual, by
which the conscience is trained to piety and divine worship; the
other civil, by which the individual is instructed in those duties
which, as men and citizens, we are bold to performs (see Book 4,
chap. 10, sec. 3-6.) To these two forms are commonly given the not
inappropriate names of spiritual and temporal jurisdiction,
intimating that the former species has reference to the life of the
soul, while the latter relates to matters of the present life, not
only to food and clothing, but to the enacting of laws which require
a man to live among his fellows purely honorably, and modestly. The
former has its seat within the soul, the latter only regulates the
external conduct. We may call the one the spiritual, the other the
civil kingdom. Now, these two, as we have divided them, are always
to be viewed apart from each other. When the one is considered, we
should call off our minds, and not allow them to think of the other.
For there exists in man a kind of two worlds, over which different
kings and different laws can preside. By attending to this
distinction, we will not erroneously transfer the doctrine of the
gospel concerning spiritual liberty to civil order, as if in regard
to external government Christians were less subject to human laws,
because their consciences are unbound before God, as if they were
exempted from all carnal service, because in regard to the Spirit
they are free. Again because even in those constitutions which seem
to relate to the spiritual kingdom, there may be some delusion, it
is necessary to distinguish between those which are to be held
legitimate as being agreeable to the Word of God, and those, on the
other hand, which ought to have no place among the pious. We shall
elsewhere have an opportunity of speaking of civil government, (see
Book 4, chap. 20.) For the present, also, I defer speaking of
ecclesiastical laws, because that subject will be more fully
discussed in the Fourth Book when we come to treat of the Power of
the Church. We would thus conclude the present discussion. The
question, as I have said, though not very obscure, or perplexing in
itself, occasions difficulty to many, because they do not
distinguish with sufficient accuracy between what is called the
external forum, and the forum of conscience. What increases the
difficulty is, that Paul commands us to obey the magistrate, "not
only for wrath, but also for conscience sake," (Rom. 13: 1, 5.)
Whence it follows that civil laws also bind the conscience. Were
this so, then what we said a little ago, and are still to say of
spiritual governments would fall. To solve this difficulty, the
first thing of importance is to understand what is meant by
conscience. The definition must be sought in the etymology of the
word. For as men, when they apprehend the knowledge of things by the
mind and intellects are said to know, and hence arises the term
knowledge or science, so when they have a sense of the divine
justice added as a witness which allows them not to conceal their
sins, but drags them forward as culprits to the bar of God, that
sense is called conscience. For it stands as it were between God and
man, not suffering man to suppress what he knows in himself; but
following him on even to conviction. It is this that Paul means when
he says, "Their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts
the meanwhile accusing, or else excusing one another," (Rom. 2: 15.)
Simple knowledge may exist in man, as it were shut up; therefore
this sense, which sists man before the bar of God, is set over him
as a kind of sentinel to observe and spy out all his secrets, that
nothing may remain buried in darkness. Hence the ancient proverb,
Conscience is a thousand witnesses. For the same reason Peter also
employs the expression, "the answer of a good conscience," (1 Pet.
3: 21,) for tranquillity of mind; when persuaded of the grace of
Christ, we boldly present ourselves before God. And the author of
the Epistle to the Hebrews says, that we have "no more conscience of
sins," (Heb. 10: 2,) that we are held as freed or acquitted, so that
sin no longer accuses us.
    16. Wherefore, as works have respect to men, so conscience
bears reference to God, a good conscience being nothing else than
inward integrity of heart. In this sense Paul says that "the end of
the commandment is charity, out of a pure heart, and of a good
consciences and of faith unfeigned" (1 Tim. 1: 5.) He afterwards, in
the same chapter, shows how much it differs from intellect when he
speaks of "holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having
put away, have made shipwreck," (1 Tim. 1: 19.) For by these words
he intimates, that it is a lively inclination to serve God, a
sincere desire to live in piety and holiness. Sometimes, indeed, it
is even extended to men, as when Paul testifies, "Herein do I
exercise myself, to have always a conscience void of offense toward
God, and toward men," (Acts 24: 16.) He speaks thus, because the
fruits of a good conscience go forth and reach even to men. But, as
I have said, properly speaking, it refers to God only. Hence a law
is said to bind the conscience, because it simply binds the
individual, without looking at men, or taking any account of them.
For example, God not only commands us to keep our mind chaste and
pure from lust, but prohibits all external lasciviousness or
obscenity of language. My conscience is subjected to the observance
of this law, though there were not another man in the world, and he
who violates it sins not only by setting a bad example to his
brethren, but stands convicted in his conscience before God. The
same rule does not hold in things indifferent. We ought to abstain
from every thing that produces offense, but with a free conscience.
Thus Paul, speaking of meat consecrated to idols, says, "If any man
say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for
his sake that showed it, and for conscience sake:" "Conscience, I
say, not thine own, but of the other," (1 Cor. 10: 28, 29.) A
believer, after being previously admonished, would sin were he still
to eat meat so offered. But though abstinence, on his part, is
necessary, in respect of a brother, as it is prescribed by God,
still he ceases not to retain liberty of conscience. We see how the
law, while binding the external act, leaves the conscience unbound.

Chapter 20.

20. Of prayer--a perpetual exercise of faith. The daily benefits
derived from it.

    The principal divisions of this chapter are,-- I. Connection of
the subject of prayer with the previous chapters. The nature of
prayer, and its necessity as a Christian exercise, sec. 1, 2. II. To
whom prayer is to be offered. Refutation of an objection which is
too apt to present itself to the mind, sec. 3. III. Rules to be
observed in prayer, sec. 4-16. IV. Through whom prayer is to be
made, sec. 17-19. V. Refutation of an error as to the doctrine of
our Mediator and Intercessor, with answers to the leading arguments
urged in support of the intercession of saints, sec. 20-27. VI. The
nature of prayer, and some of its accidents, sec. 28-33. VII. A
perfect form of invocation, or an exposition of the Lord's Prayer,
sec. 34-50. VIII. Some rules to be observed with regard to prayer,
as time, perseverance, the feeling of the mind, and the assurance of
faith, sec. 50-52.
    
Sections.
    
1. A general summary of what is contained in the previous part of
    the work. A transition to the doctrine of prayer. Its
    connection with the subject of faith.
2. Prayer defined. Its necessity and use.
3. Objection, that prayer seems useless, because God already knows
    our wants. Answer, from the institution and end of prayer.
    Confirmation by example. Its necessity and propriety.
    Perpetually reminds us of our duty, and leads to meditation on
    divine providence. Conclusion. Prayer a most useful exercise.
    This proved by three passages of Scripture.
4. Rules to be observed in prayer. First, reverence to God. How the
    mind ought to be composed.
5. All giddiness of mind must be excluded, and all our feelings
    seriously engaged. This confirmed by the form of lifting the
    hand in prayer. We must ask only in so far as God permits. To
    help our weakness, God gives the Spirit to be our guide in
    prayer. What the office of the Spirit in this respect. We must
    still pray both with the heart and the lips.
6. Second rule of prayer, a sense of our want. This rule violated,
    1. By perfunctory and formal prayer 2. By hypocrites who have
    no sense of their sins. 3. By giddiness in prayer. Remedies.
7. Objection, that we are not always under the same necessity of
    praying. Answer, we must pray always. This answer confirmed by
    an examination of the dangers by which both our life and our
    salvation are every moment threatened. Confirmed farther by the
    command and permission of God, by the nature of true
    repentance, and a consideration of impenitence. Conclusion.
8. Third rule, the suppression of all pride. Examples. Daniel,
    David, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Baruch.
9. Advantage of thus suppressing pride. It leads to earnest entreaty
    for pardon, accompanied with humble confession and sure
    confidence in the Divine mercy. This may not always be
    expressed in words. It is peculiar to pious penitents. A
    general introduction to procure favour to our prayers never to
    be omitted.
10. Objection to the third rule of prayer. Of the glorying of the
    saints. Answer. Confirmation of the answer.
11. Fourth rule of prayer,--a sure confidence of being heard
    animating us to prayer. The kind of confidence required, viz.,
    a serious conviction of our misery, joined with sure hope. From
    these true prayer springs. How diffidence impairs prayer. In
    general, faith is required.
12. This faith and sure hope regarded by our opponents as most
    absurd. Their error described and refuted by various passages
    of Scripture, which show that acceptable prayer is accompanied
    with these qualities. No repugnance between this certainty and
    an acknowledgment of our destitution.
13. To our unworthiness we oppose, 1. The command of God. 2. The
    promise. Rebels and hypocrites completely condemned. Passages
    of Scripture confirming the command to pray.
14. Other passages respecting the promises which belong to the pious
    when they invoke God. These realized though we are not
    possessed of the same holiness as other distinguished servants
    of God, provided we indulge no vain confidence, and sincerely
    betake ourselves to the mercy of God. Those who do not invoke
    God under urgent necessity are no better than idolaters. This
    concurrence of fear and confidence reconciles the different
    passages of Scripture, as to humbling ourselves in prayer, and
    causing our prayers to ascend.
15. Objection founded on some examples, viz., that prayers have
    proved effectual, though not according to the form prescribed.
    Answer. Such examples, though not given for our imitation, are
    of the greatest use. Objection, the prayers of the faithful
    sometimes not effectual. Answer confirmed by a noble passage of
    Augustine. Rule for right prayer.
16. The above four rules of prayer not so rigidly exacted, as that
    every prayer deficient in them in any respect is rejected by
    God. This shown by examples. Conclusion, or summary of this
    section.
17. Through whom God is to be invoked, viz., Jesus Christ. This
    founded on a consideration of the divine majesty, and the
    precept and promise of God himself. God therefore to be invoked
    only in the name of Christ.
18. From the first all believers were heard through him only: yet
    this specially restricted to the period subsequent to his
    ascension. The ground of this restriction.
19. The wrath of God lies on those who reject Christ as a Mediator.
    This excludes not the mutual intercession of saints on the
    earth.
20. Refutation of errors interfering with the intercession of
    Christ. 1. Christ the Mediator of redemption; the saints
    mediators of intercession. Answer confirmed by the clear
    testimony of Scripture, and by a passage from Augustine. The
    nature of Christ's intercession.
21. Of the intercession of saints living with Christ in heaven.
    Fiction of the Papists in regard to it. Refuted. 1. Its
    absurdity. 2. It is no where mentioned by Scripture. 3. Appeal
    to the conscience of the superstitious. 4. Its blasphemy.
    Exception. Answers.
22. Monstrous errors resulting from this fiction. Refutation.
    Exception by the advocates of this fiction. Answer.
23. Arguments of the Papists for the intercession of saints. 1. From
    the duty and office of angels. Answer. 2. From an expression of
    Jeremiah respecting Moses and Samuel. Answer, retorting the
    argument. 3. The meaning of the prophet confirmed by a similar
    passage in Ezekiel, and the testimony of an apostle.
24. 4. Fourth Papistical argument from the nature of charity, which
    is more perfect in the saints in glory. Answer.
25. Argument founded on a passage in Moses. Answer.
26. Argument from its being said that the prayers of saints are
    heard. Answer, confirmed by Scripture, and illustrated by
    examples.
27. Conclusion, that the saints cannot be invoked without impiety.
    1. It robs God of his glory. 2. Destroys the intercession of
    Christ. 3. Is repugnant to the word of God. 4. Is opposed to
    the due method of prayer. 5. Is without approved example. 6.
    Springs from distrust. Last objection. Answer.
28. Kinds of prayer. Vows. Supplications. Petitions. Thanksgiving.
    Connection of these, their constant use and necessity.
    Particular explanation confirmed by reason, Scripture, and
    example. Rule as to supplication and thanksgiving.
29. The accidents of prayer, viz., private and public, constant, at
    stated seasons, &c. Exception in time of necessity. Prayer
    without ceasing. Its nature. Garrulity of Papists and
    hypocrites refuted. The scope and parts of prayer. Secret
    prayer. Prayer at all places. Private and public prayer.
30. Of public places or churches in which common prayers are offered
    up. Right use of churches. Abuse.
31. Of utterance and singing. These of no avail if not from the
    heart. The use of the voice refers more to public than private
    prayer.
32. Singing of the greatest antiquity, but not universal. How to be
    performed.
33. Public prayers should be in the vulgar, not in a foreign tongue.
    Reason, 1. The nature of the Church. 2. Authority of an
    apostle. Sincere affection always necessary. The tongue not
    always necessary. Bending of the knee, and uncovering of the
    head.
34. The form of prayer delivered by Christ displays the boundless
    goodness of our heavenly Father. The great comfort thereby
    afforded.
35. Lord's Prayer divided into six petitions. Subdivision into two
    principal parts, the former referring to the glory of God, the
    latter to our salvation.
36. The use of the term Father implies, 1. That we pray to God in
    the name of Christ alone. 2. That we lay aside all distrust. 3.
    That we expect every thing that is for our good.
37. Objection, that our sins exclude us from the presence of him
    whom we have made a Judge, not a Father. Answer, from the
    nature of God, as described by an apostle, the parable of the
    prodigal son, and from the expression, _Our_ Father. Christ the
    earnest, the Holy Spirit the witness, of our adoption.
38. Why God is called generally, Our Father.
39. We may pray specially for ourselves and certain others, provided
    we have in our mind a general reference to all.
40. In what sense God is said to be _in heaven_. A threefold use of
    this doctrine for our consolation. Three cautions. Summary of
    the preface to the Lord's Prayer.
41. The necessity of the first petition a proof of our
    unrighteousness. What meant by the name of God. How it is
    hallowed. Parts of this hallowing. A deprecation of the sins by
    which the name of God is profaned.
42. Distinction between the first and second petitions. The kingdom
    of God, what. How said to come. Special exposition of this
    petition. It reminds us of three things. Advent of the kingdom
    of God in the world.
43. Distinction between the second and third petitions. The will
    here meant not the secret will or good pleasure of God, but
    that manifested in the word. Conclusion of the three first
    petitions.
44. A summary of the second part of the Lord's Prayer. Three
    petitions. What contained in the first. Declares the exceeding
    kindness of God, and our distrust. What meant by _bread_. Why
    the petition for bread precedes that for the forgiveness of
    sins. Why it is called ours. Why to be sought _this day_, or
    _daily_. The doctrine resulting from this petition, illustrated
    by an example. Two classes of men sin in regard to this
    petition. In what sense it is called, our bread. Why we ask God
    to give it to us.
45. Close connection between this and the subsequent petition. Why
    our sins are called debts. This petition violated, 1. By those
    who think they can satisfy God by their own merits, or those of
    others. 2. By those who dream of a perfection which makes
    pardon unnecessary. Why the elect cannot attain perfection in
    this life. Refutation of the libertine dreamers of perfection.
    Objection refuted. In what sense we are said to forgive those
    who have sinned against us. How the condition is to be
    understood.
46. The sixth petition reduced to three heads. 1. The various forms
    of temptation. The depraved conceptions of our minds. The wiles
    of Satan, on the right hand and on the left. 2. What it is to
    be led into temptation. We do not ask not to be tempted of God.
    What meant by evil, or the evil one. Summary of this petition.
    How necessary it is. Condemns the pride of the superstitious.
    Includes many excellent properties. In what sense God may be
    said to lead us into temptation.
47. The three last petitions show that the prayers of Christians
    ought to be public. The conclusion of the Lord's Prayer. Why
    the word Amen is added.
48. The Lord's Prayer contains every thing that we can or ought to
    ask of God. Those who go beyond it sin in three ways.
49. We may, after the example of the saints, frame our prayers in
    different words, provided there is no difference in meaning.
50. Some circumstances to be observed. Of appointing special hours
    of prayer. What to be aimed at, what avoided. The will of God,
    the rule of our prayers.
51. Perseverance in prayer especially recommended, both by precept
    and example. Condemnatory of those who assign to God a time and
    mode of hearing.
52. Of the dignity of faith, through which we always obtain, in
    answer to prayer, whatever is most expedient for us. The
    knowledge of this most necessary.

    1. From the previous part of the work we clearly see how
completely destitute man is of all good, how devoid of every means
of procuring his own salvation. Hence, if he would obtain succour in
his necessity, he must go beyond himself, and procure it in some
other quarter. It has farther been shown that the Lord kindly and
spontaneously manifests himself in Christ, in whom he offers all
happiness for our misery, all abundance for our want, opening up the
treasures of heaven to us, so that we may turn with full faith to
his beloved Son, depend upon him with full expectation, rest in him,
and cleave to him with full hope. This, indeed, is that secret and
hidden philosophy which cannot be learned by syllogisms: a
philosophy thoroughly understood by those whose eyes God has so
opened as to see light in his light (Ps. 36: 9.) But after we have
learned by faith to know that whatever is necessary for us or
defective in us is supplied in God and in our Lord Jesus Christ, in
whom it hath pleased the Father that all fulness should dwell, that
we may thence draw as from an inexhaustible fountain, it remains for
us to seek and in prayer implore of him what we have learned to be
in him. To know God as the sovereign disposer of all good, inviting
us to present our requests, and yet not to approach or ask of him,
were so far from availing us, that it were just as if one told of a
treasure were to allow it to remain buried in the ground. Hence the
Apostle, to show that a faith unaccompanied with prayer to God
cannot be genuine, states this to be the order: As faith springs
from the Gospel, so by faith our hearts are framed to call upon the
name of God, (Rom. 10: 14.) And this is the very thing which he had
expressed some time before, viz., that the _Spirit of adoption_,
which seals the testimony of the Gospel on our hearts, gives us
courage to make our requests known unto God, calls forth groanings
which cannot be uttered, and enables us to cry, Abba, Father, (Rom.
8: 26.) This last point, as we have hitherto only touched upon it
slightly in passing, must now be treated more fully.
    2. To _prayer_, then, are we indebted for penetrating to those
riches which are treasured up for us with our heavenly Father. For
there is a kind of intercourse between God and men, by which, having
entered the upper sanctuary, they appear before Him and appeal to
his promises, that when necessity requires they may learn by
experiences that what they believed merely on the authority of his
word was not in vain. Accordingly, we see that nothing is set before
us as an object of expectation from the Lord which we are not
enjoined to ask of Him in prayer, so true it is that prayer digs up
those treasures which the Gospel of our Lord discovers to the eye of
faith. The necessity and utility of this exercise of prayer no words
can sufficiently express. Assuredly it is not without cause our
heavenly Father declares that our only safety is in calling upon his
name, since by it we invoke the presence of his providence to watch
over our interests, of his power to sustain us when weak and almost
fainting, of his goodness to receive us into favour, though
miserably loaded with sin; in fine, call upon him to manifest
himself to us in all his perfections. Hence, admirable peace and
tranquillity are given to our consciences; for the straits by which
we were pressed being laid before the Lord, we rest fully satisfied
with the assurance that none of our evils are unknown to him, and
that he is both able and willing to make the best provision for us.
    3. But some one will say, Does he not know without a monitor
both what our difficulties are, and what is meet for our interest,
so that it seems in some measure superfluous to solicit him by our
prayers, as if he were winking, or even sleeping, until aroused by
the sound of our voice?[1] Those who argue thus attend not to the
end for which the Lord taught us to pray. It was not so much for his
sake as for ours. He wills indeed, as is just, that due honour be
paid him by acknowledging that all which men desire or feel to be
useful, and pray to obtain, is derived from him. But even the
benefit of the homage which we thus pay him redounds to ourselves.
Hence the holy patriarchs, the more confidently they proclaimed the
mercies of God to themselves and others felt the stronger incitement
to prayer. It will be sufficient to refer to the example of Elijah,
who being assured of the purpose of God had good ground for the
promise of rain which he gives to Ahab, and yet prays anxiously upon
his knees, and sends his servant seven times to inquire, (1 Kings
18: 42;) not that he discredits the oracle, but because he knows it
to be his duty to lay his desires before God, lest his faith should
become drowsy or torpid. Wherefore, although it is true that while
we are listless or insensible to our wretchedness, he wakes and
watches for use and sometimes even assists us unasked; it is very
much for our interest to be constantly supplicating him; first, that
our heart may always be inflamed with a serious and ardent desire of
seeking, loving and serving him, while we accustom ourselves to have
recourse to him as a sacred anchor in every necessity; secondly,
that no desires, no longing whatever, of which we are ashamed to
make him the witness, may enter our minds, while we learn to place
all our wishes in his sight, and thus pour out our heart before him;
and, lastly, that we may be prepared to receive all his benefits
with true gratitude and thanksgiving, while our prayers remind us
that they proceed from his hand. Moreover, having obtained what we
asked, being persuaded that he has answered our prayers, we are led
to long more earnestly for his favour, and at the same time have
greater pleasure in welcoming the blessings which we perceive to
have been obtained by our prayers. Lastly, use and experience
confirm the thought of his providence in our minds in a manner
adapted to our weakness, when we understand that he not only
promises that he will never fail us, and spontaneously gives us
access to approach him in every time of need, but has his hand
always stretched out to assist his people, not amusing them with
words, but proving himself to be a present aid. For these reasons,
though our most merciful Father never slumbers nor sleeps, he very
often seems to do so, that thus he may exercise us, when we might
otherwise be listless and slothful, in asking, entreating, and
earnestly beseeching him to our great good. It is very absurd,
therefore, to dissuade men from prayer, by pretending that Divine
Providence, which is always watching over the government of the
universes is in vain importuned by our supplications, when, on the
contrary, the Lord himself declares, that he is "nigh unto all that
call upon him, to all that call upon him in truth, (Ps. 145: 18.) No
better is the frivolous allegation of others, that it is superfluous
to pray for things which the Lord is ready of his own accord to
bestow; since it is his pleasure that those very things which flow
from his spontaneous liberality should be acknowledged as conceded
to our prayers. This is testified by that memorable sentence in the
psalms to which many others corresponds: "The eyes of the Lord are
upon the righteous, and his ears are open unto their cry," (Ps. 34:
15.) This passage, while extolling the care which Divine Providence
spontaneously exercises over the safety of believers, omits not the
exercise of faith by which the mind is aroused from sloth. The eyes
of God are awake to assist the blind in their necessity, but he is
likewise pleased to listen to our groans, that he may give us the
better proof of his love. And thus both things are true, "He that
keepeth Israel shall neither slumber nor sleep," (Ps. 121: 4;) and
yet whenever he sees us dumb and torpid, he withdraws as if he had
forgotten us.
    4. Let the first rule of right prayer then be, to have our
heart and mind framed as becomes those who are entering into
converse with God. This we shall accomplish in regard to the mind,
if, laying aside carnal thoughts and cares which might interfere
with the direct and pure contemplation of God, it not only be wholly
intent on prayer, but also, as far as possible, be borne and raised
above itself. I do not here insist on a mind so disengaged as to
feel none of the gnawings of anxiety; on the contrary, it is by much
anxiety that the fervor of prayer is inflamed. Thus we see that the
holy servants of God betray great anguish, not to say solicitude,
when they cause the voice of complaint to ascend to the Lord from
the deep abyss and the jaws of death. What I say is, that all
foreign and extraneous cares must be dispelled by which the mind
might be driven to and fro in vague suspense, be drawn down from
heaven, and kept groveling on the earth. When I say it must be
raised above itself, I mean that it must not bring into the presence
of God any of those things which our blind and stupid reason is wont
to devise, nor keep itself confined within the little measure of its
own vanity, but rise to a purity worthy of God.
    5. Both things are specially worthy of notice. First, let every
one in professing to pray turn thither all his thoughts and
feelings, and be not (as is usual) distracted by wandering thoughts;
because nothing is more contrary to the reverence due to God than
that levity which bespeaks a mind too much given to license and
devoid of fear. In this matter we ought to labour the more earnestly
the more difficult we experience it to be; for no man is so intent
on prayer as not to feel many thoughts creeping in, and either
breaking off the tenor of his prayer, or retarding it by some
turning or digression. Here let us consider how unbecoming it is
when God admits us to familiar intercourse to abuse his great
condescension by mingling things sacred and profane, reverence for
him not keeping our minds under restraint; but just as if in prayer
we were conversing with one like ourselves forgetting him, and
allowing our thoughts to run to and fro. Let us know, then, that
none duly prepare themselves for prayer but those who are so
impressed with the majesty of God that they engage in it free from
all earthly cares and affections. The ceremony of lifting up our
hands in prayer is designed to remind us that we are far removed
from God, unless our thoughts rise upward: as it is said in the
psalm, "Unto thee, O Lord, do I lift up my soul," (Psalm 25: 1.) And
Scripture repeatedly uses the expression to _raise our prayers_
meaning that those who would be heard by God must not grovel in the
mire. The sum is, that the more liberally God deals with us,
condescendingly inviting us to disburden our cares into his bosom,
the less excusable we are if this admirable and incomparable
blessing does not in our estimation outweigh all other things, and
win our affection, that prayer may seriously engage our every
thought and feeling. This cannot be unless our mind, strenuously
exerting itself against all impediments, rise upward. Our second
proposition was, that we are to ask only in so far as God permits.
For though he bids us pour out our hearts, (Ps. 62: 8) he does not
indiscriminately give loose reins to foolish and depraved
affections; and when he promises that he will grant believers their
wish, his indulgence does not proceed so far as to submit to their
caprice. In both matters grievous delinquencies are everywhere
committed. For not only do many without modesty, without reverence,
presume to invoke God concerning their frivolities, but impudently
bring forward their dreams, whatever they may be, before the
tribunal of God. Such is the folly or stupidity under which they
labour, that they have the hardihood to obtrude upon God desires so
vile, that they would blush exceedingly to impart them to their
fellow men. Profane writers have derided and even expressed their
detestation of this presumption, and yet the vice has always
prevailed. Hence, as the ambitious adopted Jupiter as their patron;
the avaricious, Mercury; the literary aspirants, Apollo and Minerva;
the warlike, Mars; the licentious, Venus: so in the present day, as
I lately observed, men in prayer give greater license to their
unlawful desires than if they were telling jocular tales among their
equals. God does not suffer his condescension to be thus mocked, but
vindicating his own light, places our wishes under the restraint of
his authority. We must, therefore, attend to the observation of
John: "This is the confidence that we have in him, that if we ask
any thing according to his will, he heareth us," (1 John 5: 14.) But
as our faculties are far from being able to attain to such high
perfection, we must seek for some means to assist them. As the eye
of our mind should be intent upon God, so the affection of our heart
ought to follow in the same course. But both fall far beneath this,
or rather, they faint and fail, and are carried in a contrary
direction. To assist this weakness, God gives us the guidance of the
Spirit in our prayers to dictate what is right, and regulate our
affections. For seeing "we know not what we should pray for as we
ought," "the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings
which cannot be uttered," (Rom. 8: 26) not that he actually prays or
groans, but he excites in us sighs, and wishes, and confidence,
which our natural powers are not at all able to conceive. Nor is it
without cause Paul gives the name of _groanings which cannot be
uttered_ to the prayers which believers send forth under the
guidance of the Spirit. For those who are truly exercised in prayer
are not unaware that blind anxieties so restrain and perplex them,
that they can scarcely find what it becomes them to utter; nay, in
attempting to lisp they halt and hesitate. Hence it appears that to
pray aright is a special gift. We do not speak thus in indulgence to
our sloth, as if we were to leave the office of prayer to the Holy
Spirit, and give way to that carelessness to which we are too prone.
Thus we sometimes hear the impious expression, that we are to wait
in suspense until he take possession of our minds while otherwise
occupied. Our meaning is, that, weary of our own heartlessness and
sloth, we are to long for the aid of the Spirit. Nor, indeed, does
Paul, when he enjoins us to pray _in the Spirit_, (1 Cor. 14: 15,)
cease to exhort us to vigilance, intimating, that while the
inspiration of the Spirit is effectual to the formation of prayer,
it by no means impedes or retards our own endeavours; since in this
matter God is pleased to try how efficiently faith influences our
hearts.
    6. Another rule of prayer is, that in asking we must always
truly feel our wants, and seriously considering that we need all the
things which we ask, accompany the prayer with a sincere, nay,
ardent desire of obtaining them. Many repeat prayers in a
perfunctory manner from a set form, as if they were performing a
task to God, and though they confess that this is a necessary remedy
for the evils of their condition, because it were fatal to be left
without the divine aid which they implore, it still appears that
they perform the duty from custom, because their minds are meanwhile
cold, and they ponder not what they ask. A general and confused
feeling of their necessity leads them to pray, but it does not make
them solicitous as in a matter of present consequence, that they may
obtain the supply of their need. Moreover, can we suppose anything
more hateful or even more execrable to God than this fiction of
asking the pardon of sins, while he who asks at the very time either
thinks that he is not a sinner, or, at least, is not thinking that
he is a sinner; in other words, a fiction by which God is plainly
held in derision? But mankind, as I have lately said, are full of
depravity, so that in the way of perfunctory service they often ask
many things of God which they think come to them without his
beneficence, or from some other quarter, or are already certainly in
their possession. There is another fault which seems less heinous,
but is not to be tolerated. Some murmur out prayers without
meditation, their only principle being that God is to be propitiated
by prayer. Believers ought to be specially on their guard never to
appear in the presence of God with the intention of presenting a
request unless they are under some serious impression, and are, at
the same time, desirous to obtain it. Nay, although in these things
which we ask only for the glory of God, we seem not at first sight
to consult for our necessity, yet we ought not to ask with less
fervor and vehemence of desire. For instance, when we pray that his
name be hallowed--that hallowing must, so to speak, be earnestly
hungered and thirsted after.
    7. If it is objected, that the necessity which urges us to pray
is not always equal, I admit it, and this distinction is profitably
taught us by James: "Is any among you afflicted? let him pray. Is
any merry? let him sing psalms," (James 5: 13.) Therefore, common
sense itself dictates, that as we are too sluggish, we must be
stimulated by God to pray earnestly whenever the occasion requires.
This David calls a time when God "may be found," (a seasonable
time;) because, as he declares in several other passages, that the
more hardly grievances, annoyances, fears, and other kinds of trial
press us, the freer is our access to God, as if he were inviting us
to himself. Still not less true is the injunction of Paul to pray
"always," (Eph. 6: 18;) because, however prosperously according to
our view, things proceed, and however we may be surrounded on all
sides with grounds of joy, there is not an instant of time during
which our want does not exhort us to prayer. A man abounds in wheat
and wine; but as he cannot enjoy a morsel of bread, unless by the
continual bounty of God, his granaries or cellars will not prevent
him from asking for daily bread. Then, if we consider how many
dangers impend every moment, fear itself will teach us that no time
ought to be without prayer. This, however, may be better known in
spiritual matters. For when will the many sins of which we are
conscious allow us to sit secure without suppliantly entreating
freedom from guilt and punishment? When will temptation give us a
truce, making it unnecessary to hasten for help? Moreover, zeal for
the kingdom and glory of God ought not to seize us by starts, but
urge us without intermission, so that every time should appear
seasonable. It is not without cause, therefore, that assiduity in
prayer is so often enjoined. I am not now speaking of perseverance,
which shall afterwards be considered; but Scripture, by reminding us
of the necessity of constant prayer, charges us with sloth, because
we feel not how much we stand in need of this care and assiduity. By
this rule hypocrisy and the device of lying to God are restrained,
nay, altogether banished from prayer. God promises that he will be
near to those who call upon him in truth, and declares that those
who seek him with their whole heart will find him: those, therefore,
who delight in their own pollution cannot surely aspire to him. One
of the requisites of legitimate prayer is repentance. Hence the
common declaration of Scripture, that God does not listen to the
wicked; that their prayers, as well as their sacrifices, are an
abomination to him. For it is right that those who seal up their
hearts should find the ears of God closed against them, that those
who, by their hardheartedness, provoke his severity should find him
inflexible. In Isaiah he thus threatens: "When ye make many prayers,
I will not hear: your hands are full of blood," (Isaiah 1: 15.) In
like manner, in Jeremiah, "Though they shall cry unto me, I will not
hearken unto them," (Jer. 11: 7, 8, 11;) because he regards it as
the highest insult for the wicked to boast of his covenant while
profaning his sacred name by their whole lives. Hence he complains
in Isaiah: "This people draw near to me with their mouth, and with
their lips do honour me; but have removed their heart far from men"
(Isaiah 29: 13.) Indeed, he does not confine this to prayers alone,
but declares that he abominates pretense in every part of his
service. Hence the words of James, "Ye ask and receive note because
ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts," (James iv.
3.) It is true, indeed, (as we shall again see in a little,) that
the pious, in the prayers which they utter, trust not to their own
worth; still the admonition of John is not superfluous: "Whatsoever
we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments," (1
John 3: 22;) an evil conscience shuts the door against us. Hence it
follows, that none but the sincere worshippers of God pray aright,
or are listened to. Let every one, therefore, who prepares to pray
feel dissatisfied with what is wrong in his condition, and assume,
which he cannot do without repentance, the character and feelings of
a poor suppliant.
    8. The third rule to be added is: that he who comes into the
presence of God to pray must divest himself of all vainglorious
thoughts, lay aside all idea of worth; in short, discard all self-
confidence, humbly giving God the whole glory, lest by arrogating
any thing, however little, to himself, vain pride cause him to turn
away his face. Of this submission, which casts down all haughtiness,
we have numerous examples in the servants of God. The holier they
are, the more humbly they prostrate themselves when they come into
the presence of the Lord. Thus Daniel, on whom the Lord himself
bestowed such high commendation, says, "We do not present our
supplications before thee for our righteousness but for thy great
mercies. O Lord, hear; O Lord, forgive; O Lord, hearken and do;
defer not, for thine own sake, O my God: for thy city and thy people
are called by thy name." This he does not indirectly in the usual
manner, as if he were one of the individuals in a crowd: he rather
confesses his guilt apart, and as a suppliant betaking himself to
the asylum of pardon, he distinctly declares that he was confessing
his own sin, and the sin of his people Israel, (Dan. 9: 18-20.)
David also sets us an example of this humility: "Enter not into
judgment with thy servant: for in thy sight shall no man living be
justified," (Psalm 143: 2.) In like manner, Isaiah prays, "Behold,
thou art wroth; for we have sinned: in those is continuance, and we
shall be saved. But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our
righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf;
and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away. And there is
none that calleth upon thy name, that stirreth up himself to take
hold of thee: for thou hast hid thy face from us, and hast consumed
us, because of our iniquities. But now, O Lord, thou art our Father;
we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy
hand. Be not wroth very sore, O Lord, neither remember iniquity for
ever: Behold, see, we beseech thee, we are all thy people." (Isa.
64: 5-9.) You see how they put no confidence in any thing but this:
considering that they are the Lord's, they despair not of being the
objects of his care. In the same way, Jeremiah says, "O Lord, though
our iniquities testify against us, do thou it for thy name's sake,"
(Jer. 14: 7.) For it was most truly and piously written by the
uncertain author (whoever he may have been) that wrote the book
which is attributed to the prophet Baruch,[2] "But the soul that is
greatly vexed, which goeth stooping and feeble, and the eyes that
fail, and the hungry soul, will give thee praise and righteousness,
O Lord. Therefore, we do not make our humble supplication before
thee, O Lord our God, for the righteousness of our fathers, and of
our kings." "Hear, O Lord, and have mercy; for thou art merciful:
and have pity upon us, because we have sinned before thee," (Baruch
2: 18, 19; 3: 2.)
    9. In fine, supplication for pardon, with humble and ingenuous
confession of guilt, forms both the preparation and commencement of
right prayer. For the holiest of men cannot hope to obtain any thing
from God until he has been freely reconciled to him. God cannot be
propitious to any but those whom he pardons. Hence it is not strange
that this is the key by which believers open the door of prayer, as
we learn from several passages in The Psalms. David, when presenting
a request on a different subject, says, "Remember not the sins of my
youth, nor my transgressions; according to thy mercy remember me,
for thy goodness sake, O Lord," (Psalm 25: 7.) Again, "Look upon my
affliction and my pain, and forgive my sins," (Psalm 25: 18.) Here
also we see that it is not sufficient to call ourselves to account
for the sins of each passing day; we must also call to mind those
which might seem to have been long before buried in oblivion. For in
another passage the same prophet, confessing one grievous crime,
takes occasion to go back to his very birth, "I was shapen in
iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me," (Psalm 51: 5;) not
to extenuate the fault by the corruption of his nature, but as it
were to accumulate the sins of his whole life, that the stricter he
was in condemning himself, the more placable God might be. But
although the saints do not always in express terms ask forgiveness
of sins, yet if we carefully ponder those prayers as given in
Scripture, the truth of what I say will readily appear; namely, that
their courage to pray was derived solely from the mercy of God, and
that they always began with appeasing him. For when a man
interrogates his conscience, so far is he from presuming to lay his
cares familiarly before God, that if he did not trust to mercy and
pardon, he would tremble at the very thought of approaching him.
There is, indeed, another special confession. When believers long
for deliverance from punishment, they at the same time pray that
their sins may be pardoned;[3] for it were absurd to wish that the
effect should be taken away while the cause remains. For we must
beware of imitating foolish patients who, anxious only about curing
accidental symptoms, neglect the root of the disease.[4] Nay, our
endeavour must be to have God propitious even before he attests his
favour by external signs, both because this is the order which he
himself chooses, and it were of little avail to experience his
kindness, did not conscience feel that he is appeased, and thus
enable us to regard him as altogether lovely. Of this we are even
reminded by our Savior's reply. Having determined to cure the
paralytic, he says, "Thy sins are forgiven thee;" in other words, he
raises our thoughts to the object which is especially to be desired,
viz. admission into the favour of God, and then gives the fruit of
reconciliation by bringing assistance to us. But besides that
special confession of present guilt which believers employ, in
supplicating for pardon of every fault and punishment, that general
introduction which procures favour for our prayers must never be
omitted, because prayers will never reach God unless they are
founded on free mercy. To this we may refer the words of John, "If
we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins
and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness," (1 John 1: 9.) Hence,
under the law it was necessary to consecrate prayers by the
expiation of blood, both that they might be accepted, and that the
people might be warned that they were unworthy of the high privilege
until, being purged from their defilements, they founded their
confidence in prayer entirely on the mercy of God.
    10. Sometimes, however, the saints in supplicating God, seem to
appeal to their own righteousness, as when David says, "Preserve my
soul; for I am holy," (Ps. 86: 2.) Also Hezekiah, "Remember now, O
Lord, I beseech thee how I have walked before thee in truth, and
with a perfect heart, and have done that which is good in thy
sight," (Is. 38. 2.) All they mean by such expressions is, that
regeneration declares them to be among the servants and children to
whom God engages that he will show favour. We have already seen how
he declares by the Psalmist that his eyes "are upon the righteous,
and his ears are open unto their cry," (Ps. 34: 16:) and again by
the apostle, that "whatsoever we ask of him we obtain, because we
keep his commandments," (John 3: 22.) In these passages he does not
fix a value on prayer as a meritorious work, but designs to
establish the confidence of those who are conscious of an unfeigned
integrity and innocence, such as all believers should possess. For
the saying of the blind man who had received his sight is in perfect
accordance with divine truth, And God heareth not sinners (John 9:
31;) provided we take the term sinners in the sense commonly used by
Scripture to mean those who, without any desire for righteousness,
are sleeping secure in their sins; since no heart will ever rise to
genuine prayer that does not at the same time long for holiness.
Those supplications in which the saints allude to their purity and
integrity correspond to such promises, that they may thus have, in
their own experience, a manifestation of that which all the servants
of God are made to expect. Thus they almost always use this mode of
prayer when before God they compare themselves with their enemies,
from whose injustice they long to be delivered by his hand. When
making such comparisons, there is no wonder that they bring forward
their integrity and simplicity of heart, that thus, by the justice
of their cause, the Lord may be the more disposed to give them
succour. We rob not the pious breast of the privilege of enjoying a
consciousness of purity before the Lord, and thus feeling assured of
the promises with which he comforts and supports his true
worshippers, but we would have them to lay aside all thought of
their own merits and found their confidence of success in prayer
solely on the divine mercy.
    11. The fourth rule of prayer is, that notwithstanding of our
being thus abased and truly humbled, we should be animated to pray
with the sure hope of succeeding. There is, indeed, an appearance of
contradiction between the two things, between a sense of the just
vengeance of God and firm confidence in his favour, and yet they are
perfectly accordant, if it is the mere goodness of God that raises
up those who are overwhelmed by their own sins. For, as we have
formerly shown (chap. 3: sec. 17 2) that repentance and faith go
hand in hand, being united by an indissoluble tie, the one causing
terror, the other joy, so in prayer they must both be present. This
concurrence David expresses in a few words: "But as for me, I will
come into thy house in the multitude of thy mercy, and in thy fear
will I worship toward thy holy temple," (Ps. 5: 7.) Under the
goodness of God he comprehends faith, at the same time not excluding
fear; for not only does his majesty compel our reverence, but our
own unworthiness also divests us of all pride and confidence, and
keeps us in fear. The confidence of which I speak is not one which
frees the mind from all anxiety, and soothes it with sweet and
perfect rest; such rest is peculiar to those who, while all their
affairs are flowing to a wish are annoyed by no care, stung with no
regret, agitated by no fear. But the best stimulus which the saints
have to prayer is when, in consequence of their own necessities,
they feel the greatest disquietude, and are all but driven to
despair, until faith seasonably comes to their aid; because in such
straits the goodness of God so shines upon them, that while they
groan, burdened by the weight of present calamities, and tormented
with the fear of greater, they yet trust to this goodness, and in
this way both lighten the difficulty of endurance, and take comfort
in the hope of final deliverance. It is necessary therefore, that
the prayer of the believer should be the result of both feelings,
and exhibit the influence of both; namely, that while he groans
under present and anxiously dreads new evils, he should, at the same
times have recourse to God, not at all doubting that God is ready to
stretch out a helping hand to him. For it is not easy to say how
much God is irritated by our distrust, when we ask what we expect
not of his goodness. Hence, nothing is more accordant to the nature
of prayer than to lay it down as a fixed rule, that it is not to
come forth at random, but is to follow in the footsteps of faith. To
this principle Christ directs all of us in these words, "Therefore,
I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe
that ye receive them, and ye shall have them," (Mark 11: 24.) The
same thing he declares in another passage, "All things, whatsoever
ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive," (Matth. 21.
22.) In accordance with this are the words of James, "If any of you
lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally,
and upbraideth not, and it shall be given him. But let him ask in
faith, nothing wavering," (James 1: 5.) He most aptly expresses the
power of faith by opposing it to wavering. No less worthy of notice
is his additional statement, that those who approach God with a
doubting, hesitating mind, without feeling assured whether they are
to be heard or not, gain nothing by their prayers. Such persons he
compares to a wave of the sea, driven with the wind and tossed.
Hence, in another passage he terms genuine prayer "the prayer of
faith," (James 5: 15.) Again, since God so often declares that he
will give to every man according to his faith he intimates that we
cannot obtain any thing without faith. In short, it is faith which
obtains every thing that is granted to prayer. This is the meaning
of Paul in the well known passage to which dull men give too little
heed, "How then shall they call upon him in whom they have not
believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not
heard?" "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of
God," (Rom. 10: 14,17.) Gradually deducing the origin of prayer from
faith, he distinctly maintains that God cannot be invoked sincerely
except by those to whom, by the preaching of the Gospel, his mercy
and willingness have been made known, nay, familiarly explained.
    12. This necessity our opponents do not at all consider.
Therefore, when we say that believers ought to feel firmly assured,
they think we are saying the absurdest thing in the world. But if
they had any experience in true prayer, they would assuredly
understand that God cannot be duly invoked without this firm sense
of the Divine benevolence. But as no man can well perceive the power
of faith, without at the same time feeling it in his heart, what
profit is there in disputing with men of this character, who plainly
show that they have never had more than a vain imagination? The
value and necessity of that assurance for which we contend is
learned chiefly from prayer. Every one who does not see this gives
proof of a very stupid conscience. Therefore, leaving those who are
thus blinded, let us fix our thoughts on the words of Paul, that God
can only be invoked by such as have obtained a knowledge of his
mercy from the Gospel, and feel firmly assured that that mercy is
ready to be bestowed upon them. What kind of prayer would this be?
"O Lord, I am indeed doubtful whether or not thou art inclined to
hear me; but being oppressed with anxiety I fly to thee that if I am
worthy, thou mayest assist me." None of the saints whose prayers are
given in Scripture thus supplicated. Nor are we thus taught by the
Holy Spirit, who tells us to "come boldly unto the throne of grace,
that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need,"
(Heb. 4: 16;) and elsewhere teaches us to "have boldness and access
with confidence by the faith of Christ," (Eph. 3: 12.) This
confidence of obtaining what we ask, a confidence which the Lord
commands, and all the saints teach by their example, we must
therefore hold fast with both hands, if we would pray to any
advantage. The only prayer acceptable to God is that which springs
(if I may so express it) from this presumption of faith, and is
founded on the full assurance of hope. He might have been contented
to use the simple name of faith, but he adds not only confidence,
but liberty or boldness, that by this mark he might distinguish us
from unbelievers, who indeed like us pray to God, but pray at
random. Hence, the whole Church thus prays "Let thy mercy O Lord, be
upon us, according as we hope in thee," (Ps. 33: 22.) The same
condition is set down by the Psalmist in another passage, "When I
cry unto thee, then shall mine enemies turn back: this I know, for
God is for me," (Ps. 56: 9.) Again, "In the morning will I direct my
prayer unto thee, and will look up," (Ps. 5: 3.) From these words we
gather, that prayers are vainly poured out into the air unless
accompanied with faith, in which, as from a watchtower, we may
quietly wait for God. With this agrees the order of Paul's
exhortation. For before urging believers to pray in the Spirit
always, with vigilance and assiduity, he enjoins them to take "the
shield of faith," "the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the
Spirit, which is the word of God," (Eph. vi. 16-18.) Let the reader
here call to mind what I formerly observed, that faith by no means
fails though accompanied with a recognition of our wretchedness,
poverty, and pollution. How much soever believers may feel that they
are oppressed by a heavy load of iniquity, and are not only devoid
of every thing which can procure the favour of God for them, but
justly burdened with many sins which make him an object of dread,
yet they cease not to present themselves, this feeling not deterring
them from appearing in his presence, because there is no other
access to him. Genuine prayer is not that by which we arrogantly
extol ourselves before God, or set a great value on any thing of our
own, but that by which, while confessing our guilt, we utter our
sorrows before God, just as children familiarly lay their complaints
before their parents. Nay, the immense accumulation of our sins
should rather spur us on and incite us to prayer. Of this the
Psalmist gives us an example, "Heal my soul: for I have sinned
against thee," (Ps. 41: 4.) I confess, indeed, that these stings
would prove mortal darts, did not God give succour; but our heavenly
Father has, in ineffable kindness, added a remedy, by which, calming
all perturbation, soothing our cares, and dispelling our fears he
condescendingly allures us to himself; nay, removing all doubts, not
to say obstacles, makes the way smooth before us.
    13. And first, indeed in enjoining us to pray, he by the very
injunction convicts us of impious contumacy if we obey not. He could
not give a more precise command than that which is contained in the
psalms: "Call upon me in the day of trouble," (Ps. 50: 15.) But as
there is no office of piety more frequently enjoined by Scripture,
there is no occasion for here dwelling longer upon it. "Ask," says
our Divine Master, "and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall
find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you," (Matth. 7: 7.) Here,
indeed, a promise is added to the precept, and this is necessary.
For though all confess that we must obey the precept, yet the
greater part would shun the invitation of God, did he not promise
that he would listen and be ready to answer. These two positions
being laid down, it is certain that all who cavillingly allege that
they are not to come to God directly, are not only rebellious and
disobedient but are also convicted of unbelief, inasmuch as they
distrust the promises. There is the more occasion to attend to this,
because hypocrites, under a pretense of humility and modesty,
proudly contemn the precept, as well as deny all credit to the
gracious invitation of God; nay, rob him of a principal part of his
worship. For when he rejected sacrifices, in which all holiness
seemed then to consist, he declared that the chief thing, that which
above all others is precious in his sight, is to be invoked in the
day of necessity. Therefore, when he demands that which is his own,
and urges us to alacrity in obeying, no pretexts for doubt, how
specious soever they may be, can excuse us. Hence, all the passages
throughout Scripture in which we are commanded to pray, are set up
before our eyes as so many banners, to inspire us with confidence.
It were presumption to go forward into the presence of God, did he
not anticipate us by his invitation. Accordingly, he opens up the
way for us by his own voice, "I will say, It is my people: and they
shall say, The Lord is my God," (Zech. 13: 9.) We see how he
anticipates his worshippers, and desires them to follow, and
therefore we cannot fear that the melody which he himself dictates
will prove unpleasing. Especially let us call to mind that noble
description of the divine character, by trusting to which we shall
easily overcome every obstacle: O thou that hearest prayer, unto
thee shall all flesh come," (Ps. 65: 2.) What can be more lovely or
soothing than to see God invested with a title which assures us that
nothing is more proper to his nature than to listen to the prayers
of suppliants? Hence the Psalmist infers, that free access is given
not to a few individuals, but to all men, since God addresses all in
these terms, "Call upon me in the day of trouble: I will deliver
thee, and thou shalt glorify me," (Ps. 50: 15.) David, accordingly,
appeals to the promise thus given in order to obtain what he asks:
"Thou, O Lord of hosts, God of Israel, hast revealed to thy servant,
saying, I will build thee an house: therefore hath thy servant found
in his heart to pray this prayer unto thee" (2 Sam. 7: 27.) Here we
infer, that he would have been afraid but for the promise which
emboldened him. So in another passage he fortifies himself with the
general doctrine, "He will fulfill the desire of them that fear
him," (Ps. 145: 19.) Nay, we may observe in The Psalms how the
continuity of prayer is broken, and a transition is made at one time
to the power of God, at another to his goodness, at another to the
faithfulness of his promises. It might seem that David, by
introducing these sentiments, unseasonably mutilates his prayers;
but believers well know by experience, that their ardor grows
languid unless new fuel be added, and, therefore, that meditation as
well on the nature as on the word of God during prayer, is by no
means superfluous. Let us not decline to imitate the example of
David, and introduce thoughts which may reanimate our languid minds
with new vigor.
    14. It is strange that these delightful promises affect us
coldly, or scarcely at all, so that the generality of men prefer to
wander up and down, forsaking the fountain of living waters, and
hewing out to themselves broken cisterns, rather than embrace the
divine liberality voluntarily offered to them (Jer. 2:13). "The name
of the Lord," says Solomon, "is a strong tower; the righteous
runneth into it, and is safe." (Pr. 18:10) Joel, after predicting
the fearful disaster which was at hand, subjoins the following
memorable sentence: "And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall
call on the name of the Lord shall be delivered." (Joel 2: 32) This
we know properly refers to the course of the Gospel. Scarcely one in
a hundred is moved to come into the presence of God, though he
himself exclaims by Isaiah, "And it shall come to pass, that before
they call, I will answer; and while they are yet speaking, I will
hear." (Is. 65: 24) This honour he elsewhere bestows upon the whole
Church in general, as belonging to all the members of Christ: "He
shall call upon me, and I will answer him: I will be with him in
trouble; I will deliver him, and honour him." (Ps. 91:15) My
intention, however, as I already observed, is not to enumerate all,
but only select some admirable passages as a specimen how kindly God
allures us to himself, and how extreme our ingratitude must be when
with such powerful motives our sluggishness still retards us.
Wherefore, let these words always resound in our ears: "The Lord is
nigh unto all them that call upon him, to all that call upon him in
truth," (Ps. 145: 18.) Likewise those passages which we have quoted
from Isaiah and Joel, in which God declares that his ear is open to
our prayers, and that he is delighted as with a sacrifice of sweet
savour when we cast our cares upon him. The special benefit of these
promises we receive when we frame our prayer, not timorously or
doubtingly, but when trusting to his word whose majesty might
otherwise deter us, we are bold to call him Father, he himself
deigning to suggest this most delightful name. Fortified by such
invitations it remains for us to know that we have therein
sufficient materials for prayer, since our prayers depend on no
merit of our own, but all their worth and hope of success are
founded and depend on the promises of God, so that they need no
other support, and require not to look up and down on this hand and
on that. It must therefore be fixed in our minds, that though we
equal not the lauded sanctity of patriarchs, prophets, and apostles,
yet as the command to pray is common to us as well as them, and
faith is common, so if we lean on the word of God, we are in respect
of this privilege their associates. For God declaring, as has
already been seen, that he will listen and be favourable to all,
encourages the most wretched to hope that they shall obtain what
they ask; and, accordingly, we should attend to the general forms of
expression, which, as it is commonly expressed, exclude none from
first to last; only let there be sincerity of heart, self-
dissatisfaction humility, and faith, that we may not, by the
hypocrisy of a deceitful prayer, profane the name of God. Our most
merciful Father will not reject those whom he not only encourages to
come, but urges in every possible way. Hence David's method of
prayer to which I lately referred: "And now, O Lord God, thou art
that God, and thy words be true, and thou hast promised this
goodness unto thy servant, that it may continue for ever before
thee" (2 Sam. 7: 28.) So also, in another passage, "Let, I pray
thee, thy merciful kindness be for my comfort, according to thy word
unto thy servant," (Psalm 119: 76.) And the whole body of the
Israelites, whenever they fortify themselves with the remembrance of
the covenant, plainly declare, that since God thus prescribes they
are not to pray timorously, (Gen. 32: 13.) In this they imitated the
example of the patriarchs, particularly Jacob, who, after confessing
that he was unworthy of the many mercies which he had received of
the Lord's hand, says, that he is encouraged to make still larger
requests, because God had promised that he would grant them. But
whatever be the pretexts which unbelievers employ, when they do not
flee to God as often as necessity urges, nor seek after him, nor
implore his aid, they defraud him of his due honour just as much as
if they were fabricating to themselves new gods and idols, since in
this way they deny that God is the author of all their blessings. On
the contrary, nothing more effectually frees pious minds from every
doubt, than to be armed with the thought that no obstacle should
impede them while they are obeying the command of God, who declares
that nothing is more grateful to him than obedience. Hence, again,
what I have previously said becomes still more clear, namely, that a
bold spirit in prayer well accords with fear, reverence, and
anxiety, and that there is no inconsistency when God raises up those
who had fallen prostrate. In this way forms of expression apparently
inconsistent admirably harmonize. Jeremiah and David speak of humbly
laying their supplications[5] before God (Jer. 42: 9; Dan. 9: 18.)
In another passage Jeremiah says "Let, we beseech thee, our
supplication be accepted before thee, and pray for us unto the Lord
thy God, even for all this remnant." (Jer. 42: 2) On the other hand,
believers are often said to _lift up prayer_. Thus Hezekiah speaks,
when asking the prophet to undertake the office of interceding (2
Kings 19: 4.) And David says, "Let my prayer be set forth before
thee as incense; and the lifting up of my hands as the evening
sacrifice." (Ps. 141: 2) The explanation is, that though believers,
persuaded of the paternal love of God, cheerfully rely on his
faithfulness, and have no hesitation in imploring the aid which he
voluntarily offers, they are not elated with supine or presumptuous
security; but climbing up by the ladder of the promises, still
remain humble and abased suppliants.
    15. Here, by way of objection, several questions are raised.
Scripture relates that God sometimes complied with certain prayers
which had been dictated by minds not duly calmed or regulated. It is
true, that the cause for which Jotham imprecated on the inhabitants
of Shechem the disaster which afterwards befell them was well
founded; but still he was inflamed with anger and revenge, (Judges
9: 20;) and hence God, by complying with the execration, seems to
approve of passionate impulses. Similar fervor also seized Samson,
when he prayed, "Strengthen me, I pray thee, only this once, O God,
that I may be at once avenged of the Philistines for my two eyes,"
(Judges 16: 28.) For although there was some mixture of good zeal,
yet his ruling feeling was a fervid, and therefore vicious longing
for vengeance. God assents, and hence apparently it might be
inferred that prayers are effectual, though not framed in conformity
to the rule of the word. But I answer, _first_, that a perpetual law
is not abrogated by singular examples; and, _secondly_, that special
suggestions have sometimes been made to a few individuals, whose
case thus becomes different from that of the generality of men. For
we should attend to the answer which our Saviour gave to his
disciples when they inconsiderately wished to imitate the example of
Elias, "Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of," (Luke ix. 55.)
We must, however, go farther and say, that the wishes to which God
assents are not always pleasing to him; but he assents, because it
is necessary, by way of example, to give clear evidence of the
doctrine of Scripture, viz., that he assists the miserable, and
hears the groans of those who unjustly afflicted implore his aid:
and, accordingly, he executes his judgments when the complaints of
the needy, though in themselves unworthy of attention, ascend to
him. For how often, in inflicting punishment on the ungodly for
cruelty, rapine, violence, lust, and other crimes, in curbing
audacity and fury, and also in overthrowing tyrannical power, has he
declared that he gives assistance to those who are unworthily
oppressed though they by addressing an unknown deity only beat the
air? There is one psalm which clearly teaches that prayers are not
without effect, though they do not penetrate to heaven by faith,
(Ps. 107: 6,13,19.) For it enumerates the prayers which, by natural
instinct, necessity extorts from unbelievers not less than from
believers, and to which it shows by the event, that God is,
notwithstanding, propitious. Is it to testify by such readiness to
hear that their prayers are agreeable to him? Nay; it is, first, to
magnify or display his mercy by the circumstance, that even the
wishes of unbelievers are not denied; and, secondly, to stimulate
his true worshippers to more urgent prayer, when they see that
sometimes even the wailings of the ungodly are not without avail.
This, however, is no reason why believers should deviate from the
law divinely imposed upon them, or envy unbelievers, as if they
gained much in obtaining what they wished. We have observed, (chap.
3: sec. 25,) that in this way God yielded to the feigned repentance
of Ahab, that he might show how ready he is to listen to his elect
when, with true contrition, they seek his favour. Accordingly, he
upbraids the Jews, that shortly after experiencing his readiness to
listen to their prayers, they returned to their own perverse
inclinations. It is also plain from the Book of Judges that,
whenever they wept, though their tears were deceitful, they were
delivered from the hands of their enemies. Therefore, as God sends
his sun indiscriminately on the evil and on the good, so he despises
not the tears of those who have a good cause, and whose sorrows are
deserving of relief. Meanwhile, though he hears them, it has no more
to do with salvation than the supply of food which he gives to other
despisers of his goodness. There seems to be a more difficult
question concerning Abraham and Samuel, the one of whom, without any
instruction from the word of God, prayed in behalf of the people of
Sodom, and the other, contrary to an express prohibition, prayed in
behalf of Saul, (Gen. 18: 23; 1 Sam. 15. 11.) Similar is the case of
Jeremiah, who prayed that the city might not be destroyed, (Jer. 32:
16ff.) It is true their prayers were refused, but it seems harsh to
affirm that they prayed without faith. Modest readers will, I hope,
be satisfied with this solution, viz., that leaning to the general
principle on which God enjoins us to be merciful even to the
unworthy, they were not altogether devoid of faith, though in this
particular instance their wish was disappointed. Augustine shrewdly
remarks, "How do the saints pray in faith when they ask from God
contrary to what he has decreed? Namely, because they pray according
to his will, not his hidden and immutable will, but that which he
suggests to them, that he may hear them in another manner; as he
wisely distinguishes," (August. de Civit. Dei, Lib. 22: 100: 2.)
This is truly said: for, in his incomprehensible counsel, he so
regulates events, that the prayers of the saints, though involving a
mixture of faith and error, are not in vain. And yet this no more
sanctions imitation than it excuses the saints themselves, who I
deny not exceeded due bounds. Wherefore, whenever no certain promise
exists, our request to God must have a condition annexed to it. Here
we may refer to the prayer of David, "Awake for me to the judgment
that thou hast commanded," (Ps. vii. 6;) for he reminds us that he
had received special instruction to pray for a temporal blessing.[6]
    16. It is also of importance to observe, that the four laws of
prayer of which I have treated are not so rigorously enforced, as
that God rejects the prayers in which he does not find perfect faith
or repentance, accompanied with fervent zeal and wishes duly framed.
We have said, (sec. 4,) that though prayer is the familiar
intercourse of believers with God, yet reverence and modesty must be
observed: we must not give loose reins to our wishes, nor long for
any thing farther than God permits; and, moreover, lest the majesty
of God should be despised, our minds must be elevated to pure and
chaste veneration. This no man ever performed with due perfection.
For, not to speak of the generality of men, how often do David's
complaints savour of intemperance? Not that he actually means to
expostulate with God, or murmur at his judgments, but failing,
through infirmity, he finds no better solace than to pour his griefs
into the bosom of his heavenly Father. Nay, even our stammering is
tolerated by God, and pardon is granted to our ignorance as often as
any thing rashly escapes us: indeed, without this indulgence, we
should have no freedom to pray. But although it was David's
intention to submit himself entirely to the will of God, and he
prayed with no less patience than fervor, yet irregular emotions
appear, nay, sometimes burst forth,-emotions not a little at
variance with the first law which we laid down. In particular, we
may see in a clause of the thirty-ninth Psalm, how this saint was
carried away by the vehemence of his grief, and unable to keep
within bounds. "O spare me,[7] that I may recover strength, before I
go hence, and be no more," (Ps. 39: 13.) You would call this the
language of a desperate man, who had no other desire than that God
should withdraw and leave him to relish in his distresses. Not that
his devout mind rushes into such intemperance, or that, as the
reprobate are wont, he wishes to have done with God; he only
complains that the divine anger is more than he can bear. During
those trials, wishes often escape which are not in accordance with
the rule of the word, and in which the saints do not duly consider
what is lawful and expedient. Prayers contaminated by such faults,
indeed, deserve to be rejected; yet provided the saints lament,
administer self-correction and return to themselves, God pardons.
Similar faults are committed in regard to the second law, (as to
which, see sec. 6,) for the saints have often to struggle with their
own coldness, their want and misery not urging them sufficiently to
serious prayer. It often happens, also, that their minds wander, and
are almost lost; hence in this matter also there is need of pardon,
lest their prayers, from being languid or mutilated, or interrupted
and wandering, should meet with a refusal. One of the natural
feelings which God has imprinted on our mind is, that prayer is not
genuine unless the thoughts are turned upward. Hence the ceremony of
raising the hands, to which we have adverted, a ceremony known to
all ages and nations, and still in common use. But who, in lifting
up his hands, is not conscious of sluggishness, the heart cleaving
to the earth? In regard to the petition for remission of sins, (sec.
8,) though no believer omits it, yet all who are truly exercised in
prayer feel that they bring scarcely a tenth of the sacrifice of
which David speaks, "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a
broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise," (Ps. 51:
17.) Thus a twofold pardon is always to be asked; first, because
they are conscious of many faults the sense of which, however, does
not touch them so as to make them feel dissatisfied with themselves
as they ought; and, secondly, in so far as they have been enabled to
profit in repentance and the fear of God, they are humbled with just
sorrow for their offenses, and pray for the remission of punishment
by the judge. The thing which most of all vitiates prayer, did not
God indulgently interpose, is weakness or imperfection of faith; but
it is not wonderful that this defect is pardoned by God, who often
exercises his people with severe trials, as if he actually wished to
extinguish their faith. The hardest of such trials is when believers
are forced to exclaim, "O Lord God of hosts, how long wilt thou be
angry against the prayer of thy people?" (Ps. 80: 4,) as if their
very prayers offended him. In like manner, when Jeremiah says "Also
when I cry and shout, he shutteth out my prayers (Lam. 3: 8,) there
cannot be a doubt that he was in the greatest perturbation.
Innumerable examples of the same kind occur in the Scriptures, from
which it is manifest that the faith of the saints was often mingled
with doubts and fears, so that while believing and hoping, they,
however, betrayed some degree of unbelief, But because they do not
come so far as were to be wished, that is only an additional reason
for their exerting themselves to correct their faults, that they may
daily approach nearer to the perfect law of prayer, and at the same
time feel into what an abyss of evils those are plunged, who, in the
very cures they use, bring new diseases upon themselves: since there
is no prayer which God would not deservedly disdain, did he not
overlook the blemishes with which all of them are polluted. I do not
mention these things that believers may securely pardon themselves
in any faults which they commit, but that they may call themselves
to strict account, and thereby endeavour to surmount these
obstacles; and though Satan endeavours to block up all the paths in
order to prevent them from praying, they may, nevertheless, break
through, being firmly persuaded that though not disencumbered of all
hindrances, their attempts are pleasing to God, and their wishes are
approved, provided they hasten on and keep their aim, though without
immediately reaching it.
    17. But since no man is worthy to come forward in his own name,
and appear in the presence of God, our heavenly Father, to relieve
us at once from fear and shame, with which all must feel
oppressed,[8] has given us his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, to be our
Advocate and Mediator, that under his guidance we may approach
securely, confiding that with him for our Intercessor nothing which
we ask in his name will be denied to us, as there is nothing which
the Father can deny to him, (1 Tim. 2: 5; 1 John 2: 1; see sec. 36,
37.) To this it is necessary to refer all that we have previously
taught concerning faith; because, as the promise gives us Christ as
our Mediator, so, unless our hope of obtaining what we ask is
founded on him, it deprives us of the privilege of prayer. For it is
impossible to think of the dread majesty of God without being filled
with alarm; and hence the sense of our own unworthiness must keep us
far away, until Christ interpose, and convert a throne of dreadful
glory into a throne of grace, as the Apostle teaches that thus we
can "come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy,
and find grace to help in time of need," (Heb. 4: 16.) And as a rule
has been laid down as to prayer, as a promise has been given that
those who pray will be heard, so we are specially enjoined to pray
in the name of Christ, the promise being that we shall obtain what
we ask in his name. "Whatsoever ye shall ask in my name," says our
Saviour, "that will I do; that the Father may be glorified in the
Son;" "Hitherto ye have asked nothing in my name; ask, and ye shall
receive, that your joy may be full," (John 14: 13; 16: 24.) Hence it
is incontrovertibly clear that those who pray to God in any other
name than that of Christ contumaciously falsify his orders, and
regard his will as nothing, while they have no promise that they
shall obtain. For, as Paul says "All the promises of God in him are
yea, and in him amen;" (2 Cor. 1: 20,) that is, are confirmed and
fulfilled in him.
    18. And we must carefully attend to the circumstance of time.
Christ enjoins his disciples to have recourse to his intercession
after he shall have ascended to heaven: "At that day ye shall ask in
my name," (John 16: 26.) It is certain, indeed, that from the very
first all who ever prayed were heard only for the sake of the
Mediator. For this reason God had commanded in the Law, that the
priest alone should enter the sanctuary, bearing the names of the
twelve tribes of Israel on his shoulders, and as many precious
stones on his breast, while the people were to stand at a distance
in the outer court, and thereafter unite their prayers with the
priest. Nay, the sacrifice had even the effect of ratifying and
confirming their prayers. That shadowy ceremony of the Law therefore
taught, first, that we are all excluded from the face of God, and,
therefore, that there is need of a Mediator to appear in our name,
and carry us on his shoulders and keep us bound upon his breast,
that we may be heard in his person; And secondly, that our prayers,
which, as has been said, would otherwise never be free from
impurity, are cleansed by the sprinkling of his blood. And we see
that the saints, when they desired to obtain any thing, founded
their hopes on sacrifices, because they knew that by sacrifice all
prayers were ratified: "Remember all thy offerings," says David,
"and accept thy burnt sacrifice," (Ps. 20: 3.) Hence we infer, that
in receiving the prayers of his people, God was from the very first
appeased by the intercession of Christ. Why then does Christ speak
of a new period ("at that day") when the disciples were to begin to
pray in his name, unless it be that this grace, being now more
brightly displayed, ought also to be in higher estimation with us?
In this sense he had said a little before, "Hitherto ye have asked
nothing in my name; ask." Not that they were altogether ignorant of
the office of Mediator, (all the Jews were instructed in these first
rudiments,) but they did not clearly understand that Christ by his
ascent to heaven would be more the advocate of the Church than
before. Therefore, to solace their grief for his absence by some
more than ordinary result, he asserts his office of advocate, and
says, that hitherto they had been without the special benefit which
it would be their privilege to enjoy, when aided by his intercession
they should invoke God with greater freedom. In this sense the
Apostle says that we have "boldness to enter into the holiest by the
blood of Jesus, by a new and living way, which he hath consecrated
for us," (Heb. 10: 19, 20.) Therefore, the more inexcusable we are,
if we do not with both hands (as it is said) embrace the inestimable
gift which is properly destined for us.
    19. Moreover since he himself is the only way and the only
access by which we can draw near to God, those who deviate from this
way, and decline this access, have no other remaining; his throne
presents nothing but wrath, judgment, and terror. In short, as the
Father has consecrated him our guide and head, those who abandon or
turn aside from him in any way endeavour, as much as in them lies,
to sully and efface the stamp which God has impressed. Christ,
therefore, is the only Mediator by whose intercession the Father is
rendered propitious and exorable, (1 Tim. 2: 5.) For though the
saints are still permitted to use intercessions, by which they
mutually beseech God in behalf of each others salvation, and of
which the Apostle makes mention, (Eph. 6: 18, 19; 1 Tim. 2: 1;) yet
these depend on that one intercession, so far are they from
derogating from it. For as the intercessions which, as members of
one body we offer up for each other, spring from the feeling of
love, so they have reference to this one head. Being thus also made
in the name of Christ, what more do they than declare that no man
can derive the least benefit from any prayers without the
intercession of Christ? As there is nothing in the intercession of
Christ to prevent the different members of the Church from offering
up prayers for each other, so let it be held as a fixed principle,
that all the intercessions thus used in the Church must have
reference to that one intercession. Nay, we must be specially
careful to show our gratitude on this very account, that God
pardoning our unworthiness, not only allows each individual to pray
for himself, but allows all to intercede mutually for each other.
God having given a place in his Church to intercessors who would
deserve to be rejected when praying privately on their own account,
how presumptuous were it to abuse this kindness by employing it to
obscure the honour of Christ?
    20. Moreover, the Sophists are guilty of the merest trifling
when they allege that Christ is the Mediator of _redemption_, but
that believers are mediators of _intercession_; as if Christ had
only performed a temporary mediation, and left an eternal and
imperishable mediation to his servants. Such, forsooth, is the
treatment which he receives from those who pretend only to take from
him a minute portion of honour. Very different is the language of
Scripture, with whose simplicity every pious man will be satisfied,
without paying any regard to those importers. For when John says,
"If any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ
the righteous," (1 John 2: 1,) does he mean merely that we once had
an advocate; does he not rather ascribe to him a perpetual
intercession? What does Paul mean when he declares that he "is even
at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us"?
(Rom. 8: 32.) But when in another passage he declares that he is the
only Mediator between God and man, (1 Tim. 2: 5,) is he not
referring to the supplications which he had mentioned a little
before? Having previously said that prayers were to be offered up
for all men, he immediately adds, in confirmation of that statement,
that there is one God, and one Mediator between God and man. Nor
does Augustine give a different interpretation when he says,
"Christian men mutually recommend each other in their prayers. But
he for whom none intercedes, while he himself intercedes for all, is
the only true Mediator. Though the Apostle Paul was under the head a
principal member, yet because he was a member of the body of Christ,
and knew that the most true and High Priest of the Church had
entered not by figure into the inner veil to the holy of holies, but
by firm and express truth into the inner sanctuary of heaven to
holiness, holiness not imaginary, but eternal (Heb 9: 11, 24), he
also commends himself to the prayers of the faithful (Rom. 15: 30;
Eph. 6:19; Col. 4: 3.) He does not make himself a mediator between
God and the people, but asks that all the members of the body of
Christ should pray mutually for each other, since the members are
mutually sympathetic: if one member suffers, the others suffer with
it (1 Cor. 12: 26.) And thus the mutual prayers of all the members
still laboring on the earth ascend to the Head, who has gone before
into heaven, and in whom there is propitiation for our sins. For if
Paul were a mediator, so would also the other apostles, and thus
there would be many mediators, and Paul's statement could not stand,
'There is one God, and one Mediator between God and men, the man
Christ Jesus;' (1 Tim. 2: 5) in whom we also are one (Rom. 12: 5) if
we keep the unity of the faith in the bond of peace (Eph. 4: 3),"
(August. Contra Parmenian, Lib. 2: cap. 8.) Likewise in another
passage Augustine says, "If thou requirest a priest, he is above the
heavens, where he intercedes for those who on earth died for thee,"
(August. in Ps. 94:) We imagine not that he throws himself before
his Father's knees, and suppliantly intercedes for us; but we
understand with the Apostle, that he appears in the presence of God,
and that the power of his death has the effect of a perpetual
intercession for us; that having entered into the upper sanctuary,
he alone continues to the end of the world to present the prayers of
his people, who are standing far off in the outer court.
    21. In regard to the saints who having died in the body live in
Christ, if we attribute prayer to them, let us not imagine that they
have any other way of supplicating God than through Christ who alone
is the way, or that their prayers are accepted by God in any other
name. Wherefore, since the Scripture calls us away from all others
to Christ alone, since our heavenly Father is pleased to gather
together all things in him, it were the extreme of stupidity, not to
say madness, to attempt to obtain access by means of others, so as
to be drawn away from him without whom access cannot be obtained.
But who can deny that this was the practice for several ages, and is
still the practice, wherever Popery prevails? To procure the favour
of God, human merits are ever and anon obtruded, and very frequently
while Christ is passed by, God is supplicated in their name. I ask
if this is not to transfer to them that office of sole intercession
which we have above claimed for Christ? Then what angel or devil
ever announced one syllable to any human being concerning that
fancied intercession of theirs? There is not a word on the subject
in Scripture. What ground then was there for the fiction? Certainly,
while the human mind thus seeks help for itself in which it is not
sanctioned by the word of God, it plainly manifests its distrust,
(see s. 27.) But if we appeal to the consciences of all who take
pleasure in the intercession of saints, we shall find that their
only reason for it is, that they are filled with anxiety, as if they
supposed that Christ were insufficient or too rigorous. By this
anxiety they dishonour Christ, and rob him of his title of sole
Mediator, a title which being given him by the Father as his special
privilege, ought not to be transferred to any other. By so doing
they obscure the glory of his nativity and make void his cross; in
short, divest and defraud of due praise everything which he did or
suffered, since all which he did and suffered goes to show that he
is and ought to be deemed sole Mediator. At the same time, they
reject the kindness of God in manifesting himself to them as a
Father, for he is not their Father if they do not recognize Christ
as their brother. This they plainly refuse to do if they think not
that he feels for them a brother's affection; affection than which
none can be more gentle or tender. Wherefore Scripture offers him
alone, sends us to him, and establishes us in him. "He," says
Ambrose, "is our mouth by which we speak to the Father; our eye by
which we see the Father; our right hand by which we offer ourselves
to the Father. Save by his intercession neither we nor any saints
have any intercourse with God," (Ambros. Lib. de Isaac et Anima.) If
they object that the public prayers which are offered up in churches
conclude with the words, _through Jesus Christ our Lord_, it is a
frivolous evasion; because no less insult is offered to the
intercession of Christ by confounding it with the prayers and merits
of the dead, than by omitting it altogether, and making mention only
of the dead. Then, in all their litanies, hymns, and proses where
every kind of honour is paid to dead saints, there is no mention of
Christ.
    22. But here stupidity has proceeded to such a length as to
give a manifestation of the genius of superstition, which, when once
it has shaken off the rein, is wont to wanton without limit. After
men began to look to the intercession of saints, a peculiar
administration was gradually assigned to each, so that, according to
diversity of business, now one, now another, intercessor was
invoked. Then individuals adopted particular saints, and put their
faith in them, just as if they had been tutelar deities. And thus
not only were gods set up according to the number of the cities,
(the charge which the prophet brought against Israel of old, Jer. 2:
28; 11: 13,) but according to the number of individuals. But while
the saints in all their desires refer to the will of God alone, look
to it, and acquiesce in it, yet to assign to them any other prayer
than that of longing for the arrival of the kingdom of God, is to
think of them stupidly, carnally, and even insultingly. Nothing can
be farther from such a view than to imagine that each, under the
influence of private feeling, is disposed to be most favourable to
his own worshippers. At length vast numbers have fallen into the
horrid blasphemy of invoking them not merely as helping but
presiding over their salvation. See the depth to which miserable men
fall when they forsake their proper station, that is, the word of
God. I say nothing of the more monstrous specimens of impiety in
which, though detestable to God, angels, and men, they themselves
feel no pain or shame. Prostrated at a statue or picture of Barbara
or Catherine, and the like, they mutter a _Pater Noster_;[9] and so
far are their pastors[10] from curing or curbing this frantic
course, that, allured by the scent of gain, they approve and applaud
it. But while seeking to relieve themselves of the odium of this
vile and criminal procedure, with what pretext can they defend the
practice of calling upon Eloy (Eligius) or Medard to look upon their
servants, and send them help from heaven, or the Holy Virgin to
order her Son to do what they ask?[11] The Council of Carthage
forbade direct prayer to be made at the altar to saints. It is
probable that these holy men, unable entirely to suppress the force
of depraved custom, had recourse to this check, that public prayers
might not be vitiated with such forms of expression as _Sancte
Petre, ora pro nobis-- St Peter, pray for us_. But how much farther
has this devilish extravagance proceeded when men hesitate not to
transfer to the dead the peculiar attributes of Christ and God?
    23. In endeavouring to prove that such intercession derives
some support from Scripture they labour in vain. We frequently read
(they say) of the prayers of angels, and not only so, but the
prayers of believers are said to be carried into the presence of God
by their hands. But if they would compare saints who have departed
this life with angels, it will be necessary to prove that saints are
ministering spirits, to whom has been delegated the office of
superintending our salvation, to whom has been assigned the province
of guiding us in all our ways, of encompassing, admonishing, and
comforting us, of keeping watch over us. All these are assigned to
angels, but none of them to saints. How preposterously they confound
departed saints with angels is sufficiently apparent from the many
different offices by which Scripture distinguishes the one from the
other. No one unless admitted will presume to perform the office of
pleader before an earthly judge; whence then have worms such license
as to obtrude themselves on God as intercessors, while no such
office has been assigned them? God has been pleased to give angels
the charge of our safety. Hence they attend our sacred meetings, and
the Church is to them a theatre in which they behold the manifold
wisdom of God, (Eph. 3: 10.) Those who transfer to others this
office which is peculiar to them, certainly pervert and confound the
order which has been established by God and ought to be inviolable.
With similar dexterity they proceed to quote other passages. God
said to Jeremiah, "Though Moses and Samuel stood before me, yet my
mind could not be toward this people," (Jer. 15: 1.) How (they ask)
could he have spoken thus of the dead but because he knew that they
interceded for the living? My inference, on the contrary, is this:
since it thus appears that neither Moses nor Samuel interceded for
the people of Israel, there was then no intercession for the dead.
For who of the saints can be supposed to labour for the salvation of
the peoples while Moses who, when in life, far surpassed all others
in this matter, does nothing? Therefore, if they persist in the
paltry quibble, that the dead intercede for the living, because the
Lord said, "_If they stood before me_," (_intercesserint_,) I will
argue far more speciously in this way: Moses, of whom it is said,
"_if he interceded_,," did not intercede for the people in their
extreme necessity: it is probable, therefore, that no other saint
intercedes, all being far behind Moses in humanity, goodness, and
paternal solicitude. Thus all they gain by their caviling is to be
wounded by the very arms with which they deem themselves admirably
protected. But it is very ridiculous to wrest this simple sentence
in this manner; for the Lord only declares that he would not spare
the iniquities of the people, though some Moses or Samuel, to whose
prayers he had shown himself so indulgent, should intercede for
them. This meaning is most clearly elicited from a similar passage
in Ezekiel: "Though these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in
it, they should deliver but their own souls by their righteousness,
saith the Lord God," (Ezek. 14: 14.) Here there can be no doubt that
we are to understand the words as if it had been said, If two of the
persons named were again to come alive; for the third was still
living, namely, Daniel, who it is well known had then in the bloom
of youth given an incomparable display of piety. Let us therefore
leave out those whom Scripture declares to have completed their
course. Accordingly, when Paul speaks of David, he says not that by
his prayers he assisted posterity, but only that he "served his own
generation," (Acts 13: 36.)
    24. They again object, Are those, then, to be deprived of every
pious wish, who, during the whole course of their lives, breathed
nothing but piety and mercy? I have no wish curiously to pry into
what they do or meditate; but the probability is, that instead of
being subject to the impulse of various and particular desires,
they, with one fixed and immovable will, long for the kingdom of
God, which consists not less in the destruction of the ungodly than
in the salvation of believers. If this be so, there cannot be a
doubt that their charity is confined to the communion of Christ's
body, and extends no farther than is compatible with the nature of
that communion. But though I grant that in this way they pray for
us, they do not, however, lose their quiescence so as to be
distracted with earthly cares: far less are they, therefore, to be
invoked by us. Nor does it follow that such invocation is to be used
because, while men are alive upon the earth, they can mutually
commend themselves to each other's prayers. It serves to keep alive
a feeling of charity when they, as it were, share each other's
wants, and bear each other's burdens. This they do by the command of
the Lord, and not without a promise, the two things of primary
importance in prayer. But all such reasons are inapplicable to the
dead, with whom the Lord, in withdrawing them from our society, has
left us no means of intercourse, (Eccles. 9: 5, 6,) and to whom, so
far as we can conjecture, he has left no means of intercourse with
us. But if any one allege that they certainly must retain the same
charity for us, as they are united with us in one faith, who has
revealed to us that they have ears capable of listening to the
sounds of our voice, or eyes clear enough to discern our
necessities? Our opponents, indeed, talk in the shade of their
schools of some kind of light which beams upon departed saints from
the divine countenance, and in which, as in a mirror, they, from
their lofty abode, behold the affairs of men; but to affirm this
with the confidence which these men presume to use, is just to
desire, by means of the extravagant dreams of our own brain, and
without any authority, to pry and penetrate into the hidden
judgments of God, and trample upon Scripture, which so often
declares that the wisdom of our flesh is at enmity with the wisdom
of God, utterly condemns the vanity of our mind, and humbling our
reason, bids us look only to the will of God.
    25. The other passages of Scripture which they employ to defend
their error are miserably wrested. Jacob (they say) asks for the
sons of Joseph, "Let my name be named on them, and the name of my
fathers, Abraham and Isaac," (Gen. 48: 16.) First, let us see what
the nature of this invocation was among the Israelites. They do not
implore their fathers to bring succour to them, but they beseech God
to remember his servants, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Their example,
therefore, gives no countenance to those who use addresses to the
saints themselves. But such being the dullness of these blocks, that
they comprehend not what it is to invoke the name of Jacob, nor why
it is to be invoked, it is not strange that they blunder thus
childishly as to the mode of doing it. The expression repeatedly
occurs in Scripture. Isaiah speaks of women being called by the name
of men, when they have them for husbands and live under their
protection, (Isa. 4: 1.) The calling of the name of Abraham over the
Israelites consists in referring the origin of their race to him,
and holding him in distinguished remembrance as their author and
parent. Jacob does not do so from any anxiety to extend the
celebrity of his name, but because he knows that all the happiness
of his posterity consisted in the inheritance of the covenant which
God had made with them. Seeing that this would give them the sum of
all blessings, he prays that they may be regarded as of his race,
this being nothing else than to transmit the succession of the
covenant to them. They again, when they make mention of this subject
in their prayers, do not betake themselves to the intercession of
the dead, but call to remembrance that covenant in which their most
merciful Father undertakes to be kind and propitious to them for the
sake of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. How little, in other respects,
the saints trusted to the merits of their fathers, the public voice
of the Church declares in the prophets "Doubtless thou art our
Father, though Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel acknowledge us
not; thou, O Lord, art our Father, our Redeemer," (Isa. 63: 16.) And
while the Church thus speaks, she at the same time adds, "Return for
thy servants' sake," not thinking of any thing like intercession,
but adverting only to the benefit of the covenant. Now, indeed, when
we have the Lord Jesus, in whose hand the eternal covenant of mercy
was not only made but confirmed, what better name can we bear before
us in our prayers? And since those good Doctors would make out by
these words that the Patriarchs are intercessors, I should like them
to tell me why, in so great a multitude,[12] no place whatever is
given to Abraham, the father of the Church? We know well from what a
crew they select their intercessors.[13] Let them then tell me what
consistency there is in neglecting and rejecting Abraham, whom God
preferred to all others, and raised to the highest degree of honour.
The only reason is, that as it was plain there was no such practice
in the ancient Church, they thought proper to conceal the novelty of
the practice by saying nothing of the Patriarchs: as if by a mere
diversity of names they could excuse a practice at once novel and
impure. They sometimes, also, object that God is entreated to have
mercy on his people "for David's sake," (Ps. 132: 10; see Calv.
Com.) This is so far from supporting their error, that it is the
strongest refutation of it. We must consider the character which
David bore. He is set apart from the whole body of the faithful to
establish the covenant which God made in his hand. Thus regard is
had to the covenant rather than to the individual. Under him as a
type the sole intercession of Christ is asserted. But what was
peculiar to David as a type of Christ is certainly inapplicable to
others.
    26. But some seem to be moved by the fact, that the prayers of
saints are often said to have been heard. Why? Because they prayed.
"They cried unto thee," (says the Psalmist,) "and were delivered:
they trusted in thee, and were not confounded," (Ps. 22: 5.) Let us
also pray after their example, that like them we too may be heard.
Those men, on the contrary, absurdly argue that none will be heard
but those who have been heard already. How much better does James
argue, "Elias was a man subject to like passions as we are, and he
prayed earnestly that it might not rain: and it rained not on the
earth by the space of three years and six months. And he prayed
again and the heaven gave rain, and the earth brought forth her
fruit." (James 5: 17, 18.) What? Does he infer that Elias possessed
some peculiar privilege, and that we must have recourse to him for
the use of it? By no means. He shows the perpetual efficacy of a
pure and pious prayer, that we may be induced in like manner to
pray. For the kindness and readiness of God to hear others is
malignantly interpreted, if their example does not inspire us with
stronger confidence in his promise, since his declaration is not
that he will incline his ear to one or two, or a few individuals,
but to all who call upon his name. In this ignorance they are the
less excusable, because they seem as it were avowedly to contemn the
many admonitions of Scripture. David was repeatedly delivered by the
power of God. Was this to give that power to him that we might be
delivered on his application? Very different is his affirmation:
"The righteous shall compass me about; for thou shalt deal
bountifully with me," (Ps. 142: 7.) Again, "The righteous also shall
see, and fear, and shall laugh at him," (Ps. 52: 6.) "This poor man
cried, and the Lord heard him, and saved him out of all his
troubles," (Ps. 34: 6.) In The Psalms are many similar prayers, in
which David calls upon God to give him what he asks, for this
reason, viz., that the righteous may not be put to shame, but by his
example encouraged to hope. Here let one passage suffice, "For this
shall every one that is godly pray unto thee in a time when thou
mayest be found," (Ps. 32: 6, Calv. Com.) This passage I have quoted
the more readily, because those ravers who employ their hireling
tongues in defense of the Papacy, are not ashamed to adduce it in
proof of the intercession of the dead. As if David intended any
thing more than to show the benefit which he shall obtain from the
divine clemency and condescension when he shall have been heard. In
general, we must hold that the experience of the grace of God, as
well towards ourselves as towards others, tends in no slight degree
to confirm our faith in his promises. I do not quote the many
passages in which David sets forth the loving-kindness of God to him
as a ground of confidence, as they will readily occur to every
reader of The Psalms. Jacob had previously taught the same thing by
his own example, "I am not worthy of the least of all thy mercies,
and of all the truth which thou hast showed unto thy servant: for
with my staff l passed over this Jordan; and now I am become two
bands," (Gen. 32: 10.) He indeed alleges the promise, but not the
promise only; for he at the same time adds the effect, to animate
him with greater confidence in the future kindness of God. God is
not like men who grow weary of their liberality, or whose means of
exercising it become exhausted; but he is to be estimated by his own
nature, as David properly does when he says, "Thou hast redeemed me,
O Lord God of truth," (Ps 31: 5.) After ascribing the praise of his
salvation to God, he adds that he is true: for were he not ever like
himself, his past favour would not be an infallible ground for
confidence and prayer. But when we know that as often as he assists
us, he gives us a specimen and proof of his goodness and
faithfulness, there is no reason to fear that our hope will be
ashamed or frustrated.
    27. On the whole, since Scripture places the principal part of
worship in the invocation of God, (this being the office of piety
which he requires of us in preference to all sacrifices,) it is
manifest sacrilege to offer prayer to others. Hence it is said in
the psalm: "If we have forgotten the name of our God, or stretched
out our hands to a strange god, shall not God search this out?" (Ps.
44: 20, 21.) Again, since it is only in faith that God desires to be
invoked, and he distinctly enjoins us to frame our prayers according
to the rule of his word: in fine, since faith is founded on the
word, and is the parent of right prayer, the moment we decline from
the word, our prayers are impure. But we have already shown, that if
we consult the whole volume of Scripture, we shall find that God
claims this honour to himself alone. In regard to the office of
intercession, we have also seen that it is peculiar to Christ, and
that no prayer is agreeable to God which he as Mediator does not
sanctify. And though believers mutually offer up prayers to God in
behalf of their brethren, we have shown that this derogates in no
respect from the sole intercession of Christ, because all trust to
that intercession in commending themselves as well as others to God.
Moreover, we have shown that this is ignorantly transferred to the
dead, of whom we nowhere read that they were commanded to pray for
us. The Scripture often exhorts us to offer up mutual prayers; but
says not one syllable concerning the dead; nay, James tacitly
excludes the dead when he combines the two things, to "confess our
sins one to another, and to pray one for another," (James v. 16.)
Hence it is sufficient to condemn this error, that the beginning of
right prayer springs from faith, and that faith comes by the hearing
of the word of God, in which there is no mention of fictitious
intercession, superstition having rashly adopted intercessors who
have not been divinely appointed. While the Scripture abounds in
various forms of prayer, we find no example of this intercession,
without which Papists think there is no prayer. Moreover, it is
evident that this superstition is the result of distrust, because
they are either not contented with Christ as an intercessor, or have
altogether robbed him of this honour. This last is easily proved by
their effrontery in maintaining, as the strongest of all their
arguments for the intercession of the saints, that we are unworthy
of familiar access to God. This, indeed, we acknowledge to be most
true, but we thence infer that they leave nothing to Christ, because
they consider his intercession as nothing, unless it is supplemented
by that of George and Hypolyte, and similar phantoms.
    28. But though prayer is properly confined to vows and
supplications, yet so strong is the affinity between petition and
thanksgiving, that both may be conveniently comprehended under one
name. For the forms which Paul enumerates (1 Tim. 2: 1) fall under
the first member of this division. By prayer and supplication we
pour out our desires before God, asking as well those things which
tend to promote his glory and display his name, as the benefits
which contribute to our advantage. By thanksgiving we duly celebrate
his kindnesses toward us, ascribing to his liberality every blessing
which enters into our lot. David accordingly includes both in one
sentence, "Call upon me in the day of trouble: I will deliver thee,
and thou shalt glorify me," (Ps. 50: 15.) Scripture, not without
reason, commands us to use both continually. We have already
described the greatness of our want, while experience itself
proclaims the straits which press us on every side to be so numerous
and so great, that all have sufficient ground to send forth sighs
and groans to God without intermission, and suppliantly implore him.
For even should they be exempt from adversity, still the holiest
ought to be stimulated first by their sins, and, secondly, by the
innumerable assaults of temptation, to long for a remedy. The
sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving can never be interrupted
without guilt, since God never ceases to load us with favour upon
favour, so as to force us to gratitude, however slow and sluggish we
may be. In short, so great and widely diffused are the riches of his
liberality towards us, so marvellous and wondrous the miracles which
we behold on every side, that we never can want a subject and
materials for praise and thanksgiving. To make this somewhat
clearer: since all our hopes and resources are placed in God, (this
has already been fully proved,) so that neither our persons nor our
interests can prosper without his blessing, we must constantly
submit ourselves and our all to him. Then whatever we deliberate,
speak, or do, should be deliberated, spoken, and done under his hand
and will; in fine, under the hope of his assistance. God has
pronounced a curse upon all who, confiding in themselves or others,
form plans and resolutions, who, without regarding his will, or
invoking his aid, either plan or attempt to execute, (James 4: 14;
Isaiah 30: 1; 31. 1.) And since, as has already been observed, he
receives the honour which is due when he is acknowledged to be the
author of all good, it follows that, in deriving all good from his
hand, we ought continually to express our thankfulness, and that we
have no right to use the benefits which proceed from his liberality,
if we do not assiduously proclaim his praise, and give him thanks,
these being the ends for which they are given. When Paul declares
that every creature of God "is sanctified by the word of God and
prayers" (1 Tim. 4: 5,) he intimates that without the word and
prayers none of them are holy and pure, _word_ being used
metonymically for _faith_. Hence David, on experiencing the loving-
kindness of the Lord, elegantly declares, "He hath put a new song in
my mouth," (Ps. 40: 3;) intimating, that our silence is malignant
when we leave his blessings unpraised, seeing every blessing he
bestows is a new ground of thanksgiving. Thus Isaiah, proclaiming
the singular mercies of God, says, "Sing unto the Lord a new song
(Is. 42: 10.)" In the same sense David says in another passage, "O
Lord, open thou my lips; and my mouth shall show forth thy praise,"
(Ps. 51: 15.) In like manner, Hezekiah and Jonah declare that they
will regard it as the end of their deliverance "to celebrate the
goodness of God with songs in his temple," (Is. 38: 20; Jonah 2:
10.) David lays down a general rule for all believers in these
words, "What shall I render unto the Lord for all his benefits
toward me? I will take the cup of salvation, and call upon the name
of the Lord," (Ps. 116: 12, 13.) This rule the Church follows in
another psalm, "Save us, O Lord our God, and gather us from among
the heathen, to give thanks unto thy holy name, and to triumph in
thy praise," (Ps. 106: 47.) Again, "He will regard the prayer of the
destitute, and not despise their prayer. This shall be written for
the generation to come: and the people which shall be created shall
praise the Lord." "To declare the name of the Lord in Zion, and his
praise in Jerusalem," (Ps. 102: 18, 21.) Nay, whenever believers
beseech the Lord to do anything _for his own name's sake_, as they
declare themselves unworthy of obtaining it in their own name, so
they oblige themselves to give thanks, and promise to make the right
use of his lovingkindness by being the heralds of it. Thus Hosea,
speaking of the future redemption of the Church, says, "Take away
all iniquity, and receive us graciously; so will we render the
calves of our lips," (Hos. 14: 2.) Not only do our tongues proclaim
the kindness of God, but they naturally inspire us with love to him.
"I love the Lord, because he hath heard my voice and my
supplications," (Ps. 116: 1.) In another passage, speaking of the
help which he had experienced, he says, "I will love thee, O Lord,
my strength," (Ps. 18: 1.) No praise will ever please God that does
not flow from this feeling of love. Nay, we must attend to the
declaration of Paul, that all wishes are vicious and perverse which
are not accompanied with thanksgiving. His words are, "In everything
by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be
made known unto God," (Phil. 4: 6.) Because many, under the
influence of moroseness, weariness, impatience, bitter grief and
fear, use murmuring in their prayers, he enjoins us so to regulate
our feelings as cheerfully to bless God even before obtaining what
we ask. But if this connection ought always to subsist in full vigor
between things that are almost contrary, the more sacred is the tie
which binds us to celebrate the praises of God whenever he grants
our requests. And as we have already shown that our prayers, which
otherwise would be polluted) are sanctified by the intercession of
Christ, so the Apostle, by enjoining us "to offer the sacrifice of
praise to God continually" by Christ, (Heb. 13: 15,) reminds us,
that without the intervention of his priesthood our lips are not
pure enough to celebrate the name of God. Hence we infer that a
monstrous delusion prevails among Papists, the great majority of
whom wonder when Christ is called an intercessor. The reason why
Paul enjoins, "Pray without ceasing; in every thing give thanks," (1
Thess. 5: 17, 18,) is, because he would have us with the utmost
assiduity, at all times, in every place, in all things, and under
all circumstances, direct our prayers to God, to expect all the
things which we desire from him, and when obtained ascribe them to
him; thus furnishing perpetual grounds for prayer and praise.
    29. This assiduity in prayer, though it specially refers to the
peculiar private prayers of individuals, extends also in some
measure to the public prayers of the Church. These, it may be said,
cannot be continual, and ought not to be made, except in the manner
which, for the sake of order, has been established by public
consent. This I admit, and hence certain hours are fixed beforehand,
hours which, though indifferent in regard to God, are necessary for
the use of man, that the general convenience may be consulted, and
all things be done in the Church, as Paul enjoins, "decently and in
order," (1 Cor. 14: 40.) But there is nothing in this to prevent
each church from being now and then stirred up to a more frequent
use of prayer and being more zealously affected under the impulse of
some greater necessity. Of perseverance in prayer, which is much
akin to assiduity, we shall speak towards the close of the chapter,
(sec. 51, 52.) This assiduity, moreover, is very different from the
BATTOLOGIAN (Greek--English "yammering"), _vain speaking_, which our
Saviour has prohibited, (Matth. 6: 7.) For he does not there forbid
us to pray long or frequently, or with great fervor, but warns us
against supposing that we can extort anything from God by
importuning him with garrulous loquacity, as if he were to be
persuaded after the manner of men. We know that hypocrites, because
they consider not that they have to do with God, offer up their
prayers as pompously as if it were part of a triumphal show. The
Pharisee, who thanked God that he was not as other men, no doubt
proclaimed his praises before men, as if he had wished to gain a
reputation for sanctity by his prayers. Hence that vain speaking,
which for a similar reason prevails so much in the Papacy in the
present day, some vainly spinning out the time by a reiteration of
the same frivolous prayers, and others employing a long series of
verbiage for vulgar display.[14] This childish garrulity being a
mockery of God, it is not strange that it is prohibited in the
Church, in order that every feeling there expressed may be sincere,
proceeding from the inmost heart. Akin to this abuse is another
which our Saviour also condemns, namely, when hypocrites for the
sake of ostentation court the presence of many witnesses, and would
sooner pray in the market-place than pray without applause. The true
object of prayer being, as we have already said, (sec. 4, 5,) to
carry our thoughts directly to God, whether to celebrate his praise
or implore his aid, we can easily see that its primary seat is in
the mind and heart, or rather that prayer itself is properly an
effusion and manifestation of internal feeling before Him who is the
searcher of hearts. Hence, (as has been said,) when our divine
Master was pleased to lay down the best rule for prayer, his
injunction was, "Enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy
door, pray to thy Father which is in secret, and thy Father which
seeth in secret shall reward thee openly," (Matth. 6: 6.) Dissuading
us from the example of hypocrites, who sought the applause of men by
an ambitious ostentation in prayer, he adds the better course--enter
thy chamber, shut thy door, and there pray. By these words (as I
understand them) he taught us to seek a place of retirement which
might enable us to turn all our thoughts inwards and enter deeply
into our hearts, promising that God would hold converse with the
feelings of our mind, of which the body ought to be the temple. He
meant not to deny that it may be expedient to pray in other places
also, but he shows that prayer is somewhat of a secret nature,
having its chief seat in the mind, and requiring a tranquillity far
removed from the turmoil of ordinary cares. And hence it was not
without cause that our Lord himself, when he would engage more
earnestly in prayer, withdrew into a retired spot beyond the bustle
of the world, thus reminding us by his example that we are not to
neglect those helps which enable the mind, in itself too much
disposed to wander, to become sincerely intent on prayer. Meanwhile,
as he abstained not from prayer when the occasion required it,
though he were in the midst of a crowd, so must we, whenever there
is need, lift up "pure hands" (1 Tim. 2: 8) at all places. And hence
we must hold that he who declines to pray in the public meeting of
the saints, knows not what it is to pray apart, in retirement, or at
home. On the other hand, he who neglects to pray alone and in
private, however sedulously he frequents public meetings, there
gives his prayers to the wind, because he defers more to the opinion
of man than to the secret judgment of God. Still, lest the public
prayers of the Church should be held in contempt, the Lord anciently
bestowed upon them the most honourable appellation, especially when
he called the temple the "_house of prayer_," (Isa. 56: 7.) For by
this expression he both showed that the duty of prayer is a
principal part of his worship, and that to enable believers to
engage in it with one consent his temple is set up before them as a
kind of banner. A noble promise was also added, "Praise waiteth for
thee, O God, in Sion: and unto thee shall the vow be performed,"
(Ps. 65: 1.)[15] By these words the Psalmist reminds us that the
prayers of the Church are never in vain; because God always
furnishes his people with materials for a song of joy. But although
the shadows of the law have ceased, yet because God was pleased by
this ordinance to foster the unity of the faith among us also, there
can be no doubt that the same promise belongs to us--a promise which
Christ sanctioned with his own lips, and which Paul declares to be
perpetually in force.
    30. As God in his word enjoins common prayer, so public temples
are the places destined for the performance of them, and hence those
who refuse to join with the people of God in this observance have no
ground for the pretext, that they enter their chamber in order that
they may obey the command of the Lord. For he who promises to grant
whatsoever two or three assembled in his name shall ask, (Matth. 18:
20,) declares, that he by no means despises the prayers which are
publicly offered up, provided there be no ostentation, or catching
at human applause, and provided there be a true and sincere
affection in the secret recesses of the heart.[16] If this is the
legitimate use of churches, (and it certainly is,) we must, on the
other hand, beware of imitating the practice which commenced some
centuries ago, of imagining that churches are the proper dwellings
of God, where he is more ready to listen to us, or of attaching to
them some kind of secret sanctity, which makes prayer there more
holy. For seeing we are the true temples of God, we must pray in
ourselves if we would invoke God in his holy temple. Let us leave
such gross ideas to the Jews or the heathen, knowing that we have a
command to pray without distinction of place, "in spirit and in
truth," (John 4: 23.) It is true that by the order of God the temple
was anciently dedicated for the offering of prayers and sacrifices,
but this was at a time when the truth (which being now fully
manifested, we are not permitted to confine to any material temple)
lay hid under the figure of shadows. Even the temple was not
represented to the Jews as confining the presence of God within its
walls, but was meant to train them to contemplate the image of the
true temple. Accordingly, a severe rebuke is administered both by
Isaiah and Stephen, to those who thought that God could in any way
dwell in temples made with hands, (Isa. 66: 2; Acts 7: 48.)
    31. Hence it is perfectly clear that neither words nor singing
(if used in prayer) are of the least consequence, or avail one iota
with God, unless they proceed from deep feeling in the heart. Nay,
rather they provoke his anger against us, if they come from the lips
and throat only, since this is to abuse his sacred name, and hold
his majesty in derision. This we infer from the words of Isaiah,
which, though their meaning is of wider extent, go to rebuke this
vice also: "Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth,
and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far
from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:
therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous work among this
people, even a marvellous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of their
wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men
shall be hid," (Isa. 29: 13.) Still we do not condemn words or
singing, but rather greatly commend them, provided the feeling of
the mind goes along with them. For in this way the thought of God is
kept alive on our minds, which, from their fickle and versatile
nature, soon relax, and are distracted by various objects, unless
various means are used to support them. Besides, since the glory of
God ought in a manner to be displayed in each part of our body, the
special service to which the tongue should be devoted is that of
singing and speaking, inasmuch as it has been expressly created to
declare and proclaim the praise of God. This employment of the
tongue is chiefly in the public services which are performed in the
meeting of the saints. In this way the God whom we serve in one
spirit and one faith, we glorify together as it were with one voice
and one mouth; and that openly, so that each may in turn receive the
confession of his brother's faith, and be invited and incited to
imitate it.
    32. It is certain that the use of singing in churches (which I
may mention in passing) is not only very ancient, but was also used
by the Apostles, as we may gather from the words of Paul, "I will
sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also,"
(1 Cor. 14: 15.) In like manner he says to the Colossians, "Teaching
and admonishing one another in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual
songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord," (Col. 3: 16.)
In the former passage, he enjoins us to sing with the voice and the
heart; in the latter, he commends spiritual Songs, by which the
pious mutually edify each other. That it was not an universal
practice, however, is attested by Augustine, (Confess. Lib. 9: cap.
7,) who states that the church of Milan first began to use singing
in the time of Ambrose, when the orthodox faith being persecuted by
Justina, the mother of Valentinian, the vigils of the people were
more frequent than usual;[17] and that the practice was afterwards
followed by the other Western churches. He had said a little before
that the custom came from the East.[18] He also intimates (Retract.
Lib. 2:) that it was received in Africa in his own time. His words
are, "Hilarius, a man of tribunitial rank, assailed with the
bitterest invectives he could use the custom which then began to
exist at Carthage, of singing hymns from the book of Psalms at the
altar, either before the oblation, or when it was distributed to the
people; I answered him, at the request of my brethren."[19] And
certainly if singing is tempered to a gravity befitting the presence
of God and angels, it both gives dignity and grace to sacred
actions, and has a very powerful tendency to stir up the mind to
true zeal and ardor in prayer. We must, however, carefully beware,
lest our ears be more intent on the music than our minds on the
spiritual meaning of the words. Augustine confesses (Confess. Lib.
10: cap. 33) that the fear of this danger sometimes made him wish
for the introduction of a practice observed by Athanasius, who
ordered the reader to use only a gentle inflection of the voice,
more akin to recitation than singing. But on again considering how
many advantages were derived from singing, he inclined to the other
side.[20] If this moderation is used, there cannot be a doubt that
the practice is most sacred and salutary. On the other hand, songs
composed merely to tickle and delight the ear are unbecoming the
majesty of the Church, and cannot but be most displeasing to God.
    33. It is also plain that the public prayers are not to be
couched in Greek among the Latins, nor in Latin among the French or
English, (as hitherto has been every where practised,) but in the
vulgar tongue, so that all present may understand them, since they
ought to be used for the edification of the whole Church, which
cannot be in the least degree benefited by a sound not understood.
Those who are not moved by any reason of humanity or charity, ought
at least to be somewhat moved by the authority of Paul, whose words
are by no means ambiguous: "When thou shalt bless with the spirit,
how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say, Amen, at
thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?
For thou verily givest thanks, but the other is not edified," (1
Cor. 14: 16, 17.) How then can one sufficiently admire the unbridled
license of the Papists, who, while the Apostle publicly protests
against it, hesitate not to bawl out the most verbose prayers in a
foreign tongue, prayers of which they themselves sometimes do not
understand one syllable, and which they have no wish that others
should understand?[21] Different is the course which Paul
prescribes, "What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I
will pray with the understanding also; I will sing with the spirit,
and I will sing with the understanding also:" meaning by the
_spirit_ the special gift of tongues, which some who had received it
abused when they dissevered it from the mind, that is, the
understanding. The principle we must always hold is, that in all
prayer, public and private, the tongue without the mind must be
displeasing to God. Moreover, the mind must be so incited, as in
ardor of thought far to surpass what the tongue is able to express.
Lastly, the tongue is not even necessary to private prayer, unless
in so far as the internal feeling is insufficient for incitement, or
the vehemence of the incitement carries the utterance of the tongue
along with it. For although the best prayers are sometimes without
utterance, yet when the feeling of the mind is overpowering, the
tongue spontaneously breaks forth into utterance, and our other
members into gesture. Hence that dubious muttering of Hannah, (1
Sam. 1: 13,) something similar to which is experienced by all the
saints when concise and abrupt expressions escape from them. The
bodily gestures usually observed in prayer, such as kneeling and
uncovering of the head, (Calv. in Acts 20: 36,) are exercises by
which we attempt to rise to higher veneration of God.
    34. We must now attend not only to a surer method, but also
form of prayer, that, namely, which our heavenly Father has
delivered to us by his beloved Son, and in which we may recognize
his boundless goodness and condescension, (Matth. 6: 9; Luke 11: 2.)
Besides admonishing and exhorting us to seek him in our every
necessity, (as children are wont to betake themselves to the
protection of their parents when oppressed with any anxiety,) seeing
that we were not fully aware how great our poverty was, or what was
right or for our interest to ask, he has provided for this
ignorance; that wherein our capacity failed he has sufficiently
supplied. For he has given us a form in which is set before us as in
a picture every thing which it is lawful to wish, every thing which
is conducive to our interest, every thing which it is necessary to
demand. From his goodness in this respect we derive the great
comfort of knowing, that as we ask almost in his words, we ask
nothing that is absurd, or foreign, or unseasonable; nothing, in
short, that is not agreeable to him. Plato, seeing the ignorance of
men in presenting their desires to God, desires which if granted
would often be most injurious to them, declares the best form of
prayer to be that which an ancient poet has furnished: "O king
Jupiter, give what is best, whether we wish it or wish it not; but
avert from us what is evil even though we ask it," (Plato, Alcibiad.
2:) This heathen shows his wisdom in discerning how dangerous it is
to ask of God what our own passion dictates; while, at the same
time, he reminds us of our unhappy condition in not being able to
open our lips before God without dangers unless his Spirit instruct
us how to pray aright, (Rom. 8: 26.) The higher value, therefore,
ought we to set on the privilege, when the only begotten Son of God
puts words into our lips, and thus relieves our minds of all
hesitation.
    35. This form or rule of prayer is composed of _six petitions_.
For I am prevented from agreeing with those who divide it into
_seven_ by the adversative mode of diction used by the Evangelist,
who appears to have intended to unite the two members together; as
if he had said, Do not allow us to be overcome by temptation, but
rather bring assistance to our frailty, and deliver us that we may
not fall. Ancient writers[22] also agree with us, that what is added
by Matthew as a seventh head is to be considered as explanatory of
the sixth petition.[23] But though in every part of the prayer the
first place is assigned to the glory of God, still this is more
especially the object of the three first petitions, in which we are
to look to the glory of God alone, without any reference to what is
called our own advantage. The three remaining petitions are devoted
to our interest, and properly relate to things which it is useful
for us to ask. When we ask that the name of God may be hallowed, as
God wishes to prove whether we love and serve him freely, or from
the hope of reward, we are not to think at all of our own interest;
we must set his glory before our eyes, and keep them intent upon it
alone. In the other similar petitions, this is the only manner in
which we ought to be affected. It is true, that in this way our own
interest is greatly promoted, because, when the name of God is
hallowed in the way we ask, our own sanctification also is thereby
promoted. But in regard to this advantage, we must, as I have said,
shut our eyes, and be in a manner blind, so as not even to see it;
and hence were all hope of our private advantage cut off, we still
should never cease to wish and pray for this hallowing, and every
thing else which pertains to the glory of God. We have examples in
Moses and Paul, who did not count it grievous to turn away their
eyes and minds from themselves, and with intense and fervent zeal
long for death, if by their loss the kingdom and glory of God might
be promoted, (Exod. 32: 32; Rom. 9: 3.) On the other hand, when we
ask for daily bread, although we desire what is advantageous for
ourselves, we ought also especially to seek the glory of God, so
much so that we would not ask at all unless it were to turn to his
glory. Let us now proceed to an exposition of the Prayer.  OUR
FATHER WHICH ART IN HEAVEN.
    36. The first thing suggested at the very outset is, as we have
already said, (sec. 17-19,) that all our prayers to God ought only
to be presented in the name of Christ, as there is no other name
which can recommend them. In calling God our Father, we certainly
plead the name of Christ. For with what confidence could any man
call God his Father? Who would have the presumption to arrogate to
himself the honour of a son of God were we not gratuitously adopted
as his sons in Christ? He being the true Son, has been given to us
as a brother, so that that which he possesses as his own by nature
becomes ours by adoption, if we embrace this great mercy with firm
faith. As John says, "As many as received him, to them gave he power
to become the sons of God, even to them that believe in his name,"
(John 1: 12.) Hence he both calls himself our Father, and is pleased
to be so called by us, by this delightful name relieving us of all
distrust, since no where can a stronger affection be found than in a
father. Hence, too, he could not have given us a stronger testimony
of his boundless love than in calling us his sons. But his love
towards us is so much the greater and more excellent than that of
earthly parents, the farther he surpasses all men in goodness and
mercy, (Isaiah 63: 16.) Earthly parents, laying aside all paternal
affection, might abandon their offspring; he will never abandon us,
(Ps. 27: 10,) seeing he cannot deny himself. For we have his
promise, "If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto
your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven
give good things to them that ask him?" (Matth. 7: 11.) In like
manner in the prophet, "Can a woman forget her sucking child, that
she should not have compassion on the son of her womb? Yea, they may
forget, yet will not I forget thee," (Isaiah 49: 15.) But if we are
his sons, then as a son cannot betake himself to the protection of a
stranger and a foreigner without at the same time complaining of his
father's cruelty or poverty, so we cannot ask assistance from any
other quarter than from him, unless we would upbraid him with
poverty, or want of means, or cruelty and excessive austerity.
    37. Nor let us allege that we are justly rendered timid by a
consciousness of sin, by which our Father, though mild and merciful,
is daily offended. For if among men a son cannot have a better
advocate to plead his cause with his father, and cannot employ a
better intercessor to regain his lost favour, than if he come
himself suppliant and downcast, acknowledging his fault, to implore
the mercy of his father, whose paternal feelings cannot but be moved
by such entreaties, what will that "Father of all mercies, and God
of all comfort," do? (2 Cor. i. 3.) Will he not rather listen to the
tears and groans of his children, when supplicating for themselves,
(especially seeing he invites and exhorts us to do so,) than to any
advocacy of others to whom the timid have recourse, not without some
semblance of despair, because they are distrustful of their father's
mildness and clemency? The exuberance of his paternal kindness he
sets before us in the parable, (Luke 15: 20; see Calv. Comm.) when
the father with open arms receives the son who had gone away from
him, wasted his substance in riotous living, and in all ways
grievously sinned against him. He waits not till pardon is asked in
words, but, anticipating the request, recognizes him afar off, runs
to meet him, consoles him, and restores him to favour. By setting
before us this admirable example of mildness in a man, he designed
to show in how much greater abundance we may expect it from him who
is not only a Father, but the best and most merciful of all fathers,
however ungrateful, rebellious, and wicked sons we may be, provided
only we throw ourselves upon his mercy. And the better to assure us
that he is such a Father if we are Christians, he has been pleased
to be called not only a Father, but our Father, as if we were
pleading with him after this manner, O Father, who art possessed of
so much affection for thy children, and art so ready to forgive, we
thy children approach thee and present our requests, fully persuaded
that thou hast no other feelings towards us than those of a father,
though we are unworthy of such a parent.[24] But as our narrow
hearts are incapable of comprehending such boundless favour, Christ
is not only the earnest and pledge of our adoption, but also gives
us the Spirit as a witness of this adoption, that through him we may
freely cry aloud, Abba, Father. Whenever, therefore, we are
restrained by any feeling of hesitation, let us remember to ask of
him that he may correct our timidity, and placing us under the
magnanimous guidance of the Spirit, enable us to pray boldly.
    38. The instruction given us, however, is not that every
individual in particular is to call him Father, but rather that we
are all in common to call him Our Father. By this we are reminded
how strong the feeling of brotherly love between us ought to be,
since we are all alike, by the same mercy and free kindness, the
children of such a Father. For if He from whom we all obtain
whatever is good is our common Father, (Matth. 23: 9,) every thing
which has been distributed to us we should be prepared to
communicate to each other, as far as occasion demands. But if we are
thus desirous as we ought, to stretch out our hands and give
assistance to each other, there is nothing by which we can more
benefit our brethren than by committing them to the care and
protection of the best of parents, since if He is propitious and
favourable nothing more can be desired. And, indeed, we owe this
also to our Father. For as he who truly and from the heart loves the
father of a family, extends the same love and good-will to all his
household, so the zeal and affection which we feel for our heavenly
Parent it becomes us to extend towards his people, his family, and,
in fine, his heritage, which he has honoured so highly as to give
them the appellation of the "fulness" of his only begotten Son,"
(Eph. 1: 23.) Let the Christian, then, so regulate his prayers as to
make them common, and embrace all who are his brethren in Christ;
not only those whom at present he sees and knows to be such, but all
men who are alive upon the earth. What God has determined with
regard to them is beyond our knowledge, but to wish and hope the
best concerning them is both pious and humane. Still it becomes us
to regard with special affection those who are of the household of
faith, and whom the Apostle has in express terms recommended to our
care in every thing, (Gal. 6: 10.) In short, all our prayers ought
to bear reference to that community which our Lord has established
in his kingdom and family.
    39. This, however, does not prevent us from praying specially
for ourselves, and certain others, provided our mind is not
withdrawn from the view of this community, does not deviate from it,
but constantly refers to it. For prayers, though couched in special
terms, keeping that object still in view, cease not to be common.
All this may easily be understood by analogy. There is a general
command from God to relieve the necessities of all the poor, and yet
this command is obeyed by those who with that view give succour to
all whom they see or know to be in distress, although they pass by
many whose wants are not less urgent, either because they cannot
know or are unable to give supply to all. In this way there is
nothing repugnant to the will of God in those who, giving heed to
this common society of the Church, yet offer up particular prayers,
in which, with a public mind, though in special terms, they commend
to God themselves or others, with whose necessity he has been
pleased to make them more familiarly acquainted. It is true that
prayer and the giving of our substance are not in all respects
alike. We can only bestow the kindness of our liberality on those of
whose wants we are aware, whereas in prayer we can assist the
greatest strangers, how wide soever the space which may separate
them from us. This is done by that general form of prayer which,
including all the sons of God, includes them also. To this we may
refer the exhortation which Paul gave to the believers of his age,
to lift up "holy hands without wrath and doubting," (1 Tim. 2: 8.)
By reminding them that dissension is a bar to prayer, he shows it to
be his wish that they should with one accord present their prayers
in common.
    40. The next words are, WHICH ART IN HEAVEN. From this we are
not to infer that he is enclosed and confined within the
circumference of heaven, as by a kind of boundaries. Hence Solomon
confesses, "The heaven of heavens cannot contain thee," (1 Kings 8:
27;) and he himself says by the Prophet, "The heaven is my throne,
and the earth is my footstool," (Isa. 66: 1;) thereby intimating,
that his presence, not confined to any region, is diffused over all
space. But as our gross minds are unable to conceive of his
ineffable glory, it is designated to us by _heaven_, nothing which
our eyes can behold being so full of splendor and majesty. While,
then, we are accustomed to regard every object as confined to the
place where our senses discern it, no place can be assigned to God;
and hence, if we would seek him, we must rise higher than all
corporeal or mental discernment. Again, this form of expression
reminds us that he is far beyond the reach of change or corruption,
that he holds the whole universe in his grasp, and rules it by his
power. The effect of the expressions therefore, is the same as if it
had been said, that he is of infinite majesty, incomprehensible
essence, boundless power, and eternal duration. When we thus speak
of God, our thoughts must be raised to their highest pitch; we must
not ascribe to him any thing of a terrestrial or carnal nature, must
not measure him by our little standards, or suppose his will to be
like ours. At the same time, we must put our confidence in him,
understanding that heaven and earth are governed by his providence
and power. In short, under the name of Father is set before us that
God, who hath appeared to us in his own image, that we may invoke
him with sure faith; the familiar name of Father being given not
only to inspire confidence, but also to curb our minds, and prevent
them from going astray after doubtful or fictitious gods. We thus
ascend from the only begotten Son to the supreme Father of angels
and of the Church. Then when his throne is fixed in heaven, we are
reminded that he governs the world, and, therefore, that it is not
in vain to approach him whose present care we actually experience.
"He that cometh to God," says the Apostle, "must believe that he is,
and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him," (Heb.
11: 6.) Here Christ makes both claims for his Father, _first_, that
we place our faith in him; and, _secondly_ ,that we feel assured
that our salvation is not neglected by him, inasmuch as he
condescends to extend his providence to us. By these elementary
principles Paul prepares us to pray aright; for before enjoining us
to make our requests known unto God, he premises in this way, "The
Lord is at hand. Be careful for nothing," (Phil. 4: 5, 6.) Whence it
appears that doubt and perplexity hang over the prayers of those in
whose minds the belief is not firmly seated, that "the eyes of the
Lord are upon the righteous," (Ps. 34: 15.)
    41. The first petition is, HALLOWED BE THY NAME. The necessity
of presenting it bespeaks our great disgrace. For what can be more
unbecoming than that our ingratitude and malice should impair, our
audacity and petulance should as much as in them lies destroy, the
glory of God? But though all the ungodly should burst with
sacrilegious rage, the holiness of God's name still shines forth.
Justly does the Psalmist exclaim, "According to thy name, O God, so
is thy praise unto the ends of the earth," (Ps. 48: 10.) For
wherever God hath made himself known, his perfections must be
displayed, his power, goodness, wisdom, justice, mercy, and truth,
which fill us with admiration, and incite us to show forth his
praise. Therefore, as the name of God is not duly hallowed on the
earth, and we are otherwise unable to assert it, it is at least our
duty to make it the subject of our prayers. The sum of the whole is,
It must be our desire that God may receive the honour which is his
due: that men may never think or speak of him without the greatest
reverence. The opposite of this reverence is profanity, which has
always been too common in the world, and is very prevalent in the
present day. Hence the necessity of the petition, which, if piety
had any proper existence among us, would be superfluous. But if the
name of God is duly hallowed only when separated from all other
names it alone is glorified, we are in the petition enjoined to ask
not only that God would vindicate his sacred name from all contempt
and insult, but also that he would compel the whole human race to
reverence it. Then since God manifests himself to us partly by his
word, and partly by his works, he is not sanctified unless in regard
to both of these we ascribe to him what is due, and thus embrace
whatever has proceeded from him, giving no less praise to his
justice than to his mercy. On the manifold diversity of his works he
has inscribed the marks of his glory, and these ought to call forth
from every tongue an ascription of praise. Thus Scripture will
obtain its due authority with us, and no event will hinder us from
celebrating the praises of God, in regard to every part of his
government. On the other hand, the petition implies a wish that all
impiety which pollutes this sacred name may perish and be
extinguished, that every thing which obscures or impairs his glory,
all detraction and insult, may cease; that all blasphemy being
suppressed, the divine majesty may be more and more signally
displayed.
    42. The second petition is, THY KINGDOM COME. This contains
nothing new, and yet there is good reason for distinguishing it from
the first. For if we consider our lethargy in the greatest of all
matters, we shall see how necessary it is that what ought to be in
itself perfectly known should be inculcated at greater length.
Therefore, after the injunction to pray that God would reduce to
order, and at length completely efface every stain which is thrown
on his sacred name, another petition, containing almost the same
wish, is added, viz., Thy kingdom come. Although a definition of
this kingdom has already been given, I now briefly repeat that God
reigns when men, in denial of themselves and contempt of the world
and this earthly life, devote themselves to righteousness and aspire
to heaven, (see Calvin, Harm. Matth. 6:) Thus this kingdom consists
of two parts; the first is, when God by the agency of his Spirit
corrects all the depraved lusts of the flesh, which in bands war
against Him; and the second, when he brings all our thoughts into
obedience to his authority. This petition, therefore, is duly
presented only by those who begin with themselves; in other words,
who pray that they may be purified from all the corruptions which
disturb the tranquillity and impair the purity of God's kingdom.
Then as the word of God is like his royal sceptre, we are here
enjoined to pray that he would subdue all minds and hearts to
voluntary obedience. This is done when by the secret inspiration of
his Spirit he displays the efficacy of his word, and raises it to
the place of honour which it deserves. We must next descend to the
wicked, who perversely and with desperate madness resist his
authority. God, therefore, sets up his kingdom, by humbling the
whole world, though in different ways, taming the wantonness of
some, and breaking the ungovernable pride of others. We should
desire this to be done every day, in order that God may gather
churches to himself from all quarters of the world, may extend and
increase their numbers, enrich them with his gifts, establish due
order among them; on the other hand, beat down all the enemies of
pure doctrine and religion, dissipate their counsels, defeat their
attempts. Hence it appears that there is good ground for the precept
which enjoins daily progress, for human affairs are never so
prosperous as when the impurities of vice are purged away, and
integrity flourishes in full vigor. The completion, however, is
deferred to the final advent of Christ, when, as Paul declares, "God
will be all in all," (1 Cor. 15: 28.) This prayer, therefore, ought
to withdraw us from the corruptions of the world which separate us
from God, and prevent his kingdom from flourishing within us;
secondly, it ought to inflame us with an ardent desire for the
mortification of the flesh; and, lastly, it ought to train us to the
endurance of the cross; since this is the way in which God would
have his kingdom to be advanced. It ought not to grieve us that the
outward man decays provided the inner man is renewed. For such is
the nature of the kingdom of God, that while we submit to his
righteousness he makes us partakers of his glory. This is the case
when continually adding to his light and truth, by which the lies
and the darkness of Satan and his kingdom are dissipated,
extinguished, and destroyed, he protects his people, guides them
aright by the agency of his Spirit, and confirms them in
perseverance; while, on the other hand, he frustrates the impious
conspiracies of his enemies, dissipates their wiles and frauds,
prevents their malice and curbs their petulance, until at length he
consume Antichrist "with the spirit of his mouth," and destroy all
impiety "with the brightness of his coming," (2 Thess. 2: 8, Calv.
Com.)
    43. The third petition is, THY WILL BE DONE ON EARTH AS IT IS
IN HEAVEN. Though this depends on his kingdom, and cannot be
disjoined from it, yet a separate place is not improperly given to
it on account of our ignorance, which does not at once or easily
apprehend what is meant by God reigning in the world. This,
therefore, may not improperly be taken as the explanation, that God
will be King in the world when all shall subject themselves to his
will. We are not here treating of that secret will by which he
governs all things, and destines them to their end, (see chap. 24:
s. 17.) For although devils and men rise in tumult against him, he
is able by his incomprehensible counsel not only to turn aside their
violence, but make it subservient to the execution of his decrees.
What we here speak of is another will of God, namely, that of which
voluntary obedience is the counterpart; and, therefore, heaven is
expressly contrasted with earth, because, as is said in The Psalms,
the angels "do his commandments, hearkening unto the voice of his
word," (Ps. 103: 20.) We are, therefore, enjoined to pray that as
everything done in heaven is at the command of God, and the angels
are calmly disposed to do all that is right, so the earth may be
brought under his authority, all rebellion and depravity having been
extinguished. In presenting this request we renounce the desires of
the flesh, because he who does not entirely resign his affections to
God, does as much as in him lies to oppose the divine will, since
everything which proceeds from us is vicious. Again, by this prayer
we are taught to deny ourselves, that God may rule us according to
his pleasure; and not only so, but also having annihilated our own
may create new thoughts and new minds so that we shall have no
desire save that of entire agreement with his will; in short, wish
nothing of ourselves, but have our hearts governed by his Spirit,
under whose inward teaching we may learn to love those things which
please and hate those things which displease him. Hence also we must
desire that he would nullify and suppress all affections which are
repugnant to his will. Such are the three first heads of the prayer,
in presenting which we should have the glory of God only in view,
taking no account of ourselves, and paying no respect to our own
advantage, which, though it is thereby greatly promoted, is not here
to be the subject of request. And though all the events prayed for
must happen in their own time, without being either thought of,
wished, or asked by us, it is still our duty to wish and ask for
them. And it is of no slight importance to do so, that we may
testify and profess that we are the servants and children of God,
desirous by every means in our power to promote the honour due to
him as our Lord and Father, and truly and thoroughly devoted to his
service. Hence if men, in praying that the name of God may be
hallowed, that his kingdom may come, and his will be done, are not
influenced by this zeal for the promotion of his glory, they are not
to be accounted among the servants and children of God; and as all
these things will take place against their will, so they will turn
out to their confusion and destruction.
    44. Now comes the second part of the prayer, in which we
descend to our own interests, not, indeed, that we are to lose sight
of the glory of God, (to which, as Paul declares, we must have
respect even in meat and drink, 1 Cor. 10: 31,) and ask only what is
expedient for ourselves; but the distinction, as we have already
observed, is this: God claiming the three first petitions as
specially his own, carries us entirely to himself, that in this way
he may prove our piety. Next he permits us to look to our own
advantage, but still on the condition, that when we ask anything for
ourselves it must be in order that all the benefits which he confers
may show forth his glory, there being nothing more incumbent on us
than to live and die to him. By the first petition of the second
part, GIVE US THIS DAY OUR DAILY BREAD, we pray in general that God
would give us all things which the body requires in this sublunary
state, not only food and clothing, but everything which he knows
will assist us to eat our bread in peace. In this way we briefly
cast our care upon him, and commit ourselves to his providence, that
he may feed, foster, and preserve us. For our heavenly Father
disdains not to take our body under his charge and protection, that
he may exercise our faith in those minute matters, while we look to
him for everything, even to a morsel of bread and a drop of water.
For since, owing to some strange inequality, we feel more concern
for the body than for the soul, many who can trust the latter to God
still continue anxious about the former, still hesitate as to what
they are to eat, as to how they are to be clothed, and are in
trepidation whenever their hands are not filled with corn, and wine,
and oil, so much more value do we set on this shadowy, fleeting
life, than on a blessed immortality. But those who, trusting to God,
have once cast away that anxiety about the flesh, immediately look
to him for greater gifts, even salvation and eternal life. It is no
slight exercise of faith, therefore, to hope in God for things which
would otherwise give us so much concern; nor have we made little
progress when we get quit of this unbelief, which cleaves, as it
were, to our very bones. The speculations of some concerning
supersubstantial bread seem to be very little accordant with our
Savior's meaning; for our prayer would be defective were we not to
ascribe to God the nourishment even of this fading life. The reason
which they give is heathenish, viz., that it is inconsistent with
the character of sons of God, who ought to be spiritual, not only to
occupy their mind with earthly cares, but to suppose God also
occupied with them. As if his blessing and paternal favour were not
eminently displayed in giving us food, or as if there were nothing
in the declaration that godliness hath "the promise of the life that
now is, and of that which is to come," (1 Tim. 4: 8.) But although
the forgiveness of sins is of far more importance than the
nourishment of the body, yet Christ has set down the inferior in the
prior place, in order that he might gradually raise us to the other
two petitions, which properly belong to the heavenly life,--in this
providing for our sluggishness. We are enjoined to ask _our bread_,
that we may be contented with the measure which our heavenly Father
is pleased to dispense, and not strive to make gain by illicit arts.
Meanwhile, we must hold that the title by which it is ours is
donation, because, as Moses says, (Levit. 26: 20, Deut. 8: 17,)
neither our industry, nor labour, nor hands, acquire any thing for
us, unless the blessing of God be present; nay, not even would
abundance of bread be of the least avail were it not divinely
converted into nourishment. And hence this liberality of God is not
less necessary to the rich than the poor, because, though their
cellars and barns were full, they would be parched and pine with
want did they not enjoy his favour along with their bread. The terms
_this day_, or, as it is in another Evangelist, _daily_, and also
the epithet _daily_, lay a restraint on our immoderate desire of
fleeting good--a desire which we are extremely apt to indulge to
excess, and from which other evils ensue: for when our supply is in
richer abundance we ambitiously squander it in pleasure, luxury,
ostentation, or other kinds of extravagance. Wherefore, we are only
enjoined to ask as much as our necessity requires, and as it were
for each day, confiding that our heavenly Father, who gives us the
supply of to-day, will not fail us on the morrow. How great soever
our abundance may be, however well filled our cellars and granaries,
we must still always ask for daily bread, for we must feel assured
that all substance is nothing, unless in so far as the Lord, by
pouring out his blessing, make it fruitful during its whole
progress; for even that which is in our hand is not ours except in
so far as he every hour portions it out, and permits us to use it.
As nothing is more difficult to human pride than the admission of
this truth, the Lord declares that he gave a special proof for all
ages, when he fed his people with manna in the desert, (Deut. 8: 3,)
that he might remind us that "man shall not live by bread alone, but
by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God," (Matth. 4:
4.) It is thus intimated, that by his power alone our life and
strength are sustained, though he ministers supply to us by bodily
instruments. In like manner, whenever it so pleases, he gives us a
proof of an opposite description, by breaking the strength, or, as
he himself calls it, the _staff_ of bread, (Levit. 26: 26,) and
leaving us even while eating to pine with hunger, and while drinking
to be parched with thirst. Those who, not contented with daily
bread, indulge an unrestrained insatiable cupidity, or those who are
full of their own abundance, and trust in their own riches, only
mock God by offering up this prayer. For the former ask what they
would be unwilling to obtain, nay, what they most of all abominate,
namely, daily bread only, and as much as in them lies disguise their
avarice from God, whereas true prayer should pour out the whole soul
and every inward feeling before him. The latter, again, ask what
they do not at all expect to obtain, namely, what they imagine that
they in themselves already possess. In its being called _ours_, God,
as we have already said, gives a striking display of his kindness,
making that to be ours to which we have no just claim. Nor must we
reject the view to which I have already adverted, viz., that this
name is given to what is obtained by just and honest labour, as
contrasted with what is obtained by fraud and rapine, nothing being
our own which we obtain with injury to others. When we ask God to
_give us_, the meaning is, that the thing asked is simply and freely
the gift of God, whatever be the quarter from which it comes to us,
even when it seems to have been specially prepared by our own art
and industry, and procured by our hands, since it is to his blessing
alone that all our labors owe their success.
    45. The next petition is, FORGIVE ITS OUR DEBTS. In this and
the following petition our Saviour has briefly comprehended whatever
is conducive to the heavenly life, as these two members contain the
spiritual covenant which God made for the salvation of his Church,
"I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it on their
hearts." "I will pardon all their iniquities," (Jer. 31: 33; 33: 8.)
Here our Saviour begins with the forgiveness of sins, and then adds
the subsequent blessing, viz., that God would protect us by the
power, and support us by the aid of his Spirit, so that we may stand
invincible against all temptations. To sins he gives the name of
_debts_, because we owe the punishment due to them, a debt which we
could not possibly pay were we not discharged by this remission, the
result of his free mercy, when he freely expunges the debt,
accepting nothing in return; but of his own mercy receiving
satisfaction in Christ, who gave himself a ransom for us, (Rom. 3:
24.) Hence, those who expect to satisfy God by merits of their own
or of others, or to compensate and purchase forgiveness by means of
satisfactions, have no share in this free pardon, and while they
address God in this petition, do nothing more than subscribe their
own accusation, and seal their condemnation by their own testimony.
For they confess that they are debtors, unless they are discharged
by means of forgiveness. This forgiveness, however, they do not
receive, but rather reject, when they obtrude their merits and
satisfactions upon God, since by so doing they do not implore his
mercy, but appeal to his justice. Let those, again, who dream of a
perfection which makes it unnecessary to seek pardon, find their
disciples among those whose itching ears incline them to
imposture,[25] (see Calv. on Dan. 9: 20;) only let them understand
that those whom they thus acquire have been carried away from
Christ, since he, by instructing all to confess their guilt,
receives none but sinners, not that he may soothe, and so encourage
them in their sins, but because he knows that believers are never so
divested of the sins of the flesh as not to remain subject to the
justice of God. It is, indeed, to be wished, it ought even to be our
strenuous endeavour, to perform all the parts of our duty, so as
truly to congratulate ourselves before God as being pure from every
stain; but as God is pleased to renew his image in us by degrees, so
that to some extent there is always a residue of corruption in our
flesh, we ought by no means to neglect the remedy. But if Christ,
according to the authority given him by his Father, enjoins us,
during the whole course of our lives, to implore pardon, who can
tolerate those new teachers who, by the phantom of perfect
innocence, endeavour to dazzle the simple, and make them believe
that they can render themselves completely free from guilt? This, as
John declares, is nothing else than to make God a liar, (1 John 1:
10.) In like manner, those foolish men mutilate the covenant in
which we have seen that our salvation is contained by concealing one
head of it, and so destroying it entirely; being guilty not only of
profanity in that they separate things which ought to be
indissolubly connected; but also of wickedness and cruelty in
overwhelming wretched souls with despair--of treachery also to
themselves and their followers, in that they encourage themselves in
a carelessness diametrically opposed to the mercy of God. It is
excessively childish to object, that when they long for the advent
of the kingdom of God, they at the same time pray for the abolition
of sin. In the former division of the prayer absolute perfection is
set before us; but in the latter our own weakness. Thus the two
fitly correspond to each other--we strive for the goal, and at the
same time neglect not the remedies which our necessities require. In
the next part of the petition we pray to be forgiven, "_as we
forgive our debtors;_" that is, as we spare and pardon all by whom
we are in any way offended, either in deed by unjust, or in word by
contumelious treatment. Not that we can forgive the guilt of a fault
or offense; this belongs to God only; but we can forgive to this
extent: we can voluntarily divest our minds of wrath, hatred, and
revenge, and efface the remembrance of injuries by a voluntary
oblivion. Wherefore, we are not to ask the forgiveness of our sins
from God, unless we forgive the offenses of all who are or have been
injurious to us. If we retain any hatred in our minds, if we
meditate revenge, and devise the means of hurting; nay, if we do not
return to a good understanding with our enemies, perform every kind
of friendly office, and endeavour to effect a reconciliation with
them, we by this petition beseech God not to grant us forgiveness.
For we ask him to do to us as we do to others. This is the same as
asking him not to do unless we do also. What, then, do such persons
obtain by this petition but a heavier judgment? Lastly, it is to be
observed that the condition of being forgiven as we forgive our
debtors, is not added because by forgiving others we deserve
forgiveness, as if the cause of forgiveness were expressed; but by
the use of this expression the Lord has been pleased partly to
solace the weakness of our faith, using it as a sign to assure us
that our sins are as certainly forgiven as we are certainly
conscious of having forgiven others, when our mind is completely
purged from all envy, hatred, and malice; and partly using as a
badge by which he excludes from the number of his children all who,
prone to revenge and reluctant to forgive, obstinately keep up their
enmity, cherishing against others that indignation which they
deprecate from themselves; so that they should not venture to invoke
him as a Father. In the Gospel of Luke, we have this distinctly
stated in the words of Christ.
    46. The sixth petition corresponds (as we have observed) to the
promise[26] of _writing the law upon our hearts_; but because we do
not obey God without a continual warfare, without sharp and arduous
contests, we here pray that he would furnish us with armour, and
defend us by his protection, that we may be able to obtain the
victory. By this we are reminded that we not only have need of the
gift of the Spirit inwardly to soften our hearts, and turn and
direct them to the obedience of God, but also of his assistance, to
render us invincible by all the wiles and violent assaults of Satan.
The forms of temptation are many and various. The depraved
conceptions of our minds provoking us to transgress the law--
conceptions which our concupiscence suggests or the devil excites,
are temptations; and things which in their own nature are not evil,
become temptations by the wiles of the devil, when they are
presented to our eyes in such a way that the view of them makes us
withdraw or decline from God.[27] These temptations are both on the
right hand and on the left.[28] On the right, when riches, power,
and honours, which by their glare, and the semblance of good which
they present, generally dazzle the eyes of men, and so entice by
their blandishments, that, caught by their snares, and intoxicated
by their sweetness, they forget their God: on the left, when
offended by the hardship and bitterness of poverty, disgrace,
contempt, afflictions, and other things of that description, they
despond, cast away their confidence and hope, and are at length
totally estranged from God. In regard to both kinds of temptation,
which either enkindled in us by concupiscence) or presented by the
craft of Satan's war against us, we pray God the Father not to allow
us to be overcome, but rather to raise and support us by his hand,
that strengthened by his mighty power we may stand firm against all
the assaults of our malignant enemy, whatever be the thoughts which
he sends into our minds; next we pray that whatever of either
description is allotted us, we may turn to good, that is, may
neither be inflated with prosperity, nor cast down by adversity.
Here, however, we do not ask to be altogether exempted from
temptation, which is very necessary to excite, stimulate, and urge
us on, that we may not become too lethargic. It was not without
reason that David wished to be tried,[29] nor is it without cause
that the Lord daily tries his elect, chastising them by disgrace,
poverty, tribulation, and other kinds of cross.[30] But the
temptations of God and Satan are very different: Satan tempts, that
he may destroy, condemn, confound, throw headlong; God, that by
proving his people he may make trial of their sincerity, and by
exercising their strength confirm it; may mortify, tame, and
cauterize their flesh, which, if not curbed in this manner, would
wanton and exult above measure. Besides, Satan attacks those who are
unarmed and unprepared, that he may destroy them unawares; whereas
whatever God sends, he "will with the temptation also make a way to
escape, that ye may be able to bear it."[31] Whether by the term
evil we understand the devil or sin, is not of the least
consequence. Satan is indeed the very enemy who lays snares for our
life,[32] but it is by sin that he is armed for our destruction. Our
petition, therefore, is, that we may not be overcome or overwhelmed
with temptation, but in the strength of the Lord may stand firm
against all the powers by which we are assailed; in other words, may
not fall under temptation: that being thus taken under his charge
and protection, we may remain invincible by sin, death, the gates of
hell, and the whole power of the devil; in other words, be delivered
from evil. Here it is carefully to be observed, that we have no
strength to contend with such a combatant as the devil, or to
sustain the violence of his assault. Were it otherwise, it would be
mockery of God to ask of him what we already possess in ourselves.
Assuredly those who in self-confidence prepare for such a fight, do
not understand how bold and well-equipped the enemy is with whom
they have to do. Now we ask to be delivered from his power, as from
the mouth of some furious raging lion, who would instantly tear us
with his teeth and claws, and swallow us up, did not the Lord rescue
us from the midst of death; at the same time knowing that if the
Lord is present and will fight for us while we stand by, through him
"we shall do valiantly," (Ps. 60: 12.) Let others if they will
confide in the powers and resources of their free will which they
think they possess; enough for us that we stand and are strong in
the power of God alone. But the prayer comprehends more than at
first sight it seems to do. For if the Spirit of God is our strength
in waging the contest with Satan, we cannot gain the victory unless
we are filled with him, and thereby freed from all infirmity of the
flesh. Therefore, when we pray to be delivered from sin and Satan,
we at the same time desire to be enriched with new supplies of
divine grace, until completely replenished with them, we triumph
over every evil. To some it seems rude and harsh to ask God not to
lead us into temptation, since, as James declares (James 1: 13,) it
is contrary to his nature to do so. This difficulty has already been
partly solved by the fact that our concupiscence is the cause, and
therefore properly bears the blame of all the temptations by which
we are overcome. All that James means is, that it is vain and unjust
to ascribe to God vices which our own consciousness compels us to
impute to ourselves. But this is no reason why God may not when he
sees it meet bring us into bondage to Satan, give us up to a
reprobate mind and shameful lusts, and so by a just, indeed, but
often hidden judgment, lead us into temptation. Though the cause is
often concealed from men, it is well known to him. Hence we may see
that the expression is not improper, if we are persuaded that it is
not without cause he so often threatens to give sure signs of his
vengeance, by blinding the reprobate, and hardening their hearts.
    47. These three petitions, in which we specially commend
ourselves and all that we have to God, clearly show what we formerly
observed (sec. 38, 39,) that the prayers of Christians should be
public, and have respect to the public edification of the Church and
the advancement of believers in spiritual communion. For no one
requests that anything should be given to him as an individual, but
we all ask in common for daily bread and the forgiveness of sins,
not to be led into temptation, but delivered from evil. Moreover,
there is subjoined the reason for our great boldness in asking and
confidence of obtaining, (sec. 11, 36.) Although this does not exist
in the Latin copies, yet as it accords so well with the whole, we
cannot think of omitting it. The words are, THINE IS THE KINGDOM,
AND THE POWER, AND THE GLORY, FOR EVER. Here is the calm and firm
assurance of our faith. For were our prayers to be commended to God
by our own worth, who would venture even to whisper before him? Now,
however wretched we may be, however unworthy, however devoid of
commendation, we shall never want a reason for prayer, nor a ground
of confidence, since the kingdom, power, and glory, can never be
wrested from our Father. The last word is AMEN, by which is
expressed the eagerness of our desire to obtain the things which we
ask, while our hope is confirmed, that all things have already been
obtained and will assuredly be granted to us, seeing they have been
promised by God, who cannot deceive. This accords with the form of
expression to which we have already adverted: "Grant, O Lord, for
thy name's sake, not on account of us or of our righteousness." By
this the saints not only express the end of their prayers, but
confess that they are unworthy of obtaining did not God find the
cause in himself and were not their confidence founded entirely on
his nature.
    48. All things that we ought, indeed all that we are able, to
ask of God, are contained in this formula, and as it were rule, of
prayer delivered by Christ, our divine Master, whom the Father has
appointed to be our teacher, and to whom alone he would have us to
listen, (Matth. 17. 5.) For he ever was the eternal wisdom of the
Father, and being made man, was manifested as the Wonderful, the
Counselor, (Isa. 11: 2; ix. 6.) Accordingly, this prayer is complete
in all its parts, so complete, that whatever is extraneous and
foreign to it, whatever cannot be referred to it, is impious and
unworthy of the approbation of God. For he has here summarily
prescribed what is worthy of him, what is acceptable to him, and
what is necessary for us; in short, whatever he is pleased to grant.
Those, therefore, who presume to go further and ask something more
from God, first seek to add of their own to the wisdom of God, (this
it is insane blasphemy to do;) secondly, refusing to confine
themselves within the will of God, and despising it, they wander as
their cupidity directs; lastly, they will never obtain anything,
seeing they pray without faith. For there cannot be a doubt that all
such prayers are made without faith, because at variance with the
word of God, on which if faith do not always lean it cannot possibly
stand. Those who, disregarding the Master's rule, indulge their own
wishes, not only have not the word of God, but as much as in them
lies oppose it. Hence Tertullian (De Fuga in Persequutione) has not
less truly than elegantly termed it _Lawful Prayer_, tacitly
intimating that all other prayers are lawless and illicit.
    49. By this, however, we would not have it understood that we
are so restricted to this form of prayer as to make it unlawful to
change a word or syllable of it. For in Scripture we meet with many
prayers differing greatly from it in word, yet written by the same
Spirit, and capable of being used by us with the greatest advantage.
Many prayers also are continually suggested to believers by the same
Spirit, though in expression they bear no great resemblance to it.
All we mean to say is, that no man should wish, expect, or ask
anything which is not summarily comprehended in this prayer. Though
the words may be very different, there must be no difference in the
sense. In this way, all prayers, both those which are contained in
the Scripture, and those which come forth from pious breasts, must
be referred to it, certainly none can ever equal it, far less
surpass it in perfection. It omits nothing which we can conceive in
praise of God, nothing which we can imagine advantageous to man, and
the whole is so exact that all hope of improving it may well be
renounced. In short, let us remember that we have here the doctrine
of heavenly wisdom. God has taught what he willed; he willed what
was necessary.
    50. But although it has been said above, (sec. 7, 27, &c.,)
that we ought always to raise our minds upwards towards God, and
pray without ceasing, yet such is our weakness, which requires to be
supported, such our torpor, which requires to be stimulated, that it
is requisite for us to appoint special hours for this exercise,
hours which are not to pass away without prayer, and during which
the whole affections of our minds are to be completely occupied;
namely, when we rise in the morning, before we commence our daily
work, when we sit down to food, when by the blessing of God we have
taken it, and when we retire to rest. This, however, must not be a
superstitious observance of hours, by which, as it were, performing
a task to God, we think we are discharged as to other hours; it
should rather be considered as a discipline by which our weakness is
exercised, and ever and anon stimulated. In particular, it must be
our anxious care, whenever we are ourselves pressed, or see others
pressed by any strait, instantly to have recourse to him not only
with quickened pace, but with quickened minds; and again, we must
not in any prosperity of ourselves or others omit to testify our
recognition of his hand by praise and thanksgiving. Lastly, we must
in all our prayers carefully avoid wishing to confine God to certain
circumstances, or prescribe to him the time, place, or mode of
action. In like manner, we are taught by this prayer not to fix any
law or impose any condition upon him, but leave it entirely to him
to adopt whatever course of procedure seems to him best, in respect
of method, time, and place. For before we offer up any petition for
ourselves, we ask that his will may be done, and by so doing place
our will in subordination to his, just as if we had laid a curb upon
it, that, instead of presuming to give law to God, it may regard him
as the ruler and disposer of all its wishes.
    51. If, with minds thus framed to obedience, we allow ourselves
to be governed by the laws of Divine Providence, we shall easily
learn to persevere in prayer, and suspending our own desires wait
patiently for the Lord, certain, however little the appearance of it
may be, that he is always present with us, and will in his own time
show how very far he was from turning a deaf ear to prayers, though
to the eyes of men they may seem to be disregarded. This will be a
very present consolation, if at any time God does not grant an
immediate answer to our prayers, preventing us from fainting or
giving way to despondency, as those are wont to do who, in invoking
God, are so borne away by their own fervor, that unless he yield on
their first importunity and give present help, they immediately
imagine that he is angry and offended with them and abandoning all
hope of success cease from prayer. On the contrary, deferring our
hope with well tempered equanimity, let us insist with that
perseverance which is so strongly recommended to us in Scripture. We
may often see in The Psalms how David and other believers, after
they are almost weary of praying, and seem to have been beating the
air by addressing a God who would not hear, yet cease not to pray
because due authority is not given to the word of God, unless the
faith placed in it is superior to all events. Again, let us not
tempt God, and by wearying him with our importunity provoke his
anger against us. Many have a practice of formally bargaining with
God on certain conditions, and, as if he were the servant of their
lust, binding him to certain stipulations; with which if he do not
immediately comply, they are indignant and fretful, murmur,
complain, and make a noise. Thus offended, he often in his anger
grants to such persons what in mercy he kindly denies to others. Of
this we have a proof in the children of Israel, for whom it had been
better not to have been heard by the Lord, than to swallow his
indignation with their flesh, (Num. 11: 18, 33.)
    52. But if our sense is not able till after long expectation to
perceive what the result of prayer is, or experience any benefit
from it, still our faith will assure us of that which cannot be
perceived by sense, viz., that we have obtained what was fit for us,
the Lord having so often and so surely engaged to take an interest
in all our troubles from the moment they have been deposited in his
bosom. In this way we shall possess abundance in poverty, and
comfort in affliction. For though all things fail, God will never
abandon us, and he cannot frustrate the expectation and patience of
his people. He alone will suffice for all, since in himself he
comprehends all good, and will at last reveal it to us on the day of
judgment, when his kingdom shall be plainly manifested. We may add,
that although God complies with our request, he does not always give
an answer in the very terms of our prayers but while apparently
holding us in suspense, yet in an unknown way, shows that our
prayers have not been in vain. This is the meaning of the words of
John, "If we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that
we have the petitions that we desired of him," (1 John 5: 15.) It
might seem that there is here a great superfluity of words, but the
declaration is most useful, namely, that God, even when he does not
comply with our requests, yet listens and is favourable to our
prayers, so that our hope founded on his word is never disappointed.
But believers have always need of being supported by this patience,
as they could not stand long if they did not lean upon it. For the
trials by which the Lord proves and exercises us are severe, nay, he
often drives us to extremes, and when driven allows us long to stick
fast in the mire before he gives us any taste of his sweetness. As
Hannah says, "The Lord killeth, and maketh alive; he bringeth down
to the grave, and bringeth up," (1 Sam. 2: 6.) What could they here
do but become dispirited and rush on despair, were they not, when
afflicted, desolate, and half dead, comforted with the thought that
they are regarded by God, and that there will be an end to their
present evils. But however secure their hopes may stand, they in the
meantime cease not to pray, since prayer unaccompanied by
perseverance leads to no result.

Notes

[1] French, "Dont il sembleroit que ce fust chose supeflue de le
soliciter par prieres; veu que nous avons accoustume de soliciter
ceux qui ne pensent a nostre affaire, et qui sont endormis."--Whence
it would seem that it was a superfluous matter to solicit him by
prayer; seeing we are accustomed to solicit those who think not of
our business and who are slumbering.
[2] French, "Pourtant ce qui est escrit en la prophetie qu'on
attribue a Baruch, combien que l'autheur soit incertain, est tres
sainctement dit;"--However, what is written in the prophecy which is
attributed to Baruch, though the author is uncertain, is very holily
said.
[3] French, "il reconoissent le chastisement qu'ils ont merite;"--
they acknowledge the punishment which they have deserved.
[4] The French adds, "Ils voudront qu'on leur oste le mal de tests
et des reins, et seront contens qu'on ne touche point a la fievre;"-
-They would wish to get quit of the pain in the head and the loins,
and would be contented to leave the fever untouched.
[5] Latin, "prosternere preces." French, "mettent bas leurs
prieres;" -- lay low their prayers.
[6] The French adds, "duquel id n'eust pas autrement este asseure;"-
-of which he would not otherwise have felt assured.
[7] Latin, "Desine a me." French, "Retire-toy;"--Withdraw from me.
[8] French, "Confusion que nous avons, ou devons avoir en
nousmesmes;"-- confusion which we have, or ought to have, in
ourselves.
[9] Erasmus, though stumbling and walking blindfold in clear light,
ventures to write thus in a letter to Sadolet, 1530: "Primum,
constat nullum esse locum in divinis voluminibus, qui permittat
invocare divos nisi fortasse detorquere huc placet, quod dives in
Evangelica parabola implorat opem Abrahae. Quanquam autem in re
tanta novare quicquam praeter auctoritatem Scripturae, merito
periculosum videri possit, tamen invocationem divorum nusquam
improbo," &c.--First, it is clear that there is no passage in the
Sacred Volume which permits the invocation of saints, unless we are
pleased to wrest to this purpose what is said in the parable as to
the rich man imploring the help of Abraham. But though in so weighty
a matter it may justly seem dangerous to introduce anything without
the authority of Scripture, I by no means condemn the invocation of
saints, &c.
[10] Latin, "Pastores;"--French, "ceux qui se disent prelats, cures,
ou precheurs;"--those who call themselves prelates, curates, or
preachers.
[11] French, "Mais encore qu'ils taschent de laver leur mains d'un
si vilain sacrilege, d'autant qu'il ne se commet point en leurs
messes ni en leurs vespres; sous quelle couleur defendront ils ces
blasphemes qu'il lisent a pleine gorge, ou ils prient St Eloy ou St
Medard, de regarder du ciel leurs serviteurs pour les aider? mesmes
ou ils supplient la vierge Marie de commander a son fils qu'il leur
ottroye leur requestes?"--But although they endeavour to wash their
hands of the vile sacrilege, inasmuch as it is not committed in
their masses or vespers, under what pretext will they defend those
blasphemies which they repeat with full throat, in which they pray
St Eloy or St Medard to look from heaven upon their servants and
assist them; even supplicate the Virgin Mary to command her Son to
grant their requests?
[12] The French adds, "et quasi en une fourmiliere de saincts;"--and
as it were a swarm of saints.
[13] French, "C'est chose trop notoire de quel bourbieu ou de quelle
racaille ils tirent leur saincts."-It is too notorious out of what
mire or rubbish they draw their saints.
[14] French, "Cette longueur de priere a aujourd'hui sa vogue en la
Papaute, et procede de cette mesme source; c'est que les uns
barbotant force Ave Maria, et reiterant cent fois un chapelet,
perdent une partie du temps; les autres, comme les chanoines et
caphars, en abayant le parchemin jour et nuict, et barbotant leur
breviaire vendent leur coquilles au peuple."--This long prayer is at
present in vogue among the Papists, and proceeds from the same
cause: some muttering a host of Ave Marias, and going over their
beads a hundred times, lose part of their time; others, as the
canons and monks grumbling over their parchment night and day, and
muttering their breviary, sell their cockleshells to the people.
[15] Calvin translates, "Te expectat Deus, laus in Sion,"--God, the
praise in Sion waiteth for thee.
[16] See Book 1: chap. 11: sec. 7,13, on the subject of images in
churches. Also Book 4: chap. 4: sec. 8, and chap. 5: sec. 18, as to
the ornaments of churches.
[17] This clause of the sentence is omitted in the French.
[18] The French adds, "ou on en avoit tousjours use;"--where it had
always been used.
[19] The whole of this quotation is omitted in the French.
[20] French, "Mais il adjouste d'autre part, que quand il se
souvenoit du fruict et de l'edification qu'il avoit recue en oyant
chanter a l'Eglise il enclinoit plus a l'autre partie, c'est,
approuver le chant;"--but he adds on the other hand that when he
called to mind the fruit and edification which he had received from
hearing singing in the church, he inclined more to the other side;
that is, to approve singing.
[21] French, "Qui est-ce donc qui se pourra assez esmerveiller d'une
audace tant effrenee qu'ont eu les Papistes et ont encore, qui
contre la defense de l'Apostre, chantent et brayent de langue
estrange et inconnue, en laquelle le plus souvent ils n'entendent
pas eux mesmes une syllabe, et ne veulent que les autres y
entendent?"--Who then can sufficiently admire the unbridled audacity
which the Papists have had, and still have, who, contrary to the
prohibition of the Apostle, chant and bray in a foreign and unknown
tongue, in which, for the most part, they do not understand one
syllable, and which they have no wish that others understand?
[22] Augustine in Enchiridion ad Laurent. 30: 116. Pseudo-Chrysost.
in Homilies on Matthew, hom. 14: See end of sec. 53.
[23] "Dont il est facile de juger que ce qui est adjouste en S.
Matthieu, et qu'aucuns ont pris pour une septieme requeste, n'est
qu'un explication de la sixieme, et se doit a icelle rapporter;"--
Whence it is easy to perceive that what is added in St Matthew, and
which some have taken for a seventh petition, is only an explanation
of the sixth, and ought to be referred to it.
[24] French, "Quelque mauvaistie qu'ayons eue, ou quelque
imperfection ou pourete qui soit en nous;"-whatever wickedness we
may have done, or whatever imperfection or poverty there may be in
us.
[25] French, "Telles disciples qu'ils voudront;"--such disciples as
they will.
[26] The French adds, "que Dieu nous a donnee et faite;"--which God
has given and performed to us.
[27] James 1: 2, 14; Matth. 4: 1, 3; I Thess. 3: 5.
[28] 2 Cor. 6: 7, 8.
[29] Ps. 26: 2
[30] Gen. 22: 1; Deut. 8: 2; 13: 3. For the sense in which God is
said to lead us into temptation. see the end of this section.
[31] 1 Cor. 10: 13; 2 Pet. 2: 9
[32] 1 Pet. 5: 8

Chapter 21.

21. Of the eternal election, by which God has predestinated some to
salvation, and others to destruction.

    The divisions of this chapter are, - I. The necessity and
utility of the doctrine of eternal Election explained. Excessive
curiosity restrained, sec. l, 2. II. Explanation to those who
through false modesty shun the doctrine of Predestination, sec. 3,
4. III. The orthodox doctrine expounded.
    
Sections.

l. The doctrine of Election and Predestination. It is useful,
    necessary, and most sweet. Ignorance of it impairs the glory of
    God, plucks up humility by the roots, begets and fosters pride.
    The doctrine establishes the certainty of salvation, peace of
    conscience, and the true origin of the Church. Answer to two
    classes of men: 1. The curious.
2. A sentiment of Augustine confirmed by an admonition of our Savior
    and a passage of Solomon.
3. An answer to a second class, viz., those who are unwilling that
    the doctrine should be adverted to. An objection founded on a
    passage of Solomon, solved by the words of Moses.
4. A second objection, viz., That this doctrine is a stumbling-block
    to the profane. Answer 1. The same may be said of many other
    heads of doctrine. 2. The truth of God will always defend
    itself. Third objection, viz., That this doctrine is dangerous
    even to believers. Answer 1. The same objection made to
    Augustine. 2. We must not despise anything that God has
    revealed. Arrogance and blasphemy of such objections.
5. Certain cavils against the doctrine. 1. Prescience regarded as
    the cause of predestination. Prescience and predestination
    explained. Not prescience, but the good pleasure of God the
    cause of predestination. This apparent from the gratuitous
    election of the posterity of Abraham and the rejection of all
    others.
6. Even of the posterity of Abraham some elected and others rejected
    by special grace.
7. The Apostle shows that the same thing has been done in regard to
    individuals under the Christian dispensation.

    1. The covenant of life is not preached equally to all, and
among those to whom it is preached, does not always meet with the
same reception. This diversity displays the unsearchable depth of
the divine judgment, and is without doubt subordinate to God's
purpose of eternal election. But if it is plainly owing to the mere
pleasure of God that salvation is spontaneously offered to some,
while others have no access to it, great and difficult questions
immediately arise, questions which are inexplicable, when just views
are not entertained concerning election and predestination. To many
this seems a perplexing subject, because they deem it most
incongruous that of the great body of mankind some should be
predestinated to salvation, and others to destruction. How
ceaselessly they entangle themselves will appear as we proceed. We
may add, that in the very obscurity which deters them, we may see
not only the utility of this doctrine, but also its most pleasant
fruits. We shall never feel persuaded as we ought that our salvation
flows from the free mercy of God as its fountain, until we are made
acquainted with his eternal election, the grace of God being
illustrated by the contrast, viz., that he does not adopt all
promiscuously to the hope of salvation, but gives to some what he
denies to others. It is plain how greatly ignorance of this
principle detracts from the glory of God, and impairs true humility.
But though thus necessary to be known, Paul declares that it cannot
be known unless God, throwing works entirely out of view, elect
those whom he has predestined. His words are, "Even so then at this
present time also, there is a remnant according to the election of
grace. And if by grace, then it is no more of works: otherwise grace
is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace:
otherwise work is no more work," (Rom. 11: 6.) If to make it appear
that our salvation flows entirely from the good mercy of God, we
must be carried back to the origin of election, then those who would
extinguish it, wickedly do as much as in them lies to obscure what
they ought most loudly to extol, and pluck up humility by the very
roots. Paul clearly declares that it is only when the salvation of a
remnant is ascribed to gratuitous election, we arrive at the
knowledge that God saves whom he wills of his mere good pleasure,
and does not pay a debt, a debt which never can be due. Those who
preclude access, and would not have any one to obtain a taste of
this doctrine, are equally unjust to God and men, there being no
other means of humbling us as we ought, or making us feel how much
we are bound to him. Nor, indeed, have we elsewhere any sure ground
of confidence. This we say on the authority of Christ, who, to
deliver us from all fear, and render us invincible amid our many
dangers, snares and mortal conflicts, promises safety to all that
the Father has taken under his protection, (John 10: 26.) From this
we infer, that all who know not that they are the peculiar people of
God, must be wretched from perpetual trepidation, and that those
therefore, who, by overlooking the three advantages which we have
noted, would destroy the very foundation of our safety, consult ill
for themselves and for all the faithful. What? Do we not here find
the very origin of the Church, which, as Bernard rightly teaches,
(Serm. in Cantic.) could not be found or recognized among the
creatures, because it lies hid (in both cases wondrously) within the
lap of blessed predestination, and the mass of wretched
condemnation?
    But before I enter on the subject, I have some remarks to
address to two classes of men. The subject of predestination, which
in itself is attended with considerable difficulty is rendered very
perplexed and hence perilous by human curiosity, which cannot be
restrained from wandering into forbidden paths and climbing to the
clouds determined if it can that none of the secret things of God
shall remain unexplored. When we see many, some of them in other
respects not bad men, every where rushing into this audacity and
wickedness, it is necessary to remind them of the course of duty in
this matter. First, then, when they inquire into predestination, let
then remember that they are penetrating into the recesses of the
divine wisdom, where he who rushes forward securely and confidently,
instead of satisfying his curiosity will enter in inextricable
labyrinth. For it is not right that man should with impunity pry
into things which the Lord has been pleased to conceal within
himself, and scan that sublime eternal wisdom which it is his
pleasure that we should not apprehend but adore, that therein also
his perfections may appear. Those secrets of his will, which he has
seen it meet to manifest, are revealed in his word - revealed in so
far as he knew to be conducive to our interest and welfare.
    2. "We have come into the way of faith," says Augustine: "let
us constantly adhere to it. It leads to the chambers of the king, in
which are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. For our
Lord Jesus Christ did not speak invidiously to his great and most
select disciples when he said, 'I have yet many things to say unto
you, but ye cannot bear them now,' (John 16: 12.) We must walk,
advance, increase, that our hearts may be able to comprehend those
things which they cannot now comprehend. But if the last day shall
find us making progress, we shall there learn what here we could
not," (August. Hom. in Joann.) If we give due weight to the
consideration, that the word of the Lord is the only way which can
conduct us to the investigation of whatever it is lawful for us to
hold with regard to him - is the only light which can enable us to
discern what we ought to see with regard to him, it will curb and
restrain all presumption. For it will show us that the moment we go
beyond the bounds of the word we are out of the course, in darkness,
and must every now and then stumble, go astray, and fall. Let it,
therefore, be our first principle that to desire any other knowledge
of predestination than that which is expounded by the word of God,
is no less infatuated than to walk where there is no path, or to
seek light in darkness. Let us not be ashamed to be ignorant in a
matter in which ignorance is learning. Rather let us willingly
abstain from the search after knowledge, to which it is both foolish
as well as perilous, and even fatal to aspire. If an unrestrained
imagination urges us, our proper course is to oppose it with these
words, "It is not good to eat much honey: so for men to search their
own glory is not glory," (Prov. 25: 27.) There is good reason to
dread a presumption which can only plunge us headlong into ruin.
    3. There are others who, when they would cure this disease,
recommend that the subject of predestination should scarcely if ever
be mentioned, and tell us to shun every question concerning it as we
would a rock. Although their moderation is justly commendable in
thinking that such mysteries should be treated with moderation, yet
because they keep too far within the proper measure, they have
little influence over the human mind, which does not readily allow
itself to be curbed. Therefore, in order to keep the legitimate
course in this matter, we must return to the word of God, in which
we are furnished with the right rule of understanding. For Scripture
is the school of the Holy Spirit, in which as nothing useful and
necessary to be known has been omitted, so nothing is taught but
what it is of importance to know. Every thing, therefore delivered
in Scripture on the subject of predestination, we must beware of
keeping from the faithful, lest we seem either maliciously to
deprive them of the blessing of God, or to accuse and scoff at the
Spirit, as having divulged what ought on any account to be
suppressed. Let us, I say, allow the Christian to unlock his mind
and ears to all the words of God which are addressed to him,
provided he do it with this moderation, viz., that whenever the Lord
shuts his sacred mouth, he also desists from inquiry. The best rule
of sobriety is, not only in learning to follow wherever God leads,
but also when he makes an end of teaching, to cease also from
wishing to be wise. The danger which they dread is not so great that
we ought on account of it to turn away our minds from the oracles of
God. There is a celebrated saying of Solomon, "It is the glory of
God to conceal a thing," (Prov. 25: 2.) But since both piety and
common sense dictate that this is not to be understood of every
thing, we must look for a distinction, lest under the pretence of
modesty and sobriety we be satisfied with a brutish ignorance. This
is clearly expressed by Moses in a few words, "The secret things
belong unto the Lord our God: but those things which are revealed
belong unto us, and to our children for ever," (Deut. 29: 29.) We
see how he exhorts the people to study the doctrine of the law in
accordance with a heavenly decree, because God has been pleased to
promulgate it, while he at the same time confines them within these
boundaries, for the simple reason that it is not lawful for men to
pry into the secret things of God.
    4. I admit that profane men lay hold of the subject of
predestination to carp, or cavil, or snarl, or scoff. But if their
petulance frightens us, it will be necessary to conceal all the
principal articles of faith, because they and their fellows leave
scarcely one of them unassailed with blasphemy. A rebellious spirit
will display itself no less insolently when it hears that there are
three persons in the divine essence, than when it hears that God
when he created man foresaw every thing that was to happen to him.
Nor will they abstain from their jeers when told that little more
than five thousand years have elapsed since the creation of the
world. For they will ask, Why did the power of God slumber so long
in idleness? In short, nothing can be stated that they will not
assail with derision. To quell their blasphemies, must we say
nothing concerning the divinity of the Son and Spirit? Must the
creation of the world be passed over in silence? No! The truth of
God is too powerful, both here and everywhere, to dread the slanders
of the ungodly, as Augustine powerfully maintains in his treatise,
De Bono Perseverantiae, (cap. 14 - 20.) For we see that the false
apostles were unable, by defaming and accusing the true doctrine of
Paul, to make him ashamed of it. There is nothing in the allegation
that the whole subject is fraught with danger to pious minds, as
tending to destroy exhortation, shake faith, disturb and dispirit
the heart. Augustine disguises not that on these grounds he was
often charged with preaching the doctrine of predestination too
freely, but, as it was easy for him to do, he abundantly refutes the
charge. As a great variety of absurd objections are here stated, we
have thought it best to dispose of each of them in its proper place,
(see chap. 23.) Only I wish it to be received as a general rule,
that the secret things of God are not to be scrutinized, and that
those which he has revealed are not to be overlooked, lest we may,
on the one hand, be chargeable with curiosity, and, on the other,
with ingratitude. For it has been shrewdly observed by Augustine,
(de Genesi ad Literam, Lib. 5,) that we can safely follow Scripture,
which walks softly, as with a mother's step, in accommodation to our
weakness. Those, however, who are so cautious and timid, that they
would bury all mention of predestination in order that it may not
trouble weak minds, with what color, pray, will they cloak their
arrogance, when they indirectly charge God with a want of due
consideration, in not having foreseen a danger for which they
imagine that they prudently provide? Whoever, therefore, throws
obloquy on the doctrine of predestination, openly brings a charge
against God, as having inconsiderately allowed something to escape
from him which is injurious to the Church.
    5. The predestination by which God adopts some to the hope of
life, and adjudges others to eternal death, no man who would be
thought pious ventures simply to deny; but it is greatly caviled at,
especially by those who make prescience its cause. We, indeed,
ascribe both prescience and predestination to God; but we say, that
it is absurd to make the latter subordinate to the former, (see
chap. 22 sec. 1.) When we attribute prescience to God, we mean that
all things always were, and ever continue, under his eye; that to
his knowledge there is no past or future, but all things are
present, and indeed so present, that it is not merely the idea of
them that is before him, (as those objects are which we retain in
our memory,) but that he truly sees and contemplates them as
actually under his immediate inspection. This prescience extends to
the whole circuit of the world, and to all creatures. By
predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he
determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to
every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are
preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and,
accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these
ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death.
This God has testified, not only in the case of single individuals;
he has also given a specimen of it in the whole posterity of
Abraham, to make it plain that the future condition of each nation
lives entirely at his disposal: "When the Most High divided to the
nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he
set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children
of Israel. For the Lord's portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of
his inheritance," (Deut. 32: 8, 9.) The separation is before the
eyes of all; in the person of Abraham, as in a withered stock, one
people is specially chosen, while the others are rejected; but the
cause does not appear, except that Moses, to deprive posterity of
any handle for glorying, tells them that their superiority was owing
entirely to the free love of God. The cause which he assigns for
their deliverance is, "Because he loved thy fathers, therefore he
chose their seed after them," (Deut. 4: 37;) or more explicitly in
another chapter, "The Lord did not set his love upon you, nor choose
you, because you were more in number than any people: for ye were
the fewest of all people: but because the Lord loved you," (Deut. 7:
7, 8.) He repeatedly makes the same intimations, "Behold, the
heaven, and the heaven of heavens is the Lord's thy God, the earth
also, with all that therein is. Only the Lord had a delight in thy
fathers to love them, and he chose their seed after them," (Deut.
10: 14, 15.) Again, in another passage, holiness is enjoined upon
them, because they have been chosen to be a peculiar people; while
in another, love is declared to be the cause of their protection,
(Deut. 23: 5.) This, too, believers with one voice proclaim, "He
shall choose our inheritance for us, the excellency of Jacob, whom
he loved," (Ps. 47: 4.) The endowments with which God had adorned
them, they all ascribe to gratuitous love, not only because they
knew that they had not obtained them by any merit, but that not even
was the holy patriarch endued with a virtue that could procure such
distinguished honor for himself and his posterity. And the more
completely to crush all pride, he upbraids them with having merited
nothing of the kind, seeing they were a rebellious and stiff-necked
people, (Deut. 9: 6.) Often, also, do the prophets remind the Jews
of this election by way of disparagement and opprobrium, because
they had shamefully revolted from it. Be this as it may, let those
who would ascribe the election of God to human worth or merit come
forward. When they see that one nation is preferred to all others,
when they hear that it was no feeling of respect that induced God to
show more favor to a small and ignoble body, nay, even to the wicked
and rebellious, will they plead against him for having chosen to
give such a manifestation of mercy? But neither will their
obstreperous words hinder his work, nor will their invectives, like
stones thrown against heaven, strike or hurt his righteousness; nay,
rather they will fall back on their own heads. To this principle of
a free covenant, moreover, the Israelites are recalled whenever
thanks are to be returned to God, or their hopes of the future to be
animated. "The Lord he is God," says the Psalmist; "it is he that
has made us, and not we ourselves: we are his people, and the sheep
of his pasture," (Ps. 100: 3; 95: 7.) The negation which is added,
"not we ourselves," is not superfluous, to teach us that God is not
only the author of all the good qualities in which men excel, but
that they originate in himself, there being nothing in them worthy
of so much honor. In the following words also they are enjoined to
rest satisfied with the mere good pleasure of God: "O ye seed of
Abraham, his servant; ye children of Jacob, his chosen," (Ps. 105:
6.) And after an enumeration of the continual mercies of God as
fruits of election, the conclusion is, that he acted thus kindly
because he remembered his covenant. With this doctrine accords the
song of the whole Church, "They got not the land in possession by
their own sword, neither did their own arm save them; but thy right
hand, and thine arm, and the light of thy countenance, because thou
hadst a favor unto them," (Ps. 44: 3.) It is to be observed, that
when the land is mentioned, it is a visible symbol of the secret
election in which adoption is comprehended. To like gratitude David
elsewhere exhorts the people, "Blessed is the nation whose God is
the Lord, and the people whom he has chosen for his own
inheritance," (Ps. 33: 12.) Samuel thus animates their hopes, "The
Lord will not forsake his people for his great name's sake: because
it has pleased the Lord to make you his people," (1 Sam. 12: 22.)
And when David's faith is assailed, how does he arm himself for the
battle? "Blessed is the man whom thou choosest, and causes to
approach unto thee, that he may dwell in thy courts," (Ps. 65: 4.)
But as the hidden election of God was confirmed both by a first and
second election, and by other intermediate mercies, Isaiah thus
applies the terms "The Lord will have mercy on Jacob, and will yet
choose Israel," (Isa. 14: 1.) Referring to a future period, the
gathering together of the dispersion, who seemed to have been
abandoned, he says, that it will be a sign of a firm and stable
election, notwithstanding of the apparent abandonment. When it is
elsewhere said, "I have chosen thee, and not cast thee away," (Isa.
41: 9,) the continual course of his great liberality is ascribed to
paternal kindness. This is stated more explicitly in Zechariah by
the angel, the Lord "shall choose Jerusalem again," as if the
severity of his chastisements had amounted to reprobation, or the
captivity had been an interruption of election, which, however,
remains inviolable, though the signs of it do not always appear.
    6. We must add a second step of a more limited nature, or one
in which the grace of God was displayed in a more special form, when
of the same family of Abraham God rejected some, and by keeping
others within his Church showed that he retained them among his
sons. At first Ishmael had obtained the same rank with his brother
Isaac, because the spiritual covenant was equally sealed in him by
the symbol of circumcision. He is first cut off, then Esau, at last
an innumerable multitude, almost the whole of Israel. In Isaac was
the seed called. The same calling held good in the case of Jacob.
God gave a similar example in the rejection of Saul. This is also
celebrated in the psalm, "Moreover he refused the tabernacle of
Joseph, and chose not the tribe of Ephraim: but chose the tribe of
Judah," (Ps. 78: 67, 68.) This the sacred history sometimes repeats
that the secret grace of God may be more admirably displayed in that
change. I admit that it was by their own fault Ishmael, Esau, and
others, fell from their adoption; for the condition annexed was,
that they should faithfully keep the covenant of God, whereas they
perfidiously violated it. The singular kindness of God consisted in
this, that he had been pleased to prefer them to other nations; as
it is said in the psalm, "He has not dealt so with any nation: and
as for his judgments, they have not known them," (Ps. 147: 20.) But
I had good reason for saying that two steps are here to be observed;
for in the election of the whole nation, God had already shown that
in the exercise of his mere liberality he was under no law but was
free, so that he was by no means to be restricted to an equal
division of grace, its very inequality proving it to be gratuitous.
Accordingly, Malachi enlarges on the ingratitude of Israel, in that
being not only selected from the whole human race, but set
peculiarly apart from a sacred household; they perfidiously and
impiously spurn God their beneficent parent. "Was not Esau Jacob's
brother? saith the Lord: yet I loved Jacob, and I hated Esau," (Mal.
1: 2, 3.) For God takes it for granted, that as both were the sons
of a holy father, and successors of the covenant, in short, branches
from a sacred root, the sons of Jacob were under no ordinary
obligation for having been admitted to that dignity; but when by the
rejection of Esau the first born, their progenitor though inferior
in birth was made heir, he charges them with double ingratitude, in
not being restrained by a double tie.
    7. Although it is now sufficiently plain that God by his secret
counsel chooses whom he will while he rejects others, his gratuitous
election has only been partially explained until we come to the case
of single individuals, to whom God not only offers salvation, but so
assigns it, that the certainty of the result remains not dubious or
suspended. These are considered as belonging to that one seed of
which Paul makes mention, (Rom. 9: 8; Gal. 3: 16, &c.) For although
adoption was deposited in the hand of Abraham, yet as many of his
posterity were cut off as rotten members, in order that election may
stand and be effectual, it is necessary to ascend to the head in
whom the heavenly Father has connected his elect with each other,
and bound them to himself by an indissoluble tie. Thus in the
adoption of the family of Abraham, God gave them a liberal display
of favor which he has denied to others; but in the members of Christ
there is a far more excellent display of grace, because those
ingrafted into him as their head never fail to obtain salvation.
Hence Paul skillfully argues from the passage of Malachi which I
quoted, (Rom. 9: 13; Mal. 1: 2,) that when God, after making a
covenant of eternal life, invites any people to himself, a special
mode of election is in part understood, so that he does not with
promiscuous grace effectually elect all of them. The words, "Jacob
have I loved," refer to the whole progeny of the patriarch, which
the prophet there opposes to the posterity of Esau. But there is
nothing in this repugnant to the fact, that in the person of one man
is set before us a specimen of election, which cannot fail of
accomplishing its object. It is not without cause Paul observes,
that these are called a remnants (Rom. 9: 27; 11: 5;) because
experience shows that of the general body many fall away and are
lost, so that often a small portion only remains. The reason why the
general election of the people is not always firmly ratified,
readily presents itself, viz., that on those with whom God makes the
covenant, he does not immediately bestow the Spirit of regeneration,
by whose power they persevere in the covenant even to the end. The
external invitation, without the internal efficacy of grace which
would have the effect of retaining them, holds a kind of middle
place between the rejection of the human race and the election of a
small number of believers. The whole people of Israel are called the
Lord's inheritance, and yet there were many foreigners among them.
Still, because the covenant which God had made to be their Father
and Redeemer was not altogether null, he has respect to that free
favor rather than to the perfidious defection of many; even by them
his truth was not abolished, since by preserving some residue to
himself, it appeared that his calling was without repentance. When
God ever and anon gathered his Church from among the sons of Abraham
rather than from profane nations, he had respect to his covenant,
which, when violated by the great body, he restricted to a few, that
it might not entirely fail. In short, that common adoption of the
seed of Abraham was a kind of visible image of a greater benefit
which God deigned to bestow on some out of many. This is the reason
why Paul so carefully distinguishes between the sons of Abraham
according to the flesh and the spiritual sons who are called after
the example of Isaac. Not that simply to be a son of Abraham was a
vain or useless privilege, (this could not be said without insult to
the covenant,) but that the immutable counsel of God, by which he
predestinated to himself whomsoever he would, was alone effectual
for their salvation. But until the proper view is made clear by the
production of passages of Scripture, I advise my readers not to
prejudge the question. We say, then, that Scripture clearly proves
this much, that God by his eternal and immutable counsel determined
once for all those whom it was his pleasure one day to admit to
salvation, and those whom, on the other hand, it was his pleasure to
doom to destruction. We maintain that this counsel, as regards the
elect, is founded on his free mercy, without any respect to human
worth, while those whom he dooms to destruction are excluded from
access to life by a just and blameless, but at the same time
incomprehensible judgment. In regard to the elect, we regard calling
as the evidence of election, and justification as another symbol of
its manifestation, until it is fully accomplished by the attainment
of glory. But as the Lord seals his elect by calling and
justification, so by excluding the reprobate either from the
knowledge of his name or the sanctification of his Spirit, he by
these marks in a manner discloses the judgment which awaits them. I
will here omit many of the fictions which foolish men have devised
to overthrow predestination. There is no need of refuting objections
which the moment they are produced abundantly betray their
hollowness. I will dwell only on those points which either form the
subject of dispute among the learned, or may occasion any difficulty
to the simple, or may be employed by impiety as specious pretexts
for assailing the justice of God.

Chapter 22.

22. This doctrine confirmed by proofs from Scripture.
    
    The divisions of this chapter are, - I. A confirmation of the
orthodox doctrine in opposition to two classes of individuals. This
confirmation founded on a careful exposition of our Savior's words,
and passages in the writings of Paul, sec. 1-7. II. A refutation of
some objections taken from ancient writers, Thomas Aquinas, and more
modern writers, sec. 8-10. III. Of reprobation, which is founded
entirely on the righteous will of God, sec. 11.

Sections.

1. Some imagine that God elects or reprobates according to a
    foreknowledge of merit. Others make it a charge against God
    that he elects some and passes by others. Both refuted, 1. By
    invincible arguments; 2. By the testimony of Augustine.
2. Who are elected, when, in whom, to what, for what reason.
3. The reason is the good pleasure of God, which so reigns in
    election that no works, either past or future, are taken into
    consideration. This proved by notable declarations of one
    Savior and passages of Paul.
4. Proved by a striking discussion in the Epistle to the Romans. Its
    scope and method explained. The advocates of foreknowledge
    refuted by the Apostle, when he maintains that election is
    special and wholly of grace.
5. Evasion refuted. A summary and analysis of the Apostle's
    discussion.
6. An exception, with three answers to it. The efficacy of
    gratuitous election extends only to believers, who are said to
    be elected according to foreknowledge. This foreknowledge or
    prescience is not speculative but active.
7. This proved from the words of Christ. Conclusion of the answer,
    and solution of the objection with regard to Judas.
8. An objection taken from the ancient fathers. Answer from
    Augustine, from Ambrose, as quoted by Augustine, and an
    invincible argument by an Apostle. Summary of this argument.
9. Objection from Thomas Aquinas. Answer.
10. Objection of more modern writers. Answers. Passages in which
    there is a semblance of contradiction reconciled. Why many
    called and few chosen. An objection founded on mutual consent
    between the word and faith. Solution confirmed by the words of
    Paul, Augustine, and Bernard. A clear declaration by our
    Savior.
11. The view to be taken of reprobation. It is founded on the
    righteous will of God.

    1. Many controvert all the positions which we have laid down,
especially the gratuitous election of believers, which, however,
cannot be overthrown. For they commonly imagine that God
distinguishes between men according to the merits which he foresees
that each individual is to have, giving the adoption of sons to
those whom he foreknows will not be unworthy of his grace, and
dooming those to destruction whose dispositions he perceives will be
prone to mischief and wickedness. Thus by interposing foreknowledge
as a veil, they not only obscure election, but pretend to give it a
different origin. Nor is this the commonly received opinion of the
vulgar merely, for it has in all ages had great supporters, (see
sec. 8.) This I candidly confess, lest any one should expect greatly
to prejudice our cause by opposing it with their names. The truth of
God is here too certain to be shaken, too clear to be overborne by
human authority. Others who are neither versed in Scripture, nor
entitled to any weight, assail sound doctrine with a petulance and
improbity which it is impossible to tolerate. Because God of his
mere good pleasure electing some passes by others, they raise a plea
against him. But if the fact is certain, what can they gain by
quarreling with God? We teach nothing but what experience proves to
be true, viz., that God has always been at liberty to bestow his
grace on whom he would. Not to ask in what respect the posterity of
Abraham excelled others if it be not in a worth, the cause of which
has no existence out of God, let them tell why men are better than
oxen or asses. God might have made them dogs when he formed them in
his own image. Will they allow the lower animals to expostulate with
God, as if the inferiority of their condition were unjust? It is
certainly not more equitable that men should enjoy the privilege
which they have not acquired by any merit, than that he should
variously distribute favors as seems to him meet. If they pass to
the case of individuals where inequality is more offensive to them,
they ought at least, in regard to the example of our Savior, to be
restrained by feelings of awe from talking so confidently of this
sublime mystery. He is conceived a mortal man of the seed of David;
what, I would ask them, are the virtues by which he deserved to
become in the very womb, the head of angels the only begotten Son of
God, the image and glory of the Father, the light, righteousness,
and salvation of the world? It is wisely observed by Augustine, that
in the very head of the Church we have a bright mirror of free
election, lest it should give any trouble to us the members, viz.,
that he did not become the Son of God by living righteously, but was
freely presented with this great honor, that he might afterwards
make others partakers of his gifts. Should any one here ask, why
others are not what he was, or why we are all at so great a distance
from him, why we are all corrupt while he is purity, he would not
only betray his madness, but his effrontery also. But if they are
bent on depriving God of the free right of electing and reprobating,
let them at the same time take away what has been given to Christ.
It will now be proper to attend to what Scripture declares
concerning each. When Paul declares that we were chosen in Christ
before the foundation of the world, (Eph. 1: 4,) he certainly shows
that no regard is had to our own worth; for it is just as if he had
said, Since in the whole seed of Adam our heavenly Father found
nothing worthy of his election, he turned his eye upon his own
Anointed, that he might select as members of his body those whom he
was to assume into the fellowship of life. Let believers, then, give
full effect to this reason, viz., that we were in Christ adopted
unto the heavenly inheritance, because in ourselves we were
incapable of such excellence. This he elsewhere observes in another
passage, in which he exhorts the Colossians to give thanks that they
had been made meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints,
(Col. 1: 12.) If election precedes that divine grace by which we are
made fit to obtain immortal life, what can God find in us to induce
him to elect us? What I mean is still more clearly explained in
another passage: God, says he, "has chosen us in him before the
foundation of the world, that we might be holy and without blame
before him in love: having predestinated us unto the adoption of
children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure
of his will," (Eph. 1: 4, 5.) Here he opposes the good pleasure of
God to our merits of every description.
    2. That the proof may be more complete, it is of importance to
attend to the separate clauses of that passage. When they are
connected together they leave no doubt. From giving them the name of
elect, it is clear that he is addressing believers, as indeed he
shortly after declares. It is, therefore, a complete perversion of
the name to confine it to the age in which the gospel was published.
By saying they were elected before the foundation of the world, he
takes away all reference to worth. For what ground of distinction
was there between persons who as yet existed not, and persons who
were afterwards like them to exist in Adam? But if they were elected
in Christ, it follows not only that each was elected on some
extrinsic ground, but that some were placed on a different footing
from others, since we see that all are not members of Christ. In the
additional statement that they were elected that they might be holy,
the apostle openly refutes the error of those who deduce election
from prescience, since he declares that whatever virtue appears in
men is the result of election. Then, if a higher cause is asked,
Paul answers that God so predestined, and predestined according to
the good pleasure of his will. By these words, he overturns all the
grounds of election which men imagine to exist in themselves. For he
shows that whatever favors God bestows in reference to the spiritual
life flow from this one fountain, because God chose whom he would,
and before they were born had the grace which he designed to bestow
upon them set apart for their use.
    3. Wherever this good pleasure of God reigns, no good works are
taken into account. The Apostle, indeed, does not follow out the
antithesis, but it is to be understood, as he himself explains it in
another passage, "Who has called us with a holy calling, not
according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace,
which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began," (1 Tim.
2: 9.) We have already shown that the additional words, "that we
might be holy," remove every doubt. If you say that he foresaw they
would be holy, and therefore elected them, you invert the order of
Paul. You may, therefore, safely infer, If he elected us that we
might be holy, he did not elect us because he foresaw that we would
be holy. The two things are evidently inconsistent, viz., that the
pious owe it to election that they are holy, and yet attain to
election by means of works. There is no force in the cavil to which
they are ever recurring, that the Lord does not bestow election in
recompense of preceding, but bestows it in consideration of future
merits. For when it is said that believers were elected that they
might be holy, it is at the same time intimated that the holiness
which was to be in them has its origin in election. And how can it
be consistently said, that things derived from election are the
cause of election? The very thing which the Apostle had said, he
seems afterwards to confirm by adding, "According to his good
pleasure which he has purposed in himself," (Eph. 1: 9;) for the
expression that God "purposed in himself," is the same as if it had
been said, that in forming his decree he considered nothing external
to himself; and, accordingly, it is immediately subjoined, that the
whole object contemplated in our election is, that "we should be to
the praise of his glory." Assuredly divine grace would not deserve
all the praise of election, were not election gratuitous; and it
would not be gratuitous did God in electing any individual pay
regard to his future works. Hence, what Christ said to his disciples
is found to be universally applicable to all believers, "Ye have not
chosen me, but I have chosen you," (John 15: 16.) Here he not only
excludes past merits, but declares that they had nothing in
themselves for which they could be chosen except in so far as his
mercy anticipated. And how are we to understand the words of Paul,
"Who has first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him
again?" (Rom. 11: 35.) His meaning obviously is, that men are
altogether indebted to the preventing goodness of God, there being
nothing in them, either past or future, to conciliate his favor.
    4. In the Epistle to the Romans, (Rom. 9: 6,) in which he again
treats this subject more reconditely and at greater length, he
declares that "they are not all Israel which are of Israel;" for
though all were blessed in respect of hereditary rights yet all did
not equally obtain the succession. The whole discussion was
occasioned by the pride and vain-glorying of the Jews, who, by
claiming the name of the Church for themselves, would have made the
faith of the Gospel dependent on their pleasure; just as in the
present day the Papists would fain under this pretext substitute
themselves in place of God. Paul, while he concedes that in respect
of the covenant they were the holy offspring of Abraham, yet
contends that the greater part of them were strangers to it, and
that not only because they were degenerate, and so had become
bastards instead of sons, but because the principal point to be
considered was the special election of God, by which alone his
adoption was ratified. If the piety of some established them in the
hope of salvation, and the revolt of others was the sole cause of
their being rejected, it would have been foolish and absurd in Paul
to carry his readers back to a secret election. But if the will of
God (no cause of which external to him either appears or is to be
looked for) distinguishes some from others, so that all the sons of
Israel are not true Israelites, it is vain for any one to seek the
origin of his condition in himself. He afterwards prosecutes the
subject at greater length, by contrasting the cases of Jacob and
Esau. Both being sons of Abraham, both having been at the same time
in the womb of their mother, there was something very strange in the
change by which the honor of the birthright was transferred to
Jacob, and yet Paul declares that the change was an attestation to
the election of the one and the reprobation of the other.
    The question considered is the origin and cause of election.
The advocates of foreknowledge insist that it is to be found in the
virtues and vices of men. For they take the short and easy method of
asserting, that God showed in the person of Jacob, that he elects
those who are worthy of his grace; and in the person of Esau, that
he rejects those whom he foresees to be unworthy. Such is their
confident assertion; but what does Paul say? "For the children being
not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose
of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him
that calleth; it was said unto her, [Rebecca,] The elder shall serve
the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I
hated," (Rom. 9: 11-13.) If foreknowledge had anything to do with
this distinction of the brothers, the mention of time would have
been out of place. Granting that Jacob was elected for a worth to be
obtained by future virtues, to what end did Paul say that he was not
yet born? Nor would there have been any occasion for adding, that as
yet he had done no good, because the answer was always ready, that
nothing is hid from God, and that therefore the piety of Jacob was
present before him. If works procure favor, a value ought to have
been put upon them before Jacob was born, just as if he had been of
full age. But in explaining the difficulty, the Apostle goes on to
show, that the adoption of Jacob proceeded not on works but on the
calling of God. In works he makes no mention of past or future, but
distinctly opposes them to the calling of God, intimating, that when
place is given to the one the other is overthrown; as if he had
said, The only thing to be considered is what pleased God, not what
men furnished of themselves. Lastly, it is certain that all the
causes which men are wont to devise as external to the secret
counsel of God, are excluded by the use of the terms purpose and
election.
    5. Why should men attempt to darken these statements by
assigning some place in election to past or future works? This is
altogether to evade what the Apostle contends for, viz., that the
distinction between the brothers is not founded on any ground of
works, but on the mere calling of God, inasmuch as it was fixed
before the children were born. Had there been any solidity in this
subtlety, it would not have escaped the notice of the Apostle, but
being perfectly aware that God foresaw no good in man, save that
which he had already previously determined to bestow by means of his
election, he does not employ a preposterous arrangement which would
make good works antecedent to their cause. We learn from the
Apostle's words, that the salvation of believers is founded entirely
on the decree of divine election, that the privilege is procured not
by works but free calling. We have also a specimen of the thing
itself set before us. Esau and Jacob are brothers, begotten of the
same parents, within the same womb, not yet born. In them all things
are equal, and yet the judgment of God with regard to them is
different. He adopts the one and rejects the other. The only right
of precedence was that of primogeniture; but that is disregarded,
and the younger is preferred to the elder. Nay, in the case of
others, God seems to have disregarded primogeniture for the express
purpose of excluding the flesh from all ground of boasting.
Rejecting Ishmael he gives his favor to Isaac, postponing Manasseh
he honors Ephraim.
    6. Should any one object that these minute and inferior favors
do not enable us to decide with regard to the future life, that it
is not to be supposed that he who received the honor of
primogeniture was thereby adopted to the inheritance of heaven;
(many objectors do not even spare Paul, but accuse him of having in
the quotation of these passages wrested Scripture from its proper
meaning;) I answer as before, that the Apostle has not erred through
inconsideration, or spontaneously misapplied the passages of
Scripture; but he saw (what these men cannot be brought to consider)
that God purposed under an earthly sign to declare the spiritual
election of Jacob, which otherwise lay hidden at his inaccessible
tribunal. For unless we refer the primogeniture bestowed upon him to
the future world, the form of blessing would be altogether vain and
ridiculous, inasmuch as he gained nothing by it but a multitude of
toils and annoyances, exile, sharp sorrows, and bitter cares.
Therefore, when Paul knew beyond a doubt that by the external, God
manifested the spiritual and unfading blessings, which he had
prepared for his servant in his kingdom, he hesitated not in proving
the latter to draw an argument from the former. For we must remember
that the land of Canaan was given in pledge of the heavenly
inheritance; and that therefore there cannot be a doubt that Jacob
was like the angels ingrafted into the body of Christ, that he might
be a partaker of the same life. Jacob, therefore, is chosen, while
Esau is rejected; the predestination of God makes a distinction
where none existed in respect of merit. If you ask the reason the
Apostle gives it, "For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom
I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have
compassion" (Rom. 9: 15.) And what pray, does this mean? It is just
a clear declaration by the Lord that he finds nothing in men
themselves to induce him to show kindness, that it is owing entirely
to his own mercy, and, accordingly, that their salvation is his own
work. Since God places your salvation in himself alone, why should
you descend to yourself? Since he assigns you his own mercy alone,
why will you recur to your own merits? Since he confines your
thoughts to his own mercy why do you turn partly to the view of your
own works?
    We must therefore come to that smaller number whom Paul
elsewhere describes as foreknown of God, (Rom. 11: 2;) not
foreknown, as these men imagine, by idle, inactive contemplations
but in the sense which it often bears. For surely when Peter says
that Christ was "delivered by the determinate counsel and
foreknowledge of God," (Acts 2: 23,) he does not represent God as
contemplating merely, but as actually accomplishing our salvation.
Thus also Peter, in saying that the believers to whom he writes are
elect "according to the foreknowledge of God," (1 Pet. 1: 2,)
properly expresses that secret predestination by which God has
sealed those whom he has been pleased to adopt as sons. In using the
term purpose as synonymous with a term which uniformly denotes what
is called a fixed determination, he undoubtedly shows that God, in
being the author of our salvation, does not go beyond himself. In
this sense he says in the same chapters that Christ as "a lamb" "was
foreordained before the creation of the world," (1 Pet. 1: 19, 20.)
What could have been more frigid or absurd than to have represented
God as looking from the height of heaven to see whence the salvation
of the human race was to come? By a people foreknown, Peter means
the same thing as Paul does by a remnant selected from a multitude
falsely assuming the name of God. In another passage, to suppress
the vain boasting of those who, while only covered with a mask,
claim for themselves in the view of the world a first place among
the godly, Paul says, "The Lord knoweth them that are his," (2 Tim.
2: 19.) In short, by that term he designates two classes of people,
the one consisting of the whole race of Abraham, the other a people
separated from that race, and though hidden from human view, yet
open to the eye of God. And there is no doubt that he took the
passage from Moses, who declares that God would be merciful to
whomsoever he pleased (although he was speaking of an elect people
whose condition was apparently equal;) just as if he had said, that
in a common adoption was included a special grace which he bestows
on some as a holier treasure, and that there is nothing in the
common covenant to prevent this number from being exempted from the
common order. God being pleased in this matter to act as a free
dispenser and disposer, distinctly declares, that the only ground on
which he will show mercy to one rather than to another is his
sovereign pleasure; for when mercy is bestowed on him who asks it,
though he indeed does not suffer a refusal, he, however, either
anticipates or partly acquires a favour, the whole merit of which
God claims for himself.
    7. Now, let the supreme Judge and Master decide on the whole
case. Seeing such obduracy in his hearers, that his words fell upon
the multitude almost without fruit, he to remove this
stumbling-block exclaims, "All that the Father giveth me shall come
to me." "And this is the Father's will which has sent me, that of
all which he has given me I should lose nothing," (John 6: 37, 39.)
Observe that the donation of the Father is the first step in our
delivery into the charge and protection of Christ. Some one,
perhaps, will here turn round and object, that those only peculiarly
belong to the Father who make a voluntary surrender by faith. But
the only thing which Christ maintains is that though the defections
of vast multitudes should shake the world, yet the counsel of God
would stand firm, more stable than heaven itself, that his election
would never fail. The elect are said to have belonged to the Father
before he bestowed them on his only begotten Son. It is asked if
they were his by nature? Nay, they were aliens, but he makes them
his by delivering them. The words of Christ are too clear to be
rendered obscure by any of the mists of caviling. "No man can come
to me except the Father which has sent me draw him." "Every man,
therefore, that has heard and learned of the Father comes unto me,"
(John 6: 44, 45.) Did all promiscuously bend the knee to Christ,
election would be common; whereas now in the small number of
believers a manifest diversity appears. Accordingly our Savior,
shortly after declaring that the disciples who were given to him
were the common property of the Father, adds, "I pray not for the
world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine,"
(John 17: 9.) Hence it is that the whole world no longer belongs to
its Creator, except in so far as grace rescues from malediction,
divine wrath, and eternal death, some, not many, who would otherwise
perish, while he leaves the world to the destruction to which it is
doomed. Meanwhile, though Christ interpose as a Mediator, yet he
claims the right of electing in common with the Father, "I speak not
of you all: I know whom I have chosen" (John 13: 18.) If it is asked
whence he has chosen them, he answers in another passages "Out of
the world;" which he excludes from his prayers when he commits his
disciples to the Father, (John 15: 19.) We must, indeed hold, when
he affirms that he knows whom he has chosen, first, that some
individuals of the human race are denoted; and, secondly, that they
are not distinguished by the quality of their virtues, but by a
heavenly decree. Hence it follows, that since Christ makes himself
the author of election, none excel by their own strength or
industry. In elsewhere numbering Judas among the elect, though he
was a devil, (John 6: 70,) he refers only to the apostolical office,
which though a bright manifestation of divine favor, (as Paul so
often acknowledges it to be in his own person,) does not, however,
contain within itself the hope of eternal salvation. Judas,
therefore, when he discharged the office of Apostle perfidiously,
might have been worse than a devil; but not one of those whom Christ
has once ingrafted into his body will he ever permit to perish, for
in securing their salvation, he will perform what he has promised;
that is, exert a divine power greater than all, (John 10: 28.) For
when he says, "Those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of
them is lost but the son of perdition," (John 17: 12,) the
expression, though there is a catachresis in it, is not at all
ambiguous. The sum is, that God by gratuitous adoption forms those
whom he wishes to have for sons; but that the intrinsic cause is in
himself, because he is contented with his secret pleasure.
    8. But Ambrose, Origin, and Jerome, were of opinion, that God
dispenses his grace among men according to the use which he foresees
that each will make of it. It may be added, that Augustine also was
for some time of this opinion; but after he had made greater
progress in the knowledge of Scripture, he not only retracted it as
evidently false, but powerfully confuted it, (August. Retract. Lib.
1, c. 13.) Nay, even after the retractation, glancing at the
Pelagians who still persisted in that error, he says, "Who does not
wonder that the Apostle failed to make this most acute observation?
For after stating a most startling proposition concerning those who
were not yet born, and afterwards putting the question to himself by
way of objection, 'What then? Is there unrighteousness with God?' he
had an opportunity of answering, that God foresaw the merits of
both, he does not say so, but has recourse to the justice and mercy
of God," (August. Epist. 106, ad Sixtum.) And in another passage,
after excluding all merit before election, he says, "Here,
certainly, there is no place for the vain argument of those who
defend the foreknowledge of God against the grace of God, and
accordingly maintain that we were elected before the foundation of
the world, because God foreknow that we would be good, not that he
himself would make us good. This is not the language of him who
says, 'Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you,' (John 15: 16.)
For had he chosen us because he foreknow that we would be good, he
would at the same time also have foreknown that we were to choose
him," (August. in Joann. 8, see also what follows to the same
effect.) Let the testimony of Augustine prevail with those who
willingly acquiesce in the authority of the Fathers: although
Augustine allows not that he differs from the others, but shows by
clear evidence that the difference which the Pelagians invidiously
objected to him is unfounded. For he quotes from Ambrose, (Lib. de
Praedest. Sanct. cap. 19,) "Christ calls whom he pities." Again,
"Had he pleased he could have made them devout instead of undevout;
but God calls whom he deigns to call, and makes religious whom he
will." Were we disposed to frame an entire volume out of Augustine,
it were easy to show the reader that I have no occasion to use any
other words than his: but I am unwilling to burden him with a prolix
statement. But assuming that the fathers did not speak thus, let us
attend to the thing itself. A difficult question had been raised,
viz., Did God do justly in bestowing his grace on certain
individuals? Paul might have disencumbered himself of this question
at once by saying, that God had respect to works. Why does he not do
so? Why does he rather continue to use a language which leaves him
exposed to the same difficulty? Why, but just because it would not
have been right to say it? There was no obliviousness on the part of
the Holy Spirit, who was speaking by his mouth. He, therefore,
answers without ambiguity, that God favors his elect, because he is
pleased to do so, and shows mercy because he is pleased to do so.
For the words, "I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and
show mercy on whom I will show mercy," (Exod. 33: 19,) are the same
in effect as if it had been said, God is moved to mercy by no other
reason than that he is pleased to show mercy. Augustine's
declaration, therefore, remains true. The grace of God does not
find, but makes persons fit to be chosen.
    9. Nor let us be detained by the subtlety of Thomas, that the
foreknowledge of merit is the cause of predestination, not, indeed,
in respect of the predestinating act, but that on our part it may in
some sense be so called, namely, in respect of a particular estimate
of predestination; as when it is said, that God predestinates man to
glory according to his merit, inasmuch as he decreed to bestow upon
him the grace by which he merits glory. For while the Lord would
have us to see nothing more in election than his mere goodness, for
any one to desire to see more is preposterous affectation. But were
we to make a trial of subtlety, it would not be difficult to refute
the sophistry of Thomas. He maintains that the elect are in a manner
predestinated to glory on account of their merits, because God
predestines to give them the grace by which they merit glory. What
if I should, on the contrary, object that predestination to grace is
subservient to election unto life, and follows as its handmaid; that
grace is predestined to those to whom the possession of glory was
previously assigned the Lord being pleased to bring his sons by
election to justification? For it will hence follow that the
predestination to glory is the cause of the predestination to grace,
and not the converse. But let us have done with these disputes as
superfluous among those who think that there is enough of wisdom for
them in the word of God. For it has been truly said by an old
ecclesiastical writer, Those who ascribe the election of God to
merits, are wise above what they ought to be, (Ambrose. de Vocat.
Gentium, lib. 1, c. 2.)
    10. Some object that God would be inconsistent with himself, in
inviting all without distinction while he elects only a few. Thus,
according to them, the universality of the promise destroys the
distinction of special grace. Some moderate men speak in this way,
not so much for the purpose of suppressing the truth, as to get quit
of puzzling questions, and curb excessive curiosity. The intention
is laudable, but the design is by no means to be approved,
dissimulation being at no time excusable. In those Again who display
their petulance, we see only a vile cavil or a disgraceful error.
The mode in which Scripture reconciles the two things, viz., that by
external preaching all are called to faith and repentance, and that
yet the Spirit of faith and repentance is not given to all, I have
already explained, and will again shortly repeat. But the point
which they assume I deny as false in two respects: for he who
threatens that when it shall rain on one city there will be drought
in another, (Amos 4: 7;) and declares in another passage, that there
will be a famine of the word, (Amos 8: 11,) does not lay himself
under a fixed obligation to call all equally. And he who, forbidding
Paul to preach in Asian and leading him away from Bithynia, carries
him over to Macedonia, (Acts 16: 6,) shows that it belongs to him to
distribute the treasure in what way he pleases. But it is by Isaiah
he more clearly demonstrates how he destines the promises of
salvation specially to the elect, (Isa. 8: 16;) for he declares that
his disciples would consist of them only, and not indiscriminately
of the whole human race. Whence it is evident that the doctrine of
salvation, which is said to be set apart for the sons of the Church
only, is abused when it is represented as effectually available to
all. For the present let it suffice to observe, that though the word
of the gospel is addressed generally to all, yet the gift of faith
is rare. Isaiah assigns the cause when he says that the arm of the
Lord is not revealed to all, (Isa. 53: 1.) Had he said, that the
gospel is malignantly and perversely condemned, because many
obstinately refuse to hear, there might perhaps be some color for
this universal call. It is not the purpose of the Prophet, however,
to extenuate the guilt of men, when he states the source of their
blindness to be, that God deigns not to reveal his arm to them; he
only reminds us that since faith is a special gift, it is in vain
that external doctrine sounds in the ear. But I would fain know from
those doctors whether it is mere preaching or faith that makes men
sons of God. Certainly when it is said, "As many as received him, to
them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that
believe on his name," (John 1: 12,) a confused mass is not set
before us, but a special order is assigned to believers, who are
"born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of
man, but of God."
    But it is said, there is a mutual agreement between faith and
the word. That must be wherever there is faith. But it is no new
thing for the seed to fall among thorns or in stony places; not only
because the majority appear in fact to be rebellious against God,
but because all are not gifted with eyes and ears. How, then, can it
consistently be said, that God calls while he knows that the called
will not come? Let Augustine answer for me: "Would you dispute with
me? Wonder with me, and exclaim, O the depth! Let us both agree in
dread, lest we perish in error," (August. de Verb. Apost. Serm. 11.)
Moreover, if election is, as Paul declares, the parent of faith, I
retort the argument, and maintain that faith is not general, since
election is special. For it is easily inferred from the series of
causes and effects, when Paul says, that the Father "has blessed us
with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ, according
as he has chosen us in him before the foundation of the world,"
(Eph. 1: 3, 4,) that these riches are not common to all, because God
has chosen only whom he would. And the reason why in another passage
he commends the faith of the elect is, to prevent any one from
supposing that he acquires faith of his own nature; since to God
alone belongs the glory of freely illuminating those whom he had
previously chosen, (Tit. 1: 1.) For it is well said by Bernard, "His
friend hear apart when he says to them, Fear not, little flock: to
you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom. Who are these?
Those whom he foreknew and predestinated to be conformed to the
image of his Son. He has made known his great and secret counsel.
The Lord knoweth them that are his, but that which was known to God
was manifested to men; nor, indeed, does he deign to give a
participation in this great mystery to any but those whom he
foreknew and predestinated to be his own," (Bernard. ad Thomas
Praepos. Benerlae. Epist. 107.) Shortly after he concludes, "The
mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that
fear him; from everlasting through predestination, to everlasting
through glorification: the one knows no beginning, the other no
end." But why cite Bernard as a witness, when we hear from the lips
of our Master, "Not that any man has seen the Father, save he which
is of God"? (John 6: 46.) By these words he intimates that all who
are not regenerated by God are amazed at the brightness of his
countenance. And, indeed, faith is aptly conjoined with election,
provided it hold the second place. This order is clearly expressed
by our Savior in these words, "This is the Father's will which has
sent me, that of all which he has given me I should lose nothing;"
"And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which sees
the Son, and believes on him, may have everlasting life," (John 6:
39, 40.) If he would have all to be saved, he would appoint his Son
their guardian, and would ingraft them all into his body by the
sacred bond of faith. It is now clear that faith is a singular
pledge of paternal love, treasured up for the sons whom he has
adopted. Hence Christ elsewhere says, that the sheep follow the
shepherd because they know his voice, but that they will not follow
a stranger, because they know not the voice of strangers, (John 10:
4.) But whence that distinction, unless that their ears have been
divinely bored? For no man makes himself a sheep, but is formed by
heavenly grace. And why does the Lord declare that our salvation
will always be sure and certain, but just because it is guarded by
the invincible power of God? (John 10: 29.) Accordingly, he
concludes that unbelievers are not of his sheep, (John 10: 16.) The
reason is, because they are not of the number of those who, as the
Lord promised by Isaiah, were to be his disciples. Moreover, as the
passages which I have quoted imply perseverance, they are also
attestations to the inflexible constancy of election.
    11. We come now to the reprobate, to whom the Apostle at the
same time refers, (Rom. 9: 13.) For as Jacob, who as yet had merited
nothing by good works, is assumed into favor; so Esau, while as yet
unpolluted by any crime, is hated. If we turn our view to works, we
do injustice to the Apostle, as if he had failed to see the very
thing which is clear to us. Moreover, there is complete proof of his
not having seen it, since he expressly insists that when as yet they
had done neither good nor evil, the one was elected, the other
rejected, in order to prove that the foundation of divine
predestination is not in works. Then after starting the objection,
Is God unjust? instead of employing what would have been the surest
and plainest defense of his justice, viz., that God had recompensed
Esau according to his wickedness, he is contented with a different
solution, viz., that the reprobate are expressly raised up, in order
that the glory of God may thereby be displayed. At last, he
concludes that God has mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he
will he hardeneth, (Rom. 9: 18.) You see how he refers both to the
mere pleasure of God. Therefore, if we cannot assign any reason for
his bestowing mercy on his people, but just that it so pleases him,
neither can we have any reason for his reprobating others but his
will. When God is said to visit in mercy or harden whom he will, men
are reminded that they are not to seek for any cause beyond his
will.

Chapter 23.

23. Refutation of the calumnies by which this doctrine is always
unjustly assailed.

    This chapter consists of four parts, which refute the principal
objections to this doctrine, and the various pleas and exceptions
founded on these objections. These are preceded by a refutation of
those who hold election but deny reprobation, sec. 1. Then follows,
I. A refutation of the first objection to the doctrine of
reprobation and election, sec. 2-5. II. An answer to the second
objection, sec. 6-9. III. A refutation of the third objection. IV. A
refutation of the fourth objection; to which is added a useful and
necessary caution, sec. 12-14.

Sections.

1. Error of those who deny reprobation. 1. Election opposed to
    reprobation. 2. Those who deny reprobation presumptuously plead
    with God, whose counsels even angels adore. 3. They murmur
    against God when disclosing his counsels by the Apostle.
    Exception and answer. Passage of Augustine.
2. First objection, viz., that God is unjustly offended with those
    whom he dooms to destruction without their own desert. First
    answer, from the consideration of the divine will. The nature
    of this will, and how to be considered.
3. Second answer. God owes nothing to man. His hatred against those
    who are corrupted by sin is most just. The reprobate convinced
    in their own consciences of the just judgment of God.
4. Exception, viz., that the reprobate seem to have been preordained
    to sin. Answer. Passage of the Apostle vindicated from calumny.
5. Answer, confirmed by the authority of Augustine. Illustration.
    Passage of Augustine.
6. Objection, that God ought not to impute the sins rendered
    necessary by his predestination. First answer, by ancient
    writers. This not valid. Second answer also defective. Third
    answer, proposed by Valla, well founded.
7. Objection, that God did not decree that Adam should perish by his
    fall, refuted by a variety of reasons. A noble passage of
    Augustine.
8. Objection, that the wicked perish by the permission, not by the
    will of God. Answer. A pious exhortation.
9. Objection and answer.
10. Objection, that, according to the doctrine of predestination,
    God is a respecter of persons. Answer.
11. Objection, that sinners are to be punished equally, or the
    justice of God is unequal. Answer. Confirmed by passages of
    Augustine.
12. Objection, that the doctrine of predestination produces
    overweening confidence and impiety. Different answers.
13. Another objection, depending on the former. Answer. The doctrine
    of predestination to be preached, not passed over in silence.
14. How it is to be preached and delivered to the people. Summary of
    the orthodox doctrine of predestination, from Augustine.

    1. The human mind, when it hears this doctrine, cannot restrain
its petulance, but boils and rages as if aroused by the sound of a
trumpet. Many professing a desire to defend the Deity from an
invidious charge admit the doctrine of election, but deny that any
one is reprobated, (Bernard. in Die Ascensionis, Serm. 2.) This they
do ignorantly and childishly since there could be no election
without its opposite reprobation. God is said to set apart those
whom he adopts for salvation. It were most absurd to say, that he
admits others fortuitously, or that they by their industry acquire
what election alone confers on a few. Those, therefore, whom God
passes by he reprobates, and that for no other cause but because he
is pleased to exclude them from the inheritance which he predestines
to his children. Nor is it possible to tolerate the petulance of
men, in refusing to be restrained by the word of God, in regard to
his incomprehensible counsel, which even angels adore. We have
already been told that hardening is not less under the immediate
hand of God than mercy. Paul does not, after the example of those
whom I have mentioned, labour anxiously to defend God, by calling in
the aid of falsehood; he only reminds us that it is unlawful for the
creature to quarrel with its Creator. Then how will those who refuse
to admit that any are reprobated by God explain the following words
of Christ? "Every plant which my heavenly Father has not planted
shall be rooted up," (Matth. 15: 13.) They are plainly told that all
whom the heavenly Father has not been pleased to plant as sacred
trees in his garden, are doomed and devoted to destruction. If they
deny that this is a sign of reprobation, there is nothing, however
clear, that, can be proved to them. But if they will still murmur,
let us in the soberness of faith rest contented with the admonition
of Paul, that it can be no ground of complaint that God, "willing to
show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much
long-suffering the vessels of wrath fitted for destruction: and that
he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy,
which he had store prepared unto glory," (Rom. 9: 22, 23.) Let my
readers observe that Paul, to cut off all handle for murmuring and
detraction, attributes supreme sovereignty to the wrath and power of
God; for it were unjust that those profound judgments, which
transcend all our powers of discernment, should be subjected to our
calculation. It is frivolous in our opponents to reply, that God
does not altogether reject those whom in levity he tolerates, but
remains in suspense with regard to them, if per adventure they may
repent; as if Paul were representing God as patiently waiting for
the conversion of those whom he describes as fitted for destruction.
For Augustine, rightly expounding this passage, says that where
power is united to endurance, God does not permit, but rules
(August. Cont. Julian., Lib. 5, c. 5.) They add also, that it is not
without cause the vessels of wrath are said to be fitted for
destruction, and that God is said to have prepared the vessels of
mercy, because in this way the praise of salvation is claimed for
God, whereas the blame of perdition is thrown upon those who of
their own accord bring it upon themselves. But were I to concede
that by the different forms of expression Paul softens the harshness
of the former clause, it by no means follows, that he transfers the
preparation for destruction to any other cause than the secret
counsel of God. This, indeed, is asserted in the preceding context,
where God is said to have raised up Pharaoh, and to harden whom he
will. Hence it follows, that the hidden counsel of God is the cause
of hardening. I at least hold with Augustine that when God makes
sheep out of wolves, he forms them again by the powerful influence
of grace, that their hardness may thus be subdued, and that he does
not convert the obstinate, because he does not exert that more
powerful grace, a grace which he has at command, if he were disposed
to use it, (August. de Praedest. Sanct., Lib. 1, c. 2.)
    2. These observations would be amply sufficient for the pious
and modest, and such as remember that they are men. But because many
are the species of blasphemy which these virulent dogs utter against
God, we shall, as far as the case admits, give an answer to each.
Foolish men raise many grounds of quarrel with God, as if they held
him subject to their accusations. First, they ask why God is
offended with his creatures who have not provoked him by any
previous offense; for to devote to destruction whomsoever he
pleases, more resembles the caprice of a tyrant than the legal
sentence of a judge; and, therefore, there is reason to expostulate
with God, if at his mere pleasure men are, without any desert of
their own, predestinated to eternal death. If at any time thoughts
of this kind come into the minds of the pious, they will be
sufficiently armed to repress them, by considering how sinful it is
to insist on knowing the causes of the divine will, since it is
itself, and justly ought to be, the cause of all that exists. For if
his will has any cause, there must be something antecedent to it,
and to which it is annexed; this it were impious to imagine. The
will of God is the supreme rule of righteousness, so that everything
which he wills must be held to be righteous by the mere fact of his
willing it. Therefore, when it is asked why the Lord did so, we must
answer, Because he pleased. But if you proceed farther to ask why he
pleased, you ask for something greater and more sublime than the
will of God, and nothing such can be found. Let human temerity then
be quiet, and cease to inquire after what exists not, lest perhaps
it fails to find what does exist. This, I say, will be sufficient to
restrain any one who would reverently contemplate the secret things
of God. Against the audacity of the wicked, who hesitate not openly
to blaspheme, God will sufficiently defend himself by his own
righteousness, without our assistance, when depriving their
consciences of all means of evasion, he shall hold them under
conviction, and make them feel their guilt. We, however, give no
countenance to the fiction of absolute power, which, as it is
heathenish, so it ought justly to be held in detestation by us. We
do not imagine God to be lawless. He is a law to himself; because,
as Plato says, men laboring under the influence of concupiscence
need law; but the will of God is not only free from all vice, but is
the supreme standard of perfection, the law of all laws. But we deny
that he is bound to give an account of his procedure; and we
moreover deny that we are fit of our own ability to give judgment in
such a case. Wherefore, when we are tempted to go farther than we
ought, let this consideration deter us, Thou shalt be "justified
when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judges," (Ps. 51: 4.)
    3. God may thus quell his enemies by silence. But lest we
should allow them with impunity to hold his sacred name in derision,
he supplies us with weapons against them from his word. Accordingly,
when we are accosted in such terms as these, Why did God from the
first predestine some to death, when, as they were not yet in
existence, they could not have merited sentence of death? let us by
way of reply ask in our turn, What do you imagine that God owes to
man, if he is pleased to estimate him by his own nature? As we are
all vitiated by sin, we cannot but be hateful to God, and that not
from tyrannical cruelty, but the strictest justice. But if all whom
the Lord predestines to death are naturally liable to sentence of
death, of what injustice, pray, do they complain? Should all the
sons of Adam come to dispute and contend with their Creator, because
by his eternal providence they were before their birth doomed to
perpetual destruction, when God comes to reckon with them, what will
they be able to mutter against this defense? If all are taken from a
corrupt mass, it is not strange that all are subject to
condemnation. Let them not, therefore, charge God with injustice, if
by his eternal judgment they are doomed to a death to which they
themselves feel that whether they will or not they are drawn
spontaneously by their own nature. Hence it appears how perverse is
this affectation of murmuring, when of set purpose they suppress the
cause of condemnation which they are compelled to recognize in
themselves, that they may lay the blame upon God. But though I
should confess a hundred times that God is the author, (and it is
most certain that he is,) they do not, however, thereby efface their
own guilt, which, engraven on their own consciences, is ever and
anon presenting itself to their view.
    4. They again object, Were not men predestinated by the
ordination of God to that corruption which is now held forth as the
cause of condemnation? If so, when they perish in their corruptions
they do nothing else than suffer punishment for that calamity, into
which, by the predestination of God, Adam fell, and dragged all his
posterity headlong with him. Is not he, therefore, unjust in thus
cruelly mocking his creatures? I admit that by the will of God all
the sons of Adam fell into that state of wretchedness in which they
are now involved; and this is just what I said at the first, that we
must always return to the mere pleasure of the divine will, the
cause of which is hidden in himself. But it does not forthwith
follow that God lies open to this charge. For we will answer with
Paul in these words, "Nay but, O man, who art thou that replies
against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why
hast thou made me thus? Has not the potter power over the clay, of
the same lump to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto
dishonor?" (Rom. 9: 20, 21.) They will deny that the justice of God
is thus truly defended, and will allege that we seek an evasion,
such as those are wont to employ who have no good excuse. For what
more seems to be said here than just that the power of God is such
as cannot be hindered, so that he can do whatsoever he pleases? But
it is far otherwise. For what stronger reason can be given than when
we are ordered to reflect who God is? How could he who is the Judge
of the world commit any unrighteousness? If it properly belongs to
the nature of God to do judgment, he must naturally love justice and
abhor injustice. Wherefore, the Apostle did not, as if he had been
caught in a difficulty, have recourse to evasion; he only intimated
that the procedure of divine justice is too high to be scanned by
human measure, or comprehended by the feebleness of human intellect.
The Apostle, indeed, confesses that in the divine judgments there is
a depth in which all the minds of men must be engulfed if they
attempt to penetrate into it. But he also shows how unbecoming it is
to reduce the works of God to such a law as that we can presume to
condemn them the moment they accord not with our reason. There is a
well-known saying of Solomon, (which, however, few properly
understand,) "The great God that formed all things both rewardeth
the fool and rewardeth transgressors," (Prov. 26: 10.) For he is
speaking of the greatness of God, whose pleasure it is to inflict
punishment on fools and transgressors though he is not pleased to
bestow his Spirit upon them. It is a monstrous infatuation in men to
seek to subject that which has no bounds to the little measure of
their reason. Paul gives the name of elect to the angels who
maintained their integrity. If their steadfastness was owing to the
good pleasure of God, the revolt of the others proves that they were
abandoned. Of this no other cause can be adduced than reprobation,
which is hidden in the secret counsel of God.
    5. Now, should some Manes or Coelestinus come forward to
arraign Divine Providence, (see sec. 8,) I say with Paul, that no
account of it can be given, because by its magnitude it far
surpasses our understanding. Is there any thing strange or absurd in
this? Would we have the power of God so limited as to be unable to
do more than our mind can comprehend? I say with Augustine, that the
Lord has created those who, as he certainly foreknow, were to go to
destruction, and he did so because he so willed. Why he willed it is
not ours to ask, as we cannot comprehend, nor can it become us even
to raise a controversy as to the justice of the divine will.
Whenever we speak of it, we are speaking of the supreme standard of
justice. (See August. Ep. 106.) But when justice clearly appears,
why should we raise any question of injustice? Let us not,
therefore, be ashamed to stop their mouths after the example of
Paul. Whenever they presume to carp, let us begin to repeat: Who are
ye, miserable men, that bring an accusation against God, and bring
it because he does not adapt the greatness of his works to your
meagre capacity? As if every thing must be perverse that is hidden
from the flesh. The immensity of the divine judgments is known to
you by clear experience. You know that they are called "a great
deep", (Ps. 36: 6.) Now, look at the narrowness of your own minds
and say whether it can comprehend the decrees of God. Why then
should you, by infatuated inquisitiveness, plunge yourselves into an
abyss which reason itself tells you will prove your destruction? Why
are you not deterred, in some degree at least, by what the Book of
Job, as well as the Prophetical books declare concerning the
incomprehensible wisdom and dreadful power of God? If your mind is
troubled, decline not to embrace the counsel of Augustine, "You a
man expect an answer from me: I also am a man. Wherefore, let us
both listen to him who says, 'O man, who art thou?' Believing
ignorance is better than presumptuous knowledge. Seek merits; you
will find nought but punishment. O the height! Peter denies, a thief
believes. O the height! Do you ask the reason? I will tremble at the
height. Reason you, I will wonder; dispute you, I will believe. I
see the height; I cannot sound the depth. Paul found rest, because
he found wonder. He calls the judgments of God 'unsearchable;' and
have you come to search them? He says that his ways are 'past
finding out,' and do you seek to find them out?" (August. de Verb.
Apost. Serm. 20.) We shall gain nothing by proceeding farther. For
neither will the Lord satisfy the petulance of these men, nor does
he need any other defense than that which he used by his Spirit, who
spoke by the mouth of Paul. We unlearn the art of speaking well when
we cease to speak with God.
    6. Impiety starts another objection, which, however, seeks not
so much to criminate God as to excuse the sinner; though he who is
condemned by God as a sinner cannot ultimately be acquitted without
impugning the judge. This, then is the scoffing language which
profane tongues employ. Why should God blame men for things the
necessity of which he has imposed by his own predestination? What
could they do? Could they struggle with his decrees? It were in vain
for them to do it, since they could not possibly succeed. It is not
just, therefore, to punish them for things the principal cause of
which is in the predestination of God. Here I will abstain from a
defense to which ecclesiastical writers usually recur, that there is
nothing in the prescience of God to prevent him from regarding; man
as a sinner, since the evils which he foresees are man's, not his.
This would not stop the caviler, who would still insist that God
might, if he had pleased, have prevented the evils which he foresaw,
and not having done so, must with determinate counsel have created
man for the very purpose of so acting on the earth. But if by the
providence of God man was created on the condition of afterwards
doing whatever he does, then that which he cannot escape, and which
he is constrained by the will of God to do, cannot be charged upon
him as a crime. Let us, therefore, see what is the proper method of
solving the difficulty. First, all must admit what Solomon says,
"The Lord has made all things for himself; yea, even the wicked for
the day of evil," (Prov. 16: 4.) Now, since the arrangement of all
things is in the hand of God, since to him belongs the disposal of
life and death, he arranges all things by his sovereign counsel, in
such a way that individuals are born, who are doomed from the womb
to certain death, and are to glorify him by their destruction. If
any one alleges that no necessity is laid upon them by the
providence of God, but rather that they are created by him in that
condition, because he foresaw their future depravity, he says
something, but does not say enough. Ancient writers, indeed,
occasionally employ this solution, though with some degree of
hesitation. The Schoolmen, again, rest in it as if it could not be
gainsaid. I, for my part, am willing to admit, that mere prescience
lays no necessity on the creatures; though some do not assent to
this, but hold that it is itself the cause of things. But Valla,
though otherwise not greatly skilled in sacred matters, seems to me
to have taken a shrewder and more acute view, when he shows that the
dispute is superfluous since life and death are acts of the divine
will rather than of prescience. If God merely foresaw human events,
and did not also arrange and dispose of them at his pleasure, there
might be room for agitating the question, how far his foreknowledge
amounts to necessity; but since he foresees the things which are to
happen, simply because he has decreed that they are so to happen, it
is vain to debate about prescience, while it is clear that all
events take place by his sovereign appointment.
    7. They deny that it is ever said in distinct terms, God
decreed that Adam should perish by his revolt. As if the same God,
who is declared in Scripture to do whatsoever he pleases, could have
made the noblest of his creatures without any special purpose. They
say that, in accordance with free-will, he was to be the architect
of his own fortune, that God had decreed nothing but to treat him
according to his desert. If this frigid fiction is received, where
will be the omnipotence of God, by which, according to his secret
counsel on which every thing depends, he rules over all? But whether
they will allow it or not, predestination is manifest in Adam's
posterity. It was not owing to nature that they all lost salvation
by the fault of one parent. Why should they refuse to admit with
regard to one man that which against their will they admit with
regard to the whole human race? Why should they in caviling lose
their labour? Scripture proclaims that all were, in the person of
one, made liable to eternal death. As this cannot be ascribed to
nature, it is plain that it is owing to the wonderful counsel of
God. It is very absurd in these worthy defenders of the justice of
God to strain at a gnat and swallow a camel. I again ask how it is
that the fall of Adam involves so many nations with their infant
children in eternal death without remedy unless that it so seemed
meet to God? Here the most loquacious tongues must be dumb. The
decree, I admit, is, dreadful; and yet it is impossible to deny that
God foreknow what the end of man was to be before he made him, and
foreknew, because he had so ordained by his decree. Should any one
here inveigh against the prescience of God, he does it rashly and
unadvisedly. For why, pray, should it be made a charge against the
heavenly Judge, that he was not ignorant of what was to happen?
Thus, if there is any just or plausible complaint, it must be
directed against predestination. Nor ought it to seem absurd when I
say, that God not only foresaw the fall of the first man, and in him
the ruin of his posterity; but also at his own pleasure arranged it.
For as it belongs to his wisdom to foreknow all future events, so it
belongs to his power to rule and govern them by his hand. This
question, like others, is skillfully explained by Augustine: "Let us
confess with the greatest benefit, what we believe with the greatest
truth, that the God and Lord of all things who made all things very
good, both foreknow that evil was to arise out of good, and knew
that it belonged to his most omnipotent goodness to bring good out
of evil, rather than not permit evil to be, and so ordained the life
of angels and men as to show in it, first, what free-will could do;
and, secondly, what the benefit of his grace and his righteous
judgment could do," (August. Enchir. ad Laurent.)
    8. Here they recur to the distinction between will and
permission, the object being to prove that the wicked perish only by
the permission, but not by the will of God. But why do we say that
he permits, but just because he wills? Nor, indeed, is there any
probability in the thing itself, viz., that man brought death upon
himself merely by the permission, and not by the ordination of God;
as if God had not determined what he wished the condition of the
chief of his creatures to be. I will not hesitate, therefore, simply
to confess with Augustine that the will of God is necessity, and
that every thing is necessary which he has willed; just as those
things will certainly happen which he has foreseen, (August. de Gen.
ad Lit., Lib. 6, cap. 15.) Now, if in excuse of themselves and the
ungodly, either the Pelagians, or Manichees, or Anabaptists, or
Epicureans (for it is with these four sects we have to discuss this
matter,) should object the necessity by which they are constrained,
in consequence of the divine predestination, they do nothing that is
relevant to the cause. For if predestination is nothing else than a
dispensation of divine justice, secret indeed, but unblamable,
because it is certain that those predestinated to that condition
were not unworthy of it, it is equally certain, that the destruction
consequent upon predestination is also most just. Moreover, though
their perdition depends on the predestination of God, the cause and
matter of it is in themselves. The first man fell because the Lord
deemed it meet that he should: why he deemed it meet, we know not.
It is certain, however, that it was just, because he saw that his
own glory would thereby be displayed. When you hear the glory of God
mentioned, understand that his justice is included. For that which
deserves praise must be just. Man therefore falls, divine providence
so ordaining, but he falls by his own fault. The Lord had a little
before declared that all the things which he had made were very
good, (Gen. 1: 31.) Whence then the depravity of man, which made him
revolt from God? Lest it should be supposed that it was from his
creation, God had expressly approved what proceeded from himself
Therefore man's own wickedness corrupted the pure nature which he
had received from God, and his ruin brought with it the destruction
of all his posterity. Wherefore, let us in the corruption of human
nature contemplate the evident cause of condemnation, (a cause which
comes more closely home to us,) rather than inquire into a cause
hidden and almost incomprehensible in the predestination of God. Nor
let us decline to submit our judgment to the boundless wisdom of
God, so far as to confess its insufficiency to comprehend many of
his secrets. Ignorance of things which we are not able, or which it
is not lawful to know, is learning, while the desire to know them is
a species of madness.
    9. Someone, perhaps, will say, that I have not yet stated
enough to refute this blasphemous excuse. I confess that it is
impossible to prevent impiety from murmuring and objecting; but I
think I have said enough not only to remove the ground, but also the
pretext for throwing blame upon God. The reprobate would excuse
their sins by alleging that they are unable to escape the necessity
of sinning, especially because a necessity of this nature is laid
upon them by the ordination of God. We deny that they can thus be
validly excused, since the ordination of God, by which they complain
that they are doomed to destruction, is consistent with equity, - an
equity, indeed, unknown to us, but most certain. Hence we conclude,
that every evil which they bear is inflicted by the most just
judgment of God. Next we have shown that they act preposterously
when, in seeking the origin of their condemnation, they turn their
view to the hidden recesses of the divine counsel, and wink at the
corruption of nature, which is the true source. They cannot impute
this corruption to God, because he bears testimony to the goodness
of his creation. For though, by the eternal providence of God, man
was formed for the calamity under which he lies, he took the matter
of it from himself, not from God, since the only cause of his
destruction was his degenerating from the purity of his creation
into a state of vice and impurity.
    10. There is a third absurdity by which the adversaries of
predestination defame it. As we ascribe it entirely to the counsel
of the divine will, that those whom God adopts as the heirs of his
kingdom are exempted from universal destruction, they infer that he
is an acceptor of persons; but this Scripture uniformly denies: and,
therefore Scripture is either at variance with itself, or respect is
had to merit in election. First, the sense in which Scripture
declares that God is not an acceptor of persons, is different from
that which they suppose: since the term person means not man, but
those things which when conspicuous in a man, either procure favor,
grace, and dignity, or, on the contrary, produce hatred, contempt,
and disgrace. Among, these are, on the one hand, riches, wealth,
power, rank, office, country, beauty, &c.; and, on the other hand,
poverty, want, mean birth, sordidness, contempt, and the like. Thus
Peter and Paul say, that the Lord is no acceptor of persons, because
he makes no distinction between the Jew and the Greek; does not make
the mere circumstance of country the ground for rejecting, one or
embracing the other, (Acts 10: 34; Rom. 2: 10, Gal. 3: 28.) Thus
James also uses the same words, when he would declare that God has
no respect to riches in his judgment, (James 2: 5.) Paul also says
in another passage, that in judging God has no respect to slavery or
freedom, (Eph. 6: 9; Col. 3: 25.) There is nothing inconsistent with
this when we say, that God, according to the good pleasure of his
will, without any regard to merit, elects those whom he chooses for
sons, while he rejects and reprobates others. For fuller
satisfaction the matter may be thus explained, (see August. Epist.
115, et ad Bonif., Lib. 2, cap. 7.) It is asked, how it happens that
of two, between whom there is no difference of merit, God in his
election adopts the one, and passes by the other? I, in my turn,
ask, Is there any thing in him who is adopted to incline God towards
him? If it must be confessed that there is nothing. it will follow,
that God looks not to the man, but is influenced entirely by his own
goodness to do him good. Therefore, when God elects one and rejects
another, it is owing not to any respect to the individual, but
entirely to his own mercy which is free to display and exert itself
when and where he pleases. For we have elsewhere seen, that in order
to humble the pride of the flesh, "not many wise men after the
flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called," (1 Cor. 1: 26;)
so far is God in the exercise of his favor from showing any respect
to persons.
    11. Wherefore, it is false and most wicked to charge God with
dispensing justice unequally, because in this predestination he does
not observe the same course towards all. If (say they) he finds all
guilty, let him punish all alike: if he finds them innocent, let him
relieve all from the severity of judgment. But they plead with God
as if he were either interdicted from showing mercy, or were
obliged, if he show mercy, entirely to renounce judgment. What is it
that they demand? That if all are guilty all shall receive the same
punishment. We admit that the guilt is common, but we say, that God
in mercy succors some. Let him (they say) succor all. We object,
that it is right for him to show by punishing that he is a just
judge. When they cannot tolerate this, what else are they attempting
than to deprive God of the power of showing mercy; or, at least, to
allow it to him only on the condition of altogether renouncing
judgment? Here the words of Augustine most admirably apply: "Since
in the first man the whole human race fell under condemnation, those
vessels which are made of it unto honor, are not vessels of
self-righteousness, but of divine mercy. When other vessels are made
unto dishonor, it must be imputed not to injustice, but to
judgment," (August. Epist. 106, De Praedest. et Gratia; De Bone
Persever., cap. 12.) Since God inflicts due punishment on those whom
he reprobates, and bestows unmerited favor on those whom he calls,
he is free from every accusation; just as it belongs to the creditor
to forgive the debt to one, and exact it of another. The Lord
therefore may show favor to whom he will, because he is merciful;
not show it to all, because he is a just judge. In giving to some
what they do not merit, he shows his free favor; in not giving to
all, he declares what all deserve. For when Paul says, "God has
concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all,"
it ought also to be added, that he is debtor to none; for "who has
first given to him and it shall be recompensed unto him again?"
(Rom. 11: 32, 33.)
    12. Another argument which they employ to overthrow
predestination is that if it stand, all care and study of well doing
must cease. For what man can hear (say they) that life and death are
fixed by an eternal and immutable decree of God, without immediately
concluding that it is of no consequence how he acts, since no work
of his can either hinder or further the predestination of God? Thus
all will rush on, and like desperate men plunge headlong wherever
lust inclines. And it is true that this is not altogether a fiction;
for there are multitudes of a swinish nature who defile the doctrine
of predestination by their profane blasphemies, and employ them as a
cloak to evade all admonition and censure. "God knows what he has
determined to do with regard to us: if he has decreed our salvation,
he will bring us to it in his own time; if he has doomed us to
death, it is vain for us to fight against it." But Scripture, while
it enjoins us to think of this high mystery with much greater
reverence and religion, gives very different instruction to the
pious, and justly condemns the accursed license of the ungodly. For
it does not remind us of predestination to increase our audacity,
and tempt us to pry with impious presumption into the inscrutable
counsels of God, but rather to humble and abase us, that we may
tremble at his judgment, and learn to look up to his mercy. This is
the mark at which believers will aim. The grunt of these filthy
swine is duly silenced by Paul. They say that they feel secure in
vices because, if they are of the number of the elect, their vices
will be no obstacle to the ultimate attainment of life. But Paul
reminds us that the end for which we are elected is, "that we should
be holy, and without blame before him," (Eph. 1: 4.) If the end of
election is holiness of life, it ought to arouse and stimulate us
strenuously to aspire to it, instead of serving as a pretext for
sloth. How wide the difference between the two things, between
ceasing from well-doing because election is sufficient for
salvation, and its being the very end of election, that we should
devote ourselves to the study of good works. Have done, then, with
blasphemies which wickedly invert the whole order of election. When
they extend their blasphemies farther, and say that he who is
reprobated by God will lose his pains if he studies to approve
himself to him by innocence and probity of life, they are convicted
of the most impudent falsehood. For whence can any such study arise
but from election? As all who are of the number of the reprobate are
vessels formed unto dishonor, so they cease not by their perpetual
crimes to provoke the anger of God against them, and give evident
signs of the judgment which God has already passed upon them; so far
is it from being true that they vainly contend against it.
    13. Another impudent and malicious calumny against this
doctrine is, that it destroys all exhortations to a pious life. The
great odium to which Augustine was at one time subjected on this
head he wiped away in his treatise De Correptione et Gratia, to
Valentinus, a perusal of which will easily satisfy the pious and
docile. Here, however, I may touch on a few points, which will, I
hope, be sufficient for those who are honest and not contentious. We
have already seen how plainly and audibly Paul preaches the doctrine
of free election: is he, therefore, cold in admonishing and
exhorting? Let those good zealots compare his vehemence with theirs
and they will find that they are ice, while he is all fervor. And
surely every doubt on this subject should be removed by the
principles which he lays down, that God has not called us to
uncleanness; that every one should possess his vessel in honor; that
we are the workmanship of God, "created in Christ Jesus unto good
works, which God has before ordained that we should walk in them,"
(1 Thess. 4: 4, 7; Eph. 2: 10.) In one word, those who have any
tolerable acquaintance with the writings of Paul will understand,
without a long demonstration, how well he reconciles the two things
which those men pretend to be contradictory to each other. Christ
commands us to believe in him, and yet there is nothing false or
contrary to this command in the statement which he afterwards makes:
"No man can come unto me, except it were given him of my Father,"
(John 6: 65.) Let preaching then have its free course, that it may
lead men to faith, and dispose them to persevere with uninterrupted
progress. Nor, at the same time, let there be any obstacle to the
knowledge of predestination, so that those who obey may not plume
themselves on anything of their own, but glory only in the Lord. It
is not without cause our Savior says, "Who has ears to hear, let him
hear," (Matth. 13: 9.) Therefore, while we exhort and preach, those
who have ears willingly obey: in those again, who have no ears is
fulfilled what is written: "Hear ye indeed, but understand not,"
(Isaiah 6: 9.) "But why (says Augustine) have some ears, and others
not? Who has known the mind of the Lord? Are we, therefore, to deny
what is plain because we cannot comprehend what is hid?" This is a
faithful quotation from Augustine; but because his words will
perhaps have more authority than mine, let us adduce the following
passage from his treatise, De Bone Persever., cap. 15.
    "Should some on hearing this turn to indolence and sloth, and
leaving off all exertion, rush headlong into lust, are we, therefore
to suppose that what has been said of the foreknowledge of God is
not true? If God foreknew that they would be good, will they not be
good, however great their present wickedness? and if God foreknow
that they would be wicked, will they not be wicked, how great soever
the goodness now seen in them? For reasons of this description, must
the truth which has been stated on the subject of divine
foreknowledge be denied or not mentioned? and more especially when,
if it is not stated, other errors will arise?" In the sixteenth
chapter he says, "The reason for not mentioning the truth is one
thing, the necessity for telling the truth is another. It were
tedious to inquire into all the reasons for silence. One, however,
is, lest those who understand not become worse, while we are
desirous to make those who understand better informed. Now such
persons, when we say anything of this kind, do not indeed become
better informed, but neither do they become worse. But when the
truth is of such a nature, that he who cannot comprehend it becomes
worse by our telling it, and he who can comprehend it becomes worse
by our not telling it, what think ye ought we to do? Are we not to
tell the truth, that he who can comprehend may comprehend, rather
than not tell it, and thereby not only prevent both from
comprehending, but also make the more intelligent of the two to
become worse, whereas if he heard and comprehended others might
learn through him? And we are unwilling to say what, on the
testimony of Scripture, it is lawful to say. For we fear lest, when
we speak, he who cannot comprehend may be offended; but we have no
fear lest while we are silent, he who can comprehend the truth be
involved in falsehood." In chapter twentieth, glancing again at the
same view, he more clearly confirms it. "Wherefore, if the apostles
and teachers of the Church who came after them did both; if they
discoursed piously of the eternal election of God, and at the same
time kept believers under the discipline of a pious life, how can
those men of our day, when shut up by the invincible force of truth,
think they are right in saying, that what is said of predestination,
though it is true, must not be preached to the people? Nay, it ought
indeed to be preached, that whoso has ears to hear may hear. And who
has ears if he has not received them from him who has promised to
give them? Certainly, let him who receives not, reject. Let him who
receives, take and drink, drink and live. For as piety is to be
preached, that God may be duly worshipped; so predestination also is
to be preached, that he who has ears to hear may, in regard to
divine grace, glory not in himself, but in God."
    14. And yet as that holy man had a singular desire to edify, he
so regulates his method of teaching as carefully, and as far as in
him lay, to avoid giving offense. For he reminds us, that those
things which are truly should also be fitly spoken. Were any one to
address the people thus: If you do not believe, the reason is,
because God has already doomed you to destruction: he would not only
encourage sloth, but also give countenance to wickedness. Were any
one to give utterance to the sentiment in the future tense, and say,
that those who hear will not believe because they are reprobates, it
were imprecation rather than doctrine. Wherefore, Augustine not
undeservedly orders such, as senseless teachers or minister and
ill-omened prophets, to retire from the Church. He, indeed,
elsewhere truly contends that "a man profits by correction only when
He who causes those whom He pleases to profit without correction,
pities and assists. But why is it thus with some, and differently
with others? Far be it from us to say that it belongs to the clay
and not to the potter to decide." He afterwards says, "When men by
correction either come or return to the way of righteousness, who is
it that works salvation in their hearts but he who gives the
increase, whoever it be that plants and waters? When he is pleased
to save, there is no free-will in man to resist. Wherefore, it
cannot be doubted that the will of God (who has done whatever he has
pleased in heaven and in earth, and who has even done things which
are to be) cannot be resisted by the human will, or prevented from
doing what he pleases, since with the very wills of men he does so."
Again, "When he would bring men to himself, does he bind them with
corporeal fetters? He acts inwardly, inwardly holds, inwardly moves
their hearts, and draws them by the will, which he has wrought in
them." What he immediately adds must not be omitted: "because we
know not who belongs to the number of the predestinated, or does not
belong, our desire ought to be that all may be saved; and hence
every person we meet, we will desire to be with us a partaker of
peace. But our peace will rest upon the sons of peace. Wherefore, on
our part, let correction be used as a harsh yet salutary medicine
for all, that they may neither perish, nor destroy others. To God it
will belong to make it available to those whom he has foreknown and
predestinated."

Chapter 24.

24. Election confirmed by the calling of God. The reprobate bring
upon themselves the righteous destruction to which they are doomed.

    The title of this chapter shows that it consists of two parts,
- I. The case of the Elect, from sec. 1-11. II. The case of the
Reprobate, from sec. 12-17.

Sections.

1. The election of God is secret, but is manifested by effectual
    calling. The nature of this effectual calling. How election and
    effectual calling are founded on the free mercy of God. A cavil
    of certain expositors refuted by the words of Augustine. An
    exception disposed of.
2. Calling proved to be free, 1. By its nature and the mode in which
    it is dispensed. 2. By the word of God. 3. By the calling of
    Abraham, the father of the faithful. 4. By the testimony of
    John. 5. By the example of those who have been called.
3. The pure doctrine of the calling of the elect misunderstood, 1.
    By those who attribute too much to the human will. 2. By those
    who make election dependent on faith. This error amply refuted.
4. In this and the five following sections the certainty of election
    vindicated from the assaults of Satan. The leading arguments
    are: 1. Effectual calling. 2. Christ apprehended by faith. 3.
    The protection of Christ, the guardian of the elect. We must
    not attempt to penetrate to the hidden recesses of the divine
    wisdom, in order to learn what is decreed with regard to us at
    the judgment-seat. We must begin and end with the call of God.
    This confirmed by an apposite saying of Bernard.
5. Christ the foundation of this calling and election. He who does
    not lean on him alone cannot be certain of his election. He is
    the faithful interpreter of the eternal counsel in regard to
    our salvation.
6. Another security of our election is the protection of Christ our
    Shepherd. How it is manifested to us. Objection 1. As to the
    future state. 2. As to perseverance. Both objections refuted.
7. Objection, that those who seem elected sometimes fall away.
    Answer. A passage of Paul dissuading us from security
    explained. The kind of fear required in the elect.
8. Explanation of the saying, that many are called, but few chosen.
    A twofold call.
9. Explanation of the passage, that none is lost but the son of
    perdition. Refutation of an objection to the certainty of
    election.
10. Explanation of the passages urged against the certainty of
    election. Examples by which some attempt to prove that the seed
    of election is sown in the hearts of the elect from their very
    birth. Answer. 1. One or two examples do not make the rule. 2.
    This view opposed to Scripture. 3. Is expressly opposed by an
    apostle.
11. An explanation and confirmation of the third answer.
12. Second part of the chapter, which treats of the reprobate. Some
    of them God deprives of the opportunity of hearing his word.
    Others he blinds and stupefies the more by the preaching of it.
13. Of this no other account can be given than that the reprobate
    are vessels fitted for destruction. This confirmed by the case
    of the elect; of Pharaoh and of the Jewish people both before
    and after the manifestation of Christ.
14. Question, Why does God blind the reprobate? Two answers. These
    confirmed by different passages of Scripture. Objection of the
    reprobate. Answer.
15. Objection to this doctrine of the righteous rejection of the
    reprobate. The first founded on a passage in Ezekiel. The
    passage explained.
16. A second objection founded on a passage in Paul. The apostle's
    meaning explained. A third objection and fourth objection
    answered.
17. A fifth objection, viz., that there seems to be a twofold will
    in God. Answer. Other objections and answers. Conclusion.

    1. But that the subject may be more fully illustrated, we must
treat both of the calling of the elect, and of the blinding and
hardening of the ungodly. The former I have already in some measure
discussed, (chap. 22, sec. 10, 11,) when refuting the error of those
who think that the general terms in which the promises are made
place the whole human race on a level. The special election which
otherwise would remain hidden in God, he at length manifests by his
calling. "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be
conformed to the image of his Son." Moreover, "whom he did
predestinate, them he also called; and whom he called, them he also
justified," that he may one day glorify, (Rom. 8: 29, 30.) Though
the Lord, by electing his people, adopted them as his sons, we,
however, see that they do not come into possession of this great
good until they are called; but when called, the enjoyment of their
election is in some measure communicated to them. For which reason
the Spirit which they receive is termed by Paul both the "Spirit of
adoption," and the "seal" and "earnest" of the future inheritance;
because by his testimony he confirms and seals the certainty of
future adoption on their hearts. For although the preaching of the
gospel springs from the fountain of election, yet being common to
them with the reprobate, it would not be in itself a solid proof.
God, however, teaches his elect effectually when he brings them to
faith, as we formerly quoted from the words of our Savior, "Not that
any man has seen the Father, save he which is of God, he has seen
the Father," (John 6: 46.) Again, "I have manifested thy name unto
the men which thou gavest me out of the world," (John 17: 6.) He
says in another passage, "No man can come to me, except the Father
which has sent me draw him," (John 6: 44.) This passage Augustine
ably expounds in these words: "If (as Truth says) every one who has
learned comes, then every one who does not come has not learned. It
does not therefore follows that he who can come does come, unless he
have willed and done it; but every one who has learned of the
Father, not only can come, but also comes; the antecedence of
possibility the affection of will, and the effect of action being
now present," (August. de Grat. Chr. Cont. Pelag., Lib. 1, c. 14,
31.) In another passage, he says still more clearly, "What means,
Every one that has heard and learned of the Father comes unto me,
but just that there is no one who hears and learns of the Father
that does not come to me? For if every one who has heard and
learned, comes; assuredly every one who does not come, has neither
heard nor learned of the Father: for if he had heard and learned, he
would come. Far removed from carnal sense is this school in which
the Father is heard and teaches us to come to the Son," (August. de
Praedes. Sanct. c. 8.) Shortly after, he says, "This grace, which is
secretly imparted to the hearts of men, is not received by any hard
heart; for the reason for which it is given is, that the hardness of
the heart may first be taken away. Hence, when the Father is heard
within, he takes away the stony heart, and gives a heart of flesh.
Thus he makes them sons of promise and vessels of mercy, which he
has prepared for glory. Why then does he not teach all to come to
Christ, but just because all whom he teaches he teaches in mercy,
while those whom he teaches not he teaches not in judgment? for he
pities whom he will, and hardens whom he will." Those, therefore,
whom God has chosen he adopts as sons, while he becomes to them a
Father. By calling, moreover, he admits them to his family, and
unites them to himself, that they may be one with him. When calling
is thus added to election, the Scripture plainly intimates that
nothing is to be looked for in it but the free mercy of God. For if
we ask whom it is he calls, and for what reason, he answers, it is
those whom he had chosen. When we come to election, mercy alone
everywhere appears; and, accordingly, in this the saying of Paul is
truly realized, "So then, it is not of him that willeth, nor of him
that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy," (Rom. 9: 16;) and that
not as is commonly understood by those who share the result between
the grace of God and the will and agency of man. For their
exposition is, that the desire and endeavor of sinners are of no
avail by themselves, unless accompanied by the grace of God, but
that when aided by his blessing, they also do their part in
procuring salvation. This cavil I prefer refuting in the words of
Augustine rather than my own: "If all that the apostle meant is,
that it is not alone of him that willeth, or of him that runneth,
unless the Lord be present in mercy, we may retort and hold the
converse, that it is not of mercy alone, unless willing and running
be present," (August. Enchir. ad Laurent., c. 31.) But if this is
manifestly impious, let us have no doubt that the apostle attributes
all to the mercy of the Lord, and leaves nothing to our wills or
exertions. Such were the sentiments of that holy man. I set not the
value of a straw on the subtlety to which they have recourse, viz.,
that Paul would not have spoken thus had there not been some will
and effort on our part. For he considered not what might be in man;
but seeing that certain persons ascribed a part of salvation to the
industry of man, he simply condemned their error in the former
clause, and then claimed the whole substance of salvation for the
divine mercy. And what else do the prophets than perpetually
proclaim the free calling of God?
    2. Moreover, this is clearly demonstrated by the nature and
dispensation of calling, which consists not merely of the preaching
of the word, but also of the illumination of the Spirit. Who those
are to whom God offers his word is explained by the prophet, "I am
sought of them that asked not for me: I am found of them that sought
me not: I said, Behold me, behold me, unto a nation that was not
called by my name," (Isaiah 65: 1.) And lest the Jews should think
that that mercy applied only to the Gentiles, he calls to their
remembrance whence it was he took their father Abraham when he
condescended to be his friend, (Isaiah 41: 8;) namely, from the
midst of idolatry, in which he was plunged with all his people. When
he first shines with the light of his word on the undeserving, he
gives a sufficiently clear proof of his free goodness. Here,
therefore, boundless goodness is displayed, but not so as to bring
all to salvation, since a heavier judgment awaits the reprobate for
rejecting the evidence of his love. God also, to display his own
glory, withholds from them the effectual agency of his Spirit.
Therefore, this inward calling is an infallible pledge of salvation.
Hence the words of John, "Hereby we know that he abideth in us by
the Spirit which he has given us," (1 John 3: 24.) And lest the
flesh should glory, in at least responding to him, when he calls and
spontaneously offers himself, he affirms that there would be no ears
to hear, no eyes to see, did not he give them. And he acts not
according to the gratitude of each, but according to his election.
Of this you have a striking example in Luke, when the Jews and
Gentiles in common heard the discourse of Paul and Barnabas. Though
they were all instructed in the same word, it is said, that "as many
as were ordained to eternal life believed," (Acts 13: 48.) How can
we deny that calling is gratuitous, when election alone reigns in it
even to its conclusion?
    3. Two errors are here to be avoided. Some make man a
fellow-worker with God in such a sense, that man's suffrage ratifies
election, so that, according to them, the will of man is superior to
the counsel of God. As if Scripture taught that only the power of
being able to believe is given us, and not rather faith itself.
Others, although they do not so much impair the grace of the Holy
Spirit, yet, induced by what means I know not, make election
dependent on faith, as if it were doubtful and ineffectual till
confirmed by faith. There can be no doubt, indeed, that in regard to
us it is so confirmed. Moreover, we have already seen, that the
secret counsel of God, which lay concealed, is thus brought to
light, by this nothing more being understood than that that which
was unknown is proved, and as it were sealed. But it is false to say
that election is then only effectual after we have embraced the
gospel, and that it thence derives its vigor. It is true that we
must there look for its certainty, because, if we attempt to
penetrate to the secret ordination of God, we shall be engulfed in
that profound abyss. But when the Lord has manifested it to us, we
must ascend higher in order that the effect may not bury the cause.
For what can be more absurd and unbecoming, than while Scripture
teaches that we are illuminated as God has chosen us, our eyes
should be so dazzled with the brightness of this light, as to refuse
to attend to election? Meanwhile, I deny not that, in order to be
assured of our salvation, we must begin with the word, and that our
confidence ought to go no farther than the word when we invoke God
the Father. For some to obtain more certainty of the counsel of God,
(which is nigh us in our mouth, and in our heart, Deut. 30: 14,)
absurdly desire to fly above the clouds. We must, therefore, curb
that temerity by the soberness of faith, and be satisfied to have
God as the witness of his hidden grace in the external word;
provided always that the channel in which the water flows, and out
of which we may freely drink, does not prevent us from paying due
honor to the fountain.
    4. Therefore as those are in error who make the power of
election dependent on the faith by which we perceive that we are
elected, so we shall follow the best order, if, in seeking the
certainty of our election, we cleave to those posterior signs which
are sure attestations to it. Among the temptations with which Satan
assaults believers, none is greater or more perilous, than when
disquieting them with doubts as to their election, he at the same
time stimulates them with a depraved desire of inquiring after it
out of the proper way. (See Luther in Genes. cap. 26.) By inquiring
out of the proper way, I mean when puny man endeavors to penetrate
to the hidden recesses of the divine wisdom, and goes back even to
the remotest eternity, in order that he may understand what final
determination God has made with regard to him. In this way he
plunges headlong into an immense abyss, involves himself in
numberless inextricable snares, and buries himself in the thickest
darkness. For it is right that the stupidity of the human mind
should be punished with fearful destruction, whenever it attempts to
rise in its own strength to the height of divine wisdom. And this
temptation is the more fatal, that it is the temptation to which of
all others almost all of us are most prone. For there is scarcely a
mind in which the thought does not sometimes rise, Whence your
salvation but from the election of God? But what proof have you of
your election? When once this thought has taken possession of any
individual, it keeps him perpetually miserable, subjects him to dire
torment, or throws him into a state of complete stupor. I cannot
wish a stronger proof of the depraved ideas, which men of this
description form of predestination, than experience itself
furnishes, since the mind cannot be infected by a more pestilential
error than that which disturbs the conscience, and deprives it of
peace and tranquillity in regard to God. Therefore, as we dread
shipwreck, we must avoid this rock, which is fatal to every one who
strikes upon it. And though the discussion of predestination is
regarded as a perilous sea, yet in sailing over it the navigation is
calm and safe, nay pleasant, provided we do not voluntarily court
danger. For as a fatal abyss engulfs those who, to be assured of
their election, pry into the eternal counsel of God without the
word, yet those who investigate it rightly, and in the order in
which it is exhibited in the word, reap from it rich fruits of
consolation.
    Let our method of inquiry then be, to begin with the calling of
God and to end with it. Although there is nothing in this to prevent
believers from feeling that the blessings which they daily receive
from the hand of God originate in that secret adoption, as they
themselves express it in Isaiah, "Thou hast done wonderful things;
thy counsels of old are faithfulness and truth," (Isa. 25: 1.) For
with this as a pledge, God is pleased to assure us of as much of his
counsel as can be lawfully known. But lest any should think that
testimony weak, let us consider what clearness and certainty it
gives us. On this subject there is an apposite passage in Bernard.
After speaking of the reprobate, he says, "The purpose of God
stands, the sentence of peace on those that fear him also stands, a
sentence concealing their bad and recompensing their good qualities;
so that, in a wondrous manner, not only their good but their bad
qualities work together for good. Who will lay any thing to the
charge of God's elect? It is completely sufficient for my
justification to have him propitious against whom only I have
sinned. Every thing which he has decreed not to impute to me, is as
if it had never been." A little after he says, "O the place of true
rest, a place which I consider not unworthy of the name of
inner-chamber, where God is seen, not as if disturbed with anger, or
distracted by care, but where his will is proved to be good, and
acceptable, and perfect. That vision does not terrify but soothe,
does not excite restless curiosity but calms it, does not fatigue
but tranquilizes the senses. Here is true rest. A tranquil God
tranquilizes all things; and to see him at rest, is to be at rest,"
(Bernard, super Cantic. Serm. 14.)
    5. First, if we seek for the paternal mercy and favor of God,
we must turn our eyes to Christ, in whom alone the Father is well
pleased, (Matth. 3: 17.) When we seek for salvation, life, and a
blessed immortality, to him also must we retake ourselves, since he
alone is the fountain of life and the anchor of salvation, and the
heir of the kingdom of heaven. Then what is the end of election, but
just that, being adopted as sons by the heavenly Father, we may by
his favor obtain salvation and immortality? How much soever you may
speculate and discuss you will perceive that in its ultimate object
it goes no farther. Hence, those whom God has adopted as sons, he is
said to have elected, not in themselves, but in Christ Jesus, (Eph.
1: 4;) because he could love them only in him, and only as being
previously made partakers with him, honor them with the inheritance
of his kingdom. But if we are elected in him, we cannot find the
certainty of our election in ourselves; and not even in God the
Father, if we look at him apart from the Son. Christ, then, is the
mirror in which we ought, and in which, without deception, we may
contemplate our election. For since it is into his body that the
Father has decreed to ingraft those whom from eternity he wished to
be his, that he may regard as sons all whom he acknowledges to be
his members, if we are in communion with Christ, we have proof
sufficiently clear and strong that we are written in the Book of
Life. Moreover, he admitted us to sure communion with himself, when,
by the preaching of the gospel, he declared that he was given us by
the Father, to be ours with all his blessings,(Rom. 8: 32.) We are
said to be clothed with him, to be one with him, that we may live,
because he himself lives. The doctrine is often repeated, "God so
loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever
believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life,"
(John 3: 16.) He who believes in him is said to have passed from
death unto life, (John 5: 24.) In this sense he calls himself the
bread of life, of which if a man eat, he shall never die, (John 6:
35.) He, I say, was our witness, that all by whom he is received in
faith will be regarded by our heavenly Father as sons. If we long
for more than to be regarded as sons of God and heirs, we must
ascend above Christ. But if this is our final goal, how infatuated
is it to seek out of him what we have already obtained in him, and
can only find in him? Besides, as he is the Eternal Wisdom, the
Immutable Truth, the Determinate Counsel of the Father, there is no
room for fear that any thing which he tells us will vary in the
minutes degree from that will of the Father after which we inquire.
Nay, rather he faithfully discloses it to us as it was from the
beginning, and always will be. The practical influence of this
doctrine ought also to be exhibited in our prayers. For though a
belief of our election animates us to involve God, yet when we frame
our prayers, it were preposterous to obtrude it upon God, or to
stipulate in this way, "O Lord, if I am elected, hear me." He would
have us to rest satisfied with his promises, and not to inquire
elsewhere whether or not he is disposed to hear us. We shall thus be
disentangled from many snares, if we know how to make a right use of
what is rightly written; but let us not inconsiderately wrest it to
purposes different from that to which it ought to be confined.
    6. Another confirmation tending to establish our confidence is,
that our election is connected with our calling. For those whom
Christ enlightens with the knowledge of his name, and admits into
the bosom of his Church, he is said to take under his guardianship
and protection. All whom he thus receives are said to be committed
and entrusted to him by the Father, that they may be kept unto life
eternal. What would we have? Christ proclaims aloud that all whom
the Father is pleased to save he has delivered into his protection,
(John 6: 37-39, 17: 6, 12.) Therefore, if we would know whether God
cares for our salvation, let us ask whether he has committed us to
Christ, whom he has appointed to be the only Savior of all his
people. Then, if we doubt whether we are received into the
protection of Christ, he obviates the doubt when he spontaneously
offers himself as our Shepherd, and declares that we are of the
number of his sheep if we hear his voice, (John 10: 3, 16.) Let us,
therefore, embrace Christ, who is kindly offered to us, and comes
forth to meet us: he will number us among his flock, and keep us
within his fold. But anxiety arises as to our future state. For as
Paul teaches, that those are called who were previously elected, so
our Savior shows that many are called, but few chosen, (Matth. 22:
14.) Nay, even Paul himself dissuades us from security, when he
says, "Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall," (1
Cor. 10: 12.) And again, "Well, because of unbelief they were broken
off, and thou standest by faith. Be not high-minded, but fear: for
if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare
not thee," (Rom. 11: 20, 21.) In fine, we are sufficiently taught by
experience itself, that calling and faith are of little value
without perseverance, which, however, is not the gift of all. But
Christ has freed us from anxiety on this head; for the following
promises undoubtedly have respect to the future: "All that the
Father giveth me shall come to me, and him that comes to me I will
in no wise cast out." Again, "This is the will of him that sent me,
that of all which he has given me I should lose nothing; but should
raise it up at the last day," (John 6: 37, 39.) Again "My sheep hear
my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: and I give unto them
eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any man
pluck them out of my hand. My Father which gave them me is greater
than all: and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand,"
(John 10: 27, 28.) Again when he declares, Every plant which my
heavenly Father has not planted shall be rooted up," (Matth. 15:
13,) he intimates conversely that those who have their root in God
can never be deprived of their salvation. Agreeable to this are the
words of John, "If they had been of us, they would no doubt have
continued with us," (1 John 2: 19.) Hence, also, the magnificent
triumph of Paul over life and death, things present, and things to
come, (Rom. 8: 38.) This must be founded on the gift of
perseverance. There is no doubt that he employs the sentiment as
applicable to all the elect. Paul elsewhere says, "Being confident
of this very thing, that he who has begun a good work in you will
perform it until the day of Jesus Christ," (Phil. 1: 6.) David,
also, when his faith threatened to fail, leant on this support,
"Forsake not the works of thy hands." Moreover, it cannot be
doubted, that since Christ prays for all the elect, he asks the same
thing for them as he asked for Peter, viz., that their faith fail
not, (Luke 22: 32.) Hence we infer, that there is no danger of their
falling away, since the Son of God, who asks that their piety may
prove constant, never meets with a refusal. What then did our Savior
intend to teach us by this prayer, but just to confide, that
whenever we are his our eternal salvation is secure?
    7. But it daily happens that those who seemed to belong to
Christ revolt from him and fall away: Nay, in the very passage where
he declares that none of those whom the Father has given to him have
perished, he excepts the son of perdition. This, indeed, is true;
but it is equally true that such persons never adhered to Christ
with that heartfelt confidence by which I say that the certainty of
our election is established: "They went out from us," says John,
"but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would, no
doubt, have continued with us," (1 John 2: 19.) I deny not that they
have signs of calling similar to those given to the elect; but I do
not at all admit that they have that sure confirmation of election
which I desire believers to seek from the word of the gospel.
Wherefore, let not examples of this kind move us away from tranquil
confidence in the promise of the Lord, when he declares that all by
whom he is received in true faith have been given him by the Father,
and that none of them, while he is their Guardian and Shepherd, will
perish, (John 3: 16; 6: 39.) Of Judas we shall shortly speak, (sec.
9.) Paul does not dissuade Christians from security simply, but from
careless, carnal security, which is accompanied with pride,
arrogance, and contempt of others, which extinguishes humility and
reverence for God, and produces a forgetfulness of grace received,
(Rom. 11: 20.) For he is addressing the Gentiles, and showing them
that they ought not to exult proudly and cruelly over the Jews, in
consequence of whose rejection they had been substituted in their
stead. He also enjoins fear, not a fear under which they may waver
in alarm, but a fear which, teaching us to receive the grace of God
in humility, does not impair our confidence in it, as has elsewhere
been said. We may add, that he is not speaking to individuals, but
to sects in general, (see 1 Cor. 10: 12.) The Church having been
divided into two parties, and rivalship producing dissension, Paul
reminds the Gentiles that their having been substituted in the place
of a peculiar and holy people was a reason for modesty and fear. For
there were many vain-glorious persons among them, whose empty
boasting it was expedient to repress. But we have elsewhere seen,
that our hope extends into the future, even beyond death, and that
nothing is more contrary to its nature than to be in doubt as to our
future destiny.
    8. The expression of our Savior, "Many are called, but few are
chosen," (Matth. 22: 14,) is also very improperly interpreted, (see
Book 3, chap. 2, sec. 11, 12.) There will be no ambiguity in it, if
we attend to what our former remarks ought to have made clear, viz.,
that there are two species of calling: for there is an universal
call, by which God, through the external preaching of the word,
invites all men alike, even those for whom he designs the call to be
a savor of death, and the ground of a severer condemnation. Besides
this there is a special call which, for the most part, God bestows
on believers only, when by the internal illumination of the Spirit
he causes the word preached to take deep root in their hearts.
Sometimes, however, he communicates it also to those whom he
enlightens only for a time, and whom afterwards, in just punishment
for their ingratitude, he abandons and smites with greater
blindness. Now, our Lord seeing that the gospel was published far
and wide, was despised by multitudes, and justly valued by few,
describes God under the character of a King, who, preparing a great
feast, sends his servants all around to invite a great multitude,
but can only obtain the presence of a very few, because almost all
allege causes of excuse; at length, in consequence of their refusal,
he is obliged to send his servants out into the highways to invite
every one they meet. It is perfectly clear, that thus far the
parable is to be understood of external calling. He afterwards adds,
that God acts the part of a kind entertainer, who goes round his
table and affably receives his guests; but still if he finds any one
not adorned with the nuptial garment, he will by no means allow him
to insult the festivity by his sordid dress. I admit that this
branch of the parable is to be understood of those who, by a
profession of faith, enter the Church, but are not at all invested
with the sanctification of Christ. Such disgraces to his Church,
such cankers God will not always tolerate, but will cast them forth
as their turpitude deserves. Few, then, out of the great number of
called are chosen; the calling, however, not being of that kind
which enables believers to judge of their election. The former call
is common to the wicked, the latter brings with it the spirit of
regeneration, which is the earnest and seal of the future
inheritance by which our hearts are sealed unto the day of the Lord,
(Eph. 1: 13, 14.) In one word, while hypocrites pretend to piety,
just as if they were true worshipers of God, Christ declares that
they will ultimately be ejected from the place which they improperly
occupy, as it is said in the psalm, "Lord, who shall abide in thy
tabernacle? who shall dwell in thy holy hill? He that walketh
uprightly, and worketh righteousness, and speaketh the truth in his
heart," (Psalm 15: 1, 2.) Again in another passage, "This is the
generation of them that seek him, that seek thy face, O Jacob,"
(Psalm 24: 6.) And thus the Spirit exhorts believers to patience,
and not to murmur because Ishmaelites are mingled with them in the
Church since the mask will at length be torn off, and they will be
ejected with disgrace.
    9. The same account is to be given of the passage lately
quoted, in which Christ says, that none is lost but the son of
perdition, (John 17: 12.) The expression is not strictly proper; but
it is by no means obscure: for Judas was not numbered among the
sheep of Christ, because he was one truly, but because he held a
place among them. Then, in another passage, where the Lord says,
that he was elected with the apostles, reference is made only to the
office, "Have I not chosen you twelve," says he, "and one of you is
a devil?" (John 6: 70.) That is, he had chosen him to the office of
apostle. But when he speaks of election to salvation, he altogether
excludes him from the number of the elect, "I speak not of you all:
I know whom I have chosen," (John 13: 18.) Should any one confound
the term elect in the two passages, he will miserably entangle
himself; whereas if he distinguish between them, nothing can be
plainer. Gregory, therefore, is most grievously and perniciously in
error; when he says that we are conscious only of our calling, but
are uncertain of our election; and hence he exhorts all to fear and
trembling, giving this as the reason, that though we know what we
are to-day, yet we know not what we are to be, (Gregor. Hom. 38.)
But in that passage he clearly shows how he stumbled on that stone.
By suspending election on the merit of works, he had too good a
reason for dispiriting the minds of his readers, while, at the same
time, as he did not lead them away from themselves to confidence in
the divine goodness, he was unable to confirm them. Hence believers
may in some measure perceive the truth of what we said at the
outset, viz., predestination duly considered does not shake faith,
but rather affords the best confirmation of it. I deny not, however,
that the Spirit sometimes accommodates his language to our feeble
capacity; as when he says, "They shall not be in the assembly of my
people, neither shall they be written in the writing of the house of
Israel," (Ezek. 13: 9.) As if God were beginning to write the names
of those whom he counts among his people in the Book of Life;
whereas we know, even on the testimony of Christ, that the names of
the children of God were written in the Book of Life from the
beginning, (Luke 10: 20.) The words simply indicate the abandonment
of those who seemed to have a chief place among the elect, as is
said in the psalm, "Let them be blotted out of the Book of the
Living, and not be written with the righteous," (Psalm 69: 28.)
    10. For the elect are brought by calling into the fold of
Christ, not from the very womb, nor all at the same time, but
according as God sees it meet to dispense his grace. Before they are
gathered to the supreme Shepherd they wander dispersed in a common
desert, and in no respect differ from others, except that by the
special mercy of God they are kept from rushing to final
destruction. Therefore, if you look to themselves, you will see the
offspring of Adam giving token of the common corruption of the mass.
That they proceed not to extreme and desperate impiety is not owing
to any innate goodness in them, but because the eye of God watches
for their safety, and his hand is stretched over them. Those who
dream of some seed of election implanted in their hearts from their
birth, by the agency of which they are ever inclined to piety and
the fear of God, are not supported by the authority of Scripture,
but refuted by experience. They, indeed, produce a few examples to
prove that the elect before they were enlightened were not aliens
from religion; for instance, that Paul led an unblemished life
during his Pharisaism, that Cornelius was accepted for his prayers
and alms, and so forth, (Phil. 3: 5; Acts 10: 2.) The case of Paul
we admit, but we hold that they are in error as to Cornelius; for it
appears that he was already enlightened and regenerated, so that all
which he wanted was a clear revelation of the Gospel. But what are
they to extract from these few examples? Is it that all the elect
were always endued with the spirit of piety? Just as well might any
one, after pointing to the integrity of Aristides, Socrates,
Xenocrates, Scipio, Curios, Camillus, and others, (see Book 2, c. 4,
sec. 4,) infer that all who are left in the blindness of idolatry
are studious of virtue and holiness. Nay, even Scripture is plainly
opposed to them in more passages than one. The description which
Paul gives of the state of the Ephesians before regeneration shows
not one grain of this seed. His words are, "You has he quickened,
who were dead in trespasses and sins; wherein in time past ye walked
according to the course of this world, according to the prince of
the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of
disobedience: among whom also we all had our conversation in times
past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh
and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as
others," (Eph. 2: 1-3.) And again, "At that time ye were without
Christ," "having no hope, and without God in the world," (Eph. 2:
12.) Again, "Ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the
Lord: walk as children of light," (Eph. 5: 8.) But perhaps they will
insist that in this last passage reference is made to that ignorance
of the true God, in which they deny not that the elect lived before
they were called. Though this is grossly inconsistent with the
Apostle's inference, that they were no longer to lie or steal, (Eph.
4: 28.) What answer will they give to other passages; such as that
in which, after declaring to the Corinthians that "neither
fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor
abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor
drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom
of God," he immediately adds, "Such were some of you: but ye are
washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of
the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God"? (1 Cor. 6: 9-11.)
Again he says to the Romans, "As ye have yielded your members
servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now
yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness. For when
ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. What
fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed?" (Rom.
6: 19-21.)
    11. Say, then, what seed of election germinated in those who,
contaminated in various ways during their whole lives, indulged as
with desperate wickedness in every kind of abomination? Had Paul
meant to express this view, he ought to have shown how much they
then owed to the kindness of God, by which they had been preserved
from falling into such pollution. Thus, too, Peter ought to have
exhorted his countrymen to gratitude for a perpetual seed of
election. On the contrary, his admonition is, "The time past of our
life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles," (1
Pet. 4: 3.) What if we come to examples? Was there any germ of
righteousness in Rahab the harlot before she believed? (Josh. 2: 4;)
in Manasseh when Jerusalem was dyed and almost deluged with the
blood of the prophets? (2 Kings 23: 16;) in the thief who only with
his last breath thought of repentance? (Luke 23: 42.) Have done,
then, with those arguments which curious men of themselves rashly
devise without any authority from Scripture. But let us hold fast
what Scripture states viz., that "All we like sheep have gone
astray, we have turned every one to his own way," (Isa. 53: 6;) that
is to perdition. In this gulf of perdition God leaves those whom he
has determined one day to deliver until his own time arrive; he only
preserves them from plunging into irremediable blasphemy.
    12. As the Lord by the efficacy of his calling accomplishes
towards his elect the salvation to which he had by his eternal
counsel destined them, so he has judgments against the reprobate, by
which he executes his counsel concerning them. Those, therefore,
whom he has created for dishonor during life and destruction at
death, that they may be vessels of wrath and examples of severity,
in bringing to their doom, he at one time deprives of the means of
hearing his word, at another by the preaching of it blinds and
stupefies them the more. The examples of the former case are
innumerable, but let us select one of the most remarkable of all.
Before the advent of Christ, about four thousand years passed away,
during which he hid the light of saving doctrine from all nations.
If any one answer, that he did not put them in possession of the
great blessing, because he judged them unworthy, then their
posterity will be in no respect more worthy. Of this in addition to
experience, Malachi is a sufficient witness; for while charging them
with mixed unbelief and blasphemy, he yet declares that the Redeemer
will come. Why then is he given to the latter rather than to the
former? They will in vain torment themselves in seeking for a deeper
cause than the secret and inscrutable counsel of God. And there is
no occasion to fear lest some disciple of Porphyry with impunity
arraign the justice of God, while we say nothing in its defense. For
while we maintain that none perish without deserving it, and that it
is owing to the free goodness of God that some are delivered, enough
has been said for the display of his glory; there is not the least
occasion for our caviling. The supreme Disposer then makes way for
his own predestination, when depriving those whom he has reprobated
of the communication of his light, he leaves them in blindness.
Every day furnishes instances of the latter case, and many of them
are set before us in Scripture. Among a hundred to whom the same
discourse is delivered, twenty, perhaps, receive it with the prompt
obedience of faith; the others set no value upon it, or deride, or
spurn, or abominate it. If it is said that this diversity is owing
to the malice and perversity of the latter, the answer is not
satisfactory: for the same wickedness would possess the minds of the
former, did not God in his goodness correct it. And hence we will
always be entangled until we call in the aid of Paul's question,
"Who maketh thee to differ?" (1 Cor. 4: 7,) intimating that some
excel others, not by their own virtue, but by the mere favour of
God.
    13. Why, then, while bestowing grace on the one, does he pass
by the other? In regard to the former, Luke gives the reason,
Because they "were ordained to eternal life," (Acts 13: 48.) What,
then, shall we think of the latter, but that they are vessels of
wrath unto dishonor? Wherefore, let us not decline to say with
Augustine, "God could change the will of the wicked into good,
because he is omnipotent. Clearly he could. Why, then, does he not
do it? Because he is unwilling. Why he is unwilling remains with
himself," (August. de Genes. ad Lit. Lib. 2.) We should not attempt
to be wise above what is meet, and it is much better to take
Augustine's explanation, than to quibble with Chrysostom, "that he
draws him who is willing, and stretching forth his hand," (Chrysost.
Hom. de Convers. Pauli,) lest the difference should seem to lie in
the judgment of God, and not in the mere will of man. So far is it,
indeed, from being placed in the mere will of man, that we may add,
that even the pious, and those who fear God, need this special
inspiration of the Spirit. Lydia, a seller of purple, feared God,
and yet it was necessary that her heart should be opened, that she
might attend to the doctrine of Paul, and profit in it, (Acts 16:
14.) This was not said of one woman only but to teach us that all
progress in piety is the secret work of the Spirit. Nor can it be
questioned, that God sends his word to many whose blindness he is
pleased to aggravate. For why does he order so many messages to be
taken to Pharaoh? Was it because he hoped that he might be softened
by the repetition? Nay, before he began he both knew and had
foretold the result: "The Lord said unto Moses, When thou goest to
return into Egypt see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh,
which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he
will not let the people go," (Exod. 4: 21.) So when he raises up
Ezekiel, he forewarns him, "I send thee to the children of Israel,
to a rebellious nation that has rebelled against me." "Be not afraid
of their words." "Thou dwellest in the midst of a rebellious house,
which has eyes to see, and see not; they have ears to hear, and hear
not," (Ezek. 2: 3, 6; 12: 2.) Thus he foretells to Jeremiah that the
effect of his doctrine would be, "to root out, and pull down, and to
destroy," (Jer. 1: 10.) But the prophecy of Isaiah presses still
more closely; for he is thus commissioned by the Lord, "Go and tell
this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not, and see ye indeed
but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and make their
ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and
hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert
and be healed," (Isa. 6: 9,10.) Here he directs his voice to them,
but it is that they may turn a deafer ear; he kindles a light, but
it is that they may become more blind; he produces a doctrine, but
it is that they may be more stupid; he employs a remedy, but it is
that they may not be cured. And John, referring to this prophecy,
declares that the Jews could not believe the doctrine of Christ,
because this curse from God lay upon them. It is also
incontrovertible, that to those whom God is not pleased to illumine,
he delivers his doctrine wrapt up in enigmas, so that they may not
profit by it, but be given over to greater blindness. Hence our
Savior declares that the parables in which he had spoken to the
multitude he expounded to the Apostles only, "because it is given
unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them
it is not given," (Matth. 13: 1l.) What, you will ask, does our Lord
mean, by teaching those by whom he is careful not to be understood?
Consider where the fault lies, and then cease to ask. How obscure
soever the word may be, there is always sufficient light in it to
convince the consciences of the ungodly.
    14. It now remains to see why the Lord acts in the manner in
which it is plain that he does. If the answer be given, that it is
because men deserve this by their impiety, wickedness, and
ingratitude, it is indeed well and truly said; but still, because it
does not yet appear what the cause of the difference is, why some
are turned to obedience, and others remain obdurate we must, in
discussing it, pass to the passage from Moses, on which Paul has
commented, namely, "Even for this same purpose have I raised thee
up, that I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be
declared throughout all the earth," (Rom. 9: 17.) The refusal of the
reprobate to obey the word of God when manifested to them, will be
properly ascribed to the malice and depravity of their hearts,
provided it be at the same time added that they were adjudged to
this depravity, because they were raised up by the just but
inscrutable judgment of God, to show forth his glory by their
condemnation. In like manner, when it is said of the sons of Eli,
that they would not listen to salutary admonitions "because the Lord
would slay them," (1 Sam. 2: 25,) it is not denied that their
stubbornness was the result of their own iniquity; but it is at the
same time stated why they were left to their stubbornness, when the
Lord might have softened their hearts: namely, because his immutable
decree had once for all doomed them to destruction. Hence the words
of John, "Though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they
believed not on him; that the saying of Esaias the prophet might be
fulfilled which he spake, Lord, who has believed our report?" (John
12: 37, 38;) for though he does not exculpate their perverseness, he
is satisfied with the reason that the grace of God is insipid to
men, until the Holy Spirit gives it its savor. And Christ, in
quoting the prophecy of Isaiah, "They shall be all taught of God,"
(John 6: 45,) designs only to show that the Jews were reprobates and
aliens from the Church, because they would not be taught: and gives
no other reason than that the promise of God does not belong to
them. Confirmatory of this are the words of Paul, "Christ crucified"
was "unto the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the Greeks
foolishness; but unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks,
Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God," (1 Cor. 1: 23.) For
after mentioning the usual result wherever the gospel is preached,
that it exasperates some, and is despised by others, he says, that
it is precious to them only who are called. A little before he had
given them the name of believers, but he was unwilling to refuse the
proper rank to divine grace, which precedes faith; or rather, he
added the second term by way of correction, that those who had
embraced the gospel might ascribe the merit of their faith to the
calling of God. Thus, also, he shortly after shows that they were
elected by God. When the wicked hear these things, they complain
that God abuses his inordinate power; to make cruel sport with the
miseries of his creatures. But let us, who know that all men are
liable on so many grounds to the judgment of God, that they cannot
answer for one in a thousand of their transgressions, (Job 9: 3,)
confess that the reprobate suffer nothing which is not accordant
with the most perfect justice. When unable clearly to ascertain the
reason, let us not decline to be somewhat in ignorance in regard to
the depths of the divine wisdom.
    15. But since an objection is often founded on a few passages
of Scripture, in which God seems to deny that the wicked perish
through his ordination, except in so far as they spontaneously bring
death upon themselves in opposition to his warning, let us briefly
explain these passages, and demonstrate that they are not adverse to
the above view. One of the passages adduced is, "have I any pleasure
at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord God; and not that
he should return from his ways and live?" (Ezek. 18: 23.) If we are
to extend this to the whole human race, why are not the very many
whose minds might be more easily bent to obey urged to repentance,
rather than those who by his invitations become daily more and more
hardened? Our Lord declares that the preaching of the gospel and
miracles would have produced more fruit among the people of Nineveh
and Sodom than in Judea, (Matth. 13: 23.) How comes its then, that
if God would have all to be saved he does not open a door of
repentance for the wretched, who would more readily have received
grace? Hence we may see that the passage is violently wrested, if
the will of God, which the prophet mentions, is opposed to his
eternal counsel, by which he separated the elect from the reprobate.
Now, if the genuine meaning of the prophet is inquired into, it will
be found that he only means to give the hope of pardon to them who
repent. The sum is, that God is undoubtedly ready to pardon whenever
the sinner turns. Therefore, he does not will his death, in so far
as he wills repentance. But experience shows that this will, for the
repentance of those whom he invites to himself, is not such as to
make him touch all their hearts. Still, it cannot be said that he
acts deceitfully; for though the external word only renders, those
who hear its and do not obey it, inexcusable, it is still truly
regarded as an evidence of the grace by which he reconciles men to
himself. Let us therefore hold the doctrine of the prophet, that God
has no pleasure in the death of the sinner; that the godly may feel
confident that whenever they repent God is ready to pardon them; and
that the wicked may feel that their guilt is doubled, when they
respond not to the great mercy and condescension of God. The mercy
of God, therefore will ever be ready to meet the penitent; but all
the prophets, and apostles, and Ezekiel himself, clearly tell us who
they are to whom repentance is given.
    16. The second passage adduced is that in which Paul says that
"God will have all men to be saved," (1 Tim. 2: 4.) Though the
reason here differs from the former, they have somewhat in common. I
answer, first, That the mode in which God thus wills is plain from
the context; for Paul connects two things, a will to be saved, and
to come to the knowledge of the truth. If by this they will have it
to be fixed by the eternal counsel of God that they are to receive
the doctrine of salvation, what is meant by Moses in these words,
"What nation is there so great, who has God so nigh unto them?"
(Deut. 4: 7.) How comes it that many nations are deprived of that
light of the Gospel which others enjoy? How comes it that the pure
knowledge of the doctrine of godliness has never reached some, and
others have scarcely tasted some obscure rudiments of it? It will
now be easy to extract the purport of Paul's statement. He had
commanded Timothy that prayers should be regularly offered up in the
church for kings and princes; but as it seemed somewhat absurd that
prayer should be offered up for a class of men who were almost
hopeless, (all of them being not only aliens from the body of
Christ, but doing their utmost to overthrow his kingdom,) he adds,
that it was acceptable to God, who will have all men to be saved. By
this he assuredly means nothing more than that the way of salvation
was not shut against any order of men; that, on the contrary, he had
manifested his mercy in such a way, that he would have none debarred
from it. Other passages do not declare what God has, in his secret
judgment, determined with regard to all, but declare that pardon is
prepared for all sinners who only turn to seek after it. For if they
persist in urging the words, "God has concluded all in unbelief,
that he might have mercy upon all," (Rom. 11: 32,) I will, on the
contrary, urge what is elsewhere written, "Our God is in the
heavens: he has done whatsoever he has pleased," (Ps. 115: 3.) we
must, therefore, expound the passage so as to reconcile it with
another, I "will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will
show mercy on whom I will show mercy," (Exod. 33: 19.) He who
selects those whom he is to visit in mercy does not impart it to
all. But since it clearly appears that he is there speaking not of
individuals, but of orders of men, let us have done with a longer
discussion. At the same time, we ought to observe, that Paul does
not assert what God does always, everywhere, and in all
circumstances, but leaves it free to him to make kings and
magistrates partakers of heavenly doctrine, though in their
blindness they rage against it. A stronger objection seems to be
founded on the passage in Peter; the Lord is "not willing that any
should perish, but that all should come to repentance," (2 Pet. 3:
9.) But the solution of the difficulty is to be found in the second
branch of the sentence, for his will that they should come to
repentance cannot be used in any other sense than that which is
uniformly employed. Conversion is undoubtedly in the hand of God,
whether he designs to convert all can be learned from himself, when
he promises that he will give some a heart of flesh, and leave to
others a heart of stone, (Ezek. 36: 26.) It is true, that if he were
not disposed to receive those who implore his mercy, it could not
have been said, "Turn ye unto me, saith the Lord of Hosts, and I
will turn unto you, saith the Lord of Hosts," (Zech. 1: 3;) but I
hold that no man approaches God unless previously influenced from
above. And if repentance were placed at the will of man, Paul would
not say, "If God per adventure will give them repentance," (2 Tim.
2: 25.) Nay, did not God at the very time when he is verbally
exhorting all to repentance, influence the elect by the secret
movement of his Spirit, Jeremiah would not say, "Turn thou me, and I
shall be turned; for thou art the Lord my God. Surely after that I
was turned, I repented," (Jer. 31: 18.)
    17. But if it is so, (you will say,) little faith can be put in
the Gospel promises, which, in testifying concerning the will of
God, declare that he wills what is contrary to his inviolable
decree. Not at all; for however universal the promises of salvation
may be, there is no discrepancy between them and the predestination
of the reprobate, provided we attend to their effect. We know that
the promises are effectual only when we receive them in faith, but,
on the contrary, when faith is made void, the promise is of no
effect. If this is the nature of the promises, let us now see
whether there be any inconsistency between the two things, viz.,
that God, by an eternal decree, fixed the number of those whom he is
pleased to embrace in love, and on whom he is pleased to display his
wrath, and that he offers salvation indiscriminately to all. I hold
that they are perfectly consistent, for all that is meant by the
promise is, just that his mercy is offered to all who desire and
implore it, and this none do, save those whom he has enlightened.
Moreover, he enlightens those whom he has predestinated to
salvation. Thus the truth of the promises remains firm and unshaken,
so that it cannot be said there is any disagreement between the
eternal election of God and the testimony of his grace which he
offers to believers. But why does he mention all men? Namely that
the consciences of the righteous may rest the more secure when they
understand that there is no difference between sinners, provided
they have faith, and that the ungodly may not be able to allege that
they have not an asylum to which they may retake themselves from the
bondage of sin, while they ungratefully reject the offer which is
made to them. Therefore, since by the Gospel the mercy of God is
offered to both, it is faith, in other words, the illumination of
God, which distinguishes between the righteous and the wicked, the
former feeling the efficacy of the Gospel, the latter obtaining no
benefit from it. Illumination itself has eternal election for its
rule.
    Another passage quoted is the lamentation of our Savior, "O
Jerusalem Jerusalem, how often would I have gathered thy children
together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and
ye would not!" (Matth. 23: 37;) but it gives them no support. I
admit that here Christ speaks not only in the character of man, but
upbraids them with having, in every age, rejected his grace. But
this will of God, of which we speak, must be defined. For it is well
known what exertions the Lord made to retain that people, and how
perversely from the highest to the lowest they followed their own
wayward desires, and refused to be gathered together. But it does
not follow that by the wickedness of men the counsel of God was
frustrated. They object that nothing is less accordant with the
nature of God than that he should have a double will. This I
concede, provided they are sound interpreters. But why do they not
attend to the many passages in which God clothes himself with human
affections, and descends beneath his proper majesty? He says, "I
have spread out my hands all the day unto a rebellious people,"
(Isa. 65: 1,) exerting himself early and late to bring them back.
Were they to apply these qualities without regarding the figure,
many unnecessary disputes would arise which are quashed by the
simple solution, that what is human is here transferred to God.
Indeed, the solution which we have given elsewhere (see Book 1, c.
18, sec. 3; and Book 3, c. 20, sec. 43) is amply sufficient, viz.,
that though to our apprehension the will of God is manifold, yet he
does not in himself will opposites, but, according to his manifold
wisdom, (so Paul styles it, Eph. 3: 10,) transcends our senses,
until such time as it shall be given us to know how he mysteriously
wills what now seems to be adverse to his will. They also amuse
themselves with the cavil, that since God is the Father of all, it
is unjust to discard any one before he has by his misconduct merited
such a punishment. As if the kindness of God did not extend even to
dogs and swine. But if we confine our view to the human race, let
them tell why God selected one people for himself and became their
father, and why, from that one people, he plucked only a small
number as if they were the flower. But those who thus charge God are
so blinded by their love of evil speaking, that they consider not
that as God "maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good,"
(Matth. 5: 45,) so the inheritance is treasured up for a few to whom
it shall one day be said, "Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit
the kingdom," &c., (Matth. 25: 34.) They object, moreover, that God
does not hate any of the things which he has made. This I concede,
but it does not affect the doctrine which I maintain, that the
reprobate are hateful to God, and that with perfect justice, since
those destitute of his Spirit cannot produce any thing that does not
deserve cursing. They add, that there is no distinction of Jew and
Gentile, and that, therefore, the grace of God is held forth to all
indiscriminately: true, provided they admit (as Paul declares) that
God calls as well Jews as Gentiles, according to his good pleasure,
without being astricted to any. This disposes of their gloss upon
another passage, "God has concluded all in unbelief, that he might
have mercy upon all," (Rom. 11: 32;) in other words, he wills that
all who are saved should ascribe their salvation to his mercy,
although the blessing of salvation is not common to all. Finally,
after all that has been adduced on this side and on that, let it be
our conclusion to feel overawed with Paul at the great depth, and if
petulant tongues will still murmur, let us not be ashamed to join in
his exclamation, "Nay, but, O man, who art thou that replies against
God?" (Rom. 9: 20.) Truly does Augustine maintain that it is
perverse to measure divine by the standard of human justice, (De
Praedest. et Gra. c. 2.)

Chapter 25.

25. Of the last resurrection.

    There are four principal heads in this chapter, - I. The
utility, necessity, truth, and irrefragable evidence of the orthodox
doctrine of a final resurrection - a doctrine unknown to
philosophers, sec. 1-4. II. Refutation of the objections to this
doctrine by Atheists, Sadducees, Chiliasts, and other fanatics, sec.
5-7. III. The nature of the final resurrection explained, sec. 8, 9.
IV. Of the eternal felicity of the elect, and the everlasting misery
of the reprobate.
    
Sections.
    
1. For invincible perseverance in our calling, it is necessary to be
    animated with the blessed hope of our Savior's final advent.
2. The perfect happiness reserved for the elect at the final
    resurrection unknown to philosophers.
3. The truth and necessity of this doctrine of a final resurrection.
    To confirm our belief in it we have, 1. The example of Christ;
    and, 2. The omnipotence of God. There is an inseparable
    connection between us and our risen Savior. The bodies of the
    elect must be conformed to the body of their Head. It is now in
    heaven. Therefore, our bodies also must rise, and, reanimated
    by their souls, reign with Christ in heaven. The resurrection
    of Christ a pledge of ours.
4. As God is omnipotent, he can raise the dead. Resurrection
    explained by a natural process. The vision of dry bones.
5. Second part of the chapter, refuting objections to the doctrine
    of resurrection. 1. Atheists. 2. Sadducees. 3. Chiliasts. Their
    evasion. Various answers. 4. Universalists. Answer.
6.. Objections continued. 5. Some speculators who imagine that death
    destroys the whole man. Refutation. The condition and abode of
    souls from death till the last day. What meant by the bosom of
    Abraham.
7. Refutation of some weak men and Manichees, pretending that new
    bodies are to be given. Refutation confirmed by various
    arguments and passages of Scripture.
8. Refutation of the fiction of new bodies continued.
9. Shall the wicked rise again? Answer in the affirmative. Why the
    wicked shall rise again. Why resurrection promised to the elect
    only.
10 The last part of the chapter, treating of eternal felicity; 1 Its
    excellence transcends our capacity. Rules to be observed. The
    glory of all the saints will not be equal.
11. Without rewarding questions which merely puzzle, an answer given
    to some which are not without use.
12. As the happiness of the elect, so the misery of the reprobate,
    will be without measure, and without end.
    
    1. Although Christ, the Sun of righteousness, shining upon us
through the gospel, has, as Paul declares, after conquering death,
given us the light of life; and hence on believing we are said to
have passed from "death unto life," being no longer strangers and
pilgrims, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household
of God, who has made us sit with his only begotten Son in heavenly
places, so that nothing is wanting to our complete felicity; yet,
lest we should feel it grievous to be exercised under a hard
warfare, as if the victory obtained by Christ had produced no fruit,
we must attend to what is elsewhere taught concerning the nature of
hope. For since we hope for what we see not, and faith, as is said
in another passage, is "the evidence of things not seen" so long as
we are imprisoned in the body we are absent from the Lord. For which
reason Paul says, "Ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in
God. When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also
appear with him in glory." Our present condition, therefore,
requires us to "live soberly, righteously, and godly;" "looking for
that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and
our Savior Jesus Christ." Here there is need of no ordinary
patience, lest, worn out with fatigue, we either turn backwards or
abandon our post. Wherefore, all that has hitherto been said of our
salvation calls upon us to raise our minds towards heaven, that, as
Peter exhorts, though we now see not Christ, "yet believing," we may
"rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory," receiving the end
of our faith, even the salvation of our souls. For this reason Paul
says, that the faith and charity of the saints have respect to the
faith and hope which is laid up for them in heaven, (Col. 1: 5.)
When we thus keep our eyes fixed upon Christ in heaven, and nothing
on earth prevents us from directing them to the promised
blessedness, there is a true fulfillment of the saying, "where your
treasure is, there will your heart be also," (Matth. 6: 21.) Hence
the reason why faith is so rare in the world; nothing being more
difficult for our sluggishness than to surmount innumerable
obstacles in striving for the prize of our high calling. To the
immense load of miseries which almost overwhelm us, are added the
jeers of profane men, who assail us for our simplicity, when
spontaneously renouncing the allurements of the present life we
seem, in seeking a happiness which lies hid from us, to catch at a
fleeting shadow. In short, we are beset above and below, behind and
before, with violent temptations, which our minds would be
altogether unable to withstand, were they not set free from earthly
objects and devoted to the heavenly life, though apparently remote
from us. Wherefore, he alone has made solid progress in the Gospel
who has acquired the habit of meditating continually on a blessed
resurrection.
    2. In ancient times philosophers discoursed, and even debated
with each other, concerning the chief good: none, however, except
Plato acknowledged that it consisted in union with God. He could
not, however, form even an imperfect idea of its true nature; nor is
this strange, as he had learned nothing of the sacred bond of that
union. We even in this our earthly pilgrimage know wherein our
perfect and only felicity consists, - a felicity which, while we
long for it, daily inflames our hearts more and more, until we
attain to full fruition. Therefore I said, that none participate in
the benefits of Christ save those who raise their minds to the
resurrection. This, accordingly, is the mark which Paul sets before
believers, and at which he says they are to aim, forgetting every
thing until they reach its (Phil. 3: 8.) The more strenuously,
therefore, must we contend for it, lest if the world engross us we
be severely punished for our sloth. Accordingly, he in another
passage distinguishes believers by this mark, that their
conversation is in heaven, from whence they look for the Savior,
(Phil. 3: 20.) And that they may not faint in their course, he
associates all the other creatures with them. As shapeless ruins are
everywhere seen, he says, that all things in heaven and earth
struggle for renovation. For since Adam by his fall destroyed the
proper order of nature, the creatures groan under the servitude to
which they have been subjected through his sin; not that they are at
all endued with sense, but that they naturally long for the state of
perfection from which they have fallen. Paul therefore describes
them as groaning and travailing in pain, (Rom. 8: 19;) so that we
who have received the first-fruits of the Spirit may be ashamed to
grovel in our corruption, instead of at least imitating the
inanimate elements which are bearing the punishment of another's
sin. And in order that he may stimulate us the more powerfully, he
terms the final advent of Christ our redemption. It is true, indeed,
that all the parts of our redemption are already accomplished; but
as Christ was once offered for sins, (Heb. 9: 28,) so he shall again
appear without sin unto salvation. Whatever, then, be the
afflictions by which we are pressed, let this redemption sustain us
until its final accomplishment.
    3. The very importance of the subject ought to increase our
ardor. Paul justly contends, that if Christ rise not the whole
gospel is delusive and vain, (1 Cor. 15: 13-17;) for our condition
would be more miserable than that of other mortals, because we are
exposed to much hatred and insult, and incur danger every hour; nay,
are like sheep destined for slaughter; and hence the authority of
the gospel would fail, not in one part merely, but in its very
essence, including both our adoption and the accomplishment of our
salvation. Let us, therefore, give heed to a matter of all others
the most serious, so that no length of time may produce weariness. I
have deferred the brief consideration to be given of it to this
place, that my readers may learn, when they have received Christ,
the author of perfect salvation, to rise higher, and know that he is
clothed with heavenly immortality and glory in order that the whole
body may be rendered conformable to the Head. For thus the Holy
Spirit is ever setting before us in his person an example of the
resurrection. It is difficult to believe that after our bodies have
been consumed with rottenness, they sill rise again at their
appointed time. And hence, while many of the philosophers maintained
the immortality of the soul, few of them assented to the
resurrection of the body. Although in this they were inexcusable, we
are thereby reminded that the subject is too difficult for human
apprehension to reach it. To enable faith to surmount the great
difficulty, Scripture furnishes two auxiliary proofs, the one the
likeness of Christ's resurrection, and the other the omnipotence of
God. Therefore, whenever the subject of the resurrection is
considered, let us think of the case of our Savior, who, having
completed his mortal course in our nature which he had assumed,
obtained immortality, and is now the pledge of our future
resurrection. For in the miseries by which we are beset, we always
bear "about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life
also of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal flesh," (2 Cor.
4: 10.) It is not lawful, it is not even possible, to separate him
from us, without dividing him. Hence Paul's argument, "If there be
no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen," (1 Cor. 15:
13;) for he assumes it as an acknowledged principle, that when
Christ was subjected to death, and by rising gained a victory over
death, it was not on his own account, but in the Head was begun what
must necessarily be fulfilled in all the members, according to the
degree and order of each. For it would not be proper to be made
equal to him in all respects. It is said in the psalm, "Neither wilt
thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption," (Ps. 16: 10.)
Although a portion of this confidence appertain to us according to
the measure bestowed on us, yet the full effect appeared only in
Christ, who, free from all corruption, resumed a spotless body.
Then, that there may be no doubt as to our fellowship with Christ in
a blessed resurrection, and that we may be contented with this
pledge, Paul distinctly affirms that he sits in the heavens, and
will come as a judge on the last day for the express purpose of
changing our vile body, "that it may be fashioned like unto his
glorious body," (Phil. 3: 21.) For he elsewhere says that God did
not raise up his Son from death to give an isolated specimen of his
mighty power, but that the Spirit exerts the same efficacy in regard
to them that believe; and accordingly he says, that the Spirit when
he dwells in us is life, because the end for which he was given is
to quicken our mortal body, (Rom. 8: 10, 11; Col. 3: 4.) I briefly
glance at subjects which might be treated more copiously, and
deserve to be adorned more splendidly, and yet in the little I have
said I trust pious readers will find sufficient materials for
building up their faith. Christ rose again that he might have us as
partakers with him of future life. He was raised up by the Father,
inasmuch as he was the Head of the Church, from which he cannot
possibly be dissevered. He was raised up by the power of the Spirit,
who also in us performs the office of quickening. In fine, he was
raised up to be the resurrection and the life. But as we have said,
that in this mirror we behold a living image of the resurrection, so
it furnishes a sure evidence to support our minds, provided we faint
not, nor grow weary at the long delay, because it is not ours to
measure the periods of time at our own pleasure; but to rest
patiently till God in his own time renew his kingdom. To this Paul
refers when he says, "But every man in his own order: Christ the
first-fruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming," (1
Cor. 15: 23.)
    But lest any question should be raised as to the resurrection
of Christ on which ours is founded, we see how often and in what
various ways he has borne testimony to it. Scoffing men will deride
the narrative which is given by the Evangelist as a childish fable.
For what importance will they attach to a message which timid women
brings and the disciples almost dead with fear, afterwards confirm?
Why does not Christ rather place the illustrious trophies of his
victory in the midst of the temple and the forum? Why does he not
come forth, and in the presence of Pilate strike terror? Why does he
not show himself alive again to the priests and all Jerusalem?
Profane men will scarcely admit that the witnesses whom he selects
are well qualified. I answer, that though at the commencement their
infirmity was contemptible, yet the whole was directed by the
admirable providence of God, so that partly from love to Christ and
religious zeal, partly from incredulity, those who were lately
overcome with fear now hurry to the sepulchre, not only that they
might be eye-witnesses of the fact, but that they might hear angels
announce what they actually saw. How can we question the veracity of
those who regarded what the women told them as a fable, until they
saw the reality? It is not strange that the whole people and also
the governor, after they were furnished with sufficient evidence for
conviction, were not allowed to see Christ or the other signs,
(Matth. 27: 66; 28: 11.) The sepulchre is sealed, sentinels keep
watch, on the third day the body is not found. The soldiers are
bribed to spread the report that his disciples had stolen the body.
As if they had had the means of deforming a band of soldiers, or
been supplied with weapons, or been trained so as to make such a
daring attempt. But if the soldiers had not courage enough to repel
them, why did they not follow and apprehend some of them by the aid
of the populace? Pilate, therefore, in fact, put his signet to the
resurrection of Christ, and the guards who were placed at the
sepulchre by their silence or falsehood also became heralds of his
resurrection. Meanwhile, the voice of angels was heard, "He is not
here, but is risen," (Luke 24: 6.) The celestial splendor plainly
shows that they were not men but angels. Afterwards, if any doubt
still remained, Christ himself removed it. The disciples saw him
frequently; they even touched his hands and his feet, and their
unbelief is of no little avail in confirming our faith. He
discoursed to them of the mysteries of the kingdom of God, and at
length, while they beheld, ascended to heaven. This spectacle was
exhibited not to eleven apostles only, but was seen by more than
five hundred brethren at once, (1 Cor. 15: 6.) Then by sending the
Holy Spirit he gave a proof not only of life but also of supreme
power, as he had foretold, "It is expedient for you that I go away:
for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you," (John
16: 7.) Paul was not thrown down on the way by the power of a dead
man, but felt that he whom he was opposing was possessed of
sovereign authority. To Stephen he appeared for another purpose,
viz., that he might overcome the fear of death by the certainty of
life. To refuse assent to these numerous and authentic proofs is not
diffidence, but depraved and therefore infatuated obstinacy.
    4. We have said that in proving the resurrection our thoughts
must be directed to the immense power of God. This Paul briefly
teaches, when he says that the Lord Jesus Christ "shall change our
vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body,
according to the working of that mighty power whereby he is able
even to subdue all things unto himself," (Phil. 3: 21.) Wherefore,
nothing can be more incongruous than to look here at what can be
done naturally when the subject presented to us is an inestimable
miracle, which by its magnitude absorbs our senses. Paul, however,
by producing a proof from nature, confutes the senselessness of
those who deny the resurrection. "Thou fool, that which thou sowest
is not quickened except it die," &c., (1 Cor. 15: 36.) He says that
in seed there is a species of resurrection, because the crop is
produced from corruption. Nor would the thing be so difficult of
belief were we as attentive as we ought to be to the wonders which
meet our eye in every quarter of the world. But let us remember that
none is truly persuaded of the future resurrection save he who,
carried away with admiration gives God the glory.
    Elated with this convictions Isaiah exclaims, "Thy dead men
shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and
sing, ye that dwell in dust," (Isaiah 26: 19.) In desperate
circumstances he rises to God, the author of life, in whose hand are
"the issues from death," (Psalm 68: 20.) Job also, when liker a dead
body than a living being, trusting to the power of God, hesitates
not as if in full vigor to rise to that day: "I know that my
Redeemer liveth, and that he will stand at the latter day upon the
earth;" (that is, that he will there exert his power:) "and though
after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see
God; whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and
not another," (Job 19: 25-27.) For though some have recourse to a
more subtle interpretation, by which they wrest these passages, as
if they were not to be understood of the resurrection, they only
confirm what they are desirous to overthrow; for holy men, in
seeking consolation in their misfortunes, have recourse for
alleviation merely to the similitude of a resurrection. This is
better learned from a passage in Ezekiel. When the Jews scouted the
promise of return, and objected that the probability of it was not
greater than that of the dead coming forth from the tomb, there is
presented to the prophet in vision a field covered with dry bones,
which at the command of God recover sinews and flesh. Though under
that figure he encourages the people to hope for return, yet the
ground of hope is taken from the resurrection, as it is the special
type of all the deliverances which believers experience in this
world. Thus Christ declares that the voice of the Gospel gives life;
but because the Jews did not receive it, he immediately adds,
"Marvel not at this; for the hour is coming in which all that are in
the grave shall hear his voice, and shall come forth," (John 5: 28,
29.) Wherefore, amid all our conflicts let us exult after the
example of Paul, that he who has promised us future life "is able to
keep that" which "is committed unto him," and thus glory that there
is laid up for us "a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the
righteous judge, shall give," (2 Tim. 1: 12; 4: 8.) Thus all the
hardships which we may endure will be a demonstration of our future
life, "seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense
tribulation to them that trouble you; and to you who are troubled
rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with
his mighty angels, in flaming fire," (2 Thess. 1: 6-8.) But we must
attend to what he shortly after adds, viz., that he "shall come to
be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that
believe," by receiving the Gospel.
    5. Although the minds of men ought to be perpetually occupied
with this pursuits yet as if they actually resolved to banish all
remembrance of the resurrection, they have called death the end of
all things, the extinction of man. For Solomon certainly expresses
the commonly received opinion when he says "A living dog is better
than a dead lion," (Eccl. 9: 4.) And again, "Who knoweth the spirit
of man that goes upward, and the spirit of the beast that goes
downward to the earth?" In all ages a brutish stupor has prevailed,
and, accordingly, it has made its way into the very Church; for the
Sadducees had the hardihood openly to profess that there was no
resurrection, nay, that the soul was mortal, (Mark 12: 18; Luke 20:
27.) But that this gross ignorance might be no excuse, unbelievers
have always by natural instinct had an image of the resurrection
before their eyes. For why the sacred and inviolable custom of
burying, but that it might be the earnest of a new life? Nor can it
be said that it had its origin in error, for the solemnity of
sepulture always prevailed among the holy patriarchs, and God was
pleased that the same custom should continue among the Gentiles, in
order that the image of the resurrection thus presented might shake
off their torpor. But although that ceremony was without profit, yet
it is useful to us if we prudently consider its end; because it is
no feeble refutation of infidelity that all men agreed in professing
what none of them believed. But not only did Satan stupefy the
senses of mankind, so that with their bodies they buried the
remembrance of the resurrection; but he also managed by various
fictions so to corrupt this branch of doctrine that it at length was
lost. Not to mention that even in the days of Paul he began to
assail it, (1 Cor. 15,) shortly after the Chiliasts arose, who
limited the reign of Christ to a thousand years. This fiction is too
puerile to need or to deserve refutation. Nor do they receive any
countenance from the Apocalypse, from which it is known that they
extracted a gloss for their error, (Rev. 20: 4,) since the thousand
years there mentioned refer not to the eternal blessedness of the
Church, but only to the various troubles which await the Church
militant in this world. The whole Scripture proclaims that there
will be no end either to the happiness of the elect, or the
punishment of the reprobate. Moreover, in regard to all things which
lie beyond our sight, and far transcend the reach of our intellect,
belief must either be founded on the sure oracles of God, or
altogether renounced. Those who assign only a thousand years to the
children of God to enjoy the inheritance of future life, observe not
how great an insult they offer to Christ and his kingdom. If they
are not to be clothed with immortality, then Christ himself, into
whose glory they shall be transformed, has not been received into
immortal glory; if their blessedness is to have an end, the kingdom
of Christ, on whose solid structure it rests, is temporary. In
short, they are either most ignorant of all divine things or they
maliciously aim at subverting the whole grace of God and power of
Christ, which cannot have their full effects unless sin is
obliterated, death swallowed up, and eternal life fully renewed. How
stupid and frivolous their fear that too much severity will be
ascribed to God, if the reprobate are doomed to eternal punishment,
even the blind may see. The Lord, forsooth, will be unjust if he
exclude from his kingdom those who, by their ingratitude shall have
rendered themselves unworthy of it. But their sins are temporary,
(see Bernard, Epist. 254.) I admit it; but then the majesty of God,
and also the justice which they have violated by their sins, are
eternal. Justly, therefore, the memory of their iniquity does not
perish. But in this way the punishment will exceed the measure of
the fault. It is intolerable blasphemy to hold the majesty of God in
so little estimation, as not to regard the contempt of it as of
greater consequence than the destruction of a single soul. But let
us have done with these triflers, that we may not seem (contrary to
what we first observed) to think their dreams deserving of
refutation.
    6. Besides these, other two dreams have been invented by men
who indulge a wicked curiosity. Some, under the idea that the whole
man perishes, have thought that the soul will rise again with the
body; while others, admitting that spirits are immortal, hold that
they will be clothed with new bodies, and thus deny the resurrection
of the flesh. Having already adverted to the former point when
speaking of the creation of man, it will be sufficient again to
remind the reader how groveling an error it is to convert a spirit,
formed after the image of God, into an evanescent breath, which
animates the body only during this fading life, and to reduce the
temple of the Holy Spirit to nothing; in short, to rob of the badge
of immortality that part of ourselves in which the divinity is most
Refulgent and the marks of immortality conspicuous, so as to make
the condition of the body better and more excellent than that of the
soul. Very different is the course taken by Scripture, which
compares the body to a tabernacle, from which it describes us as
migrating when we die, because it estimates us by that part which
distinguishes us from the lower animals. Thus Peter, in reference to
his approaching death, says, "Knowing that shortly I must put off
this my tabernacle," (2 Pet. 1: 14.) Paul, again, speaking of
believers, after saying, "If our earthly house of this tabernacle
were dissolved, we have a building of God," adds, "Whilst we are at
home in the body, we are absent from the Lord," (2 Cor. 5: 1, 6.)
Did not the soul survive the body, how could it be present with the
Lord on being separated from the body? But an Apostle removes all
doubt when he says that we go "to the spirits of just men made
perfect," (Heb. 12: 23;) by these words meaning, that we are
associated with the holy patriarchs, who, even when dead, cultivate
the same piety, so that we cannot be the members of Christ unless we
unite with them. And did not the soul, when unclothed from the body,
retain its essence, and be capable of beatific glory, our Savior
would not have said to the thief, "Today shalt thou be with me in
paradise," (Luke 23: 43.) Trusting to these clear proofs, let us
doubt not, after the example of our Savior, to commend our spirits
to God when we come to die, or after the example of Stephen, to
commit ourselves to the protection of Christ, who, with good reason,
is called "The Shepherd and Bishop" of our souls, (Acts 7: 59; 1
Pet. 2: 25.) Moreover, to pry curiously into their intermediate
state is neither lawful nor expedient, (see Calv. Psychopannychia.)
Many greatly torment themselves with discussing what place they
occupy, and whether or not they already enjoy celestial glory. It is
foolish and rash to inquire into hidden things, farther than God
permits us to know. Scripture, after telling that Christ is present
with them, and receives them into paradise, (John 12: 32,) and that
they are comforted, while the souls of the reprobate suffer the
torments which they have merited goes no farther. What teacher or
doctor will reveal to us what God has concealed? As to the place of
abode, the question is not less futile and inept, since we know that
the dimension of the soul is not the same as that of the body. When
the abode of blessed spirits is designated as the bosom of Abraham,
it is plain that, on quitting this pilgrimage, they are received by
the common father of the faithful, who imparts to them the fruit of
his faith. Still, since Scripture uniformly enjoins us to look with
expectation to the advent of Christ, and delays the crown of glory
till that period, let us be contented with the limits divinely
prescribed to us, viz., that the souls of the righteous, after their
warfare is ended, obtain blessed rest where in joy they wait for the
fruition of promised glory, and that thus the final result is
suspended till Christ the Redeemer appear. There can be no doubt
that the reprobate have the same doom as that which Jude assigns to
the devils, they are "reserved in everlasting chains under darkness
unto the judgment of the great day," (Jude ver. 6.)
    7. Equally monstrous is the error of those who imagine that the
soul, instead of resuming the body with which it is now clothed,
will obtain a new and different body. Nothing can be more futile
than the reason given by the Manichees, viz., that it were
incongruous for impure flesh to rise again: as if there were no
impurity in the soul; and yet this does not exclude it from the hope
of heavenly life. It is just as if they were to say, that what is
infected by the taint of sin cannot be divinely purified; for I now
say nothing to the delirious dream that flesh is naturally impure as
having been created by the devil. I only maintain, that nothing in
us at present, which is unworthy of heaven, is any obstacle to the
resurrection. But, first, Paul enjoins believers to purify
themselves from "all filthiness of the flesh and spirit," (2 Cor. 7:
l;) and then denounces the judgment which is to follow, that every
one shall "receive the things done in his body, according to that he
has done, whether it be good or bad," (2 Cor. 5: 10.) With this
accords what he says to the Corinthians, "That the life also of
Jesus might be made manifest in our body," (2 Cor. 4: 10.) For which
reason he elsewhere says, "I pray God your whole spirit and soul and
body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus
Christ," (1 Thess. 5: 23.) He says "body" as well as "spirit and
soul," and no wonder; for it were most absurd that bodies which God
has dedicated to himself as temples should fall into corruption
without hope of resurrection. What? are they not also the members of
Christ? Does he not pray that God would sanctify every part of them,
and enjoin them to celebrate his name with their tongues, lift up
pure hands, and offer sacrifices? That part of man, therefore, which
the heavenly Judge so highly honors, what madness is it for any
mortal man to reduce to dust without hope of revival? In like
manner, when Paul exhorts, "glorify God in your body, and in your
spirit, which are God's," he certainly does not allow that that
which he claims for God as sacred is to be adjudged to eternal
corruption. Nor, indeed, on any subject does Scripture furnish
clearer explanation than on the resurrection of our flesh. "This
corruptible (says Paul) must put on incorruption, and this mortal
must put on immortality," (1 Cor. 15: 53.) If God formed new bodies,
where would be this change of quality? If it were said that we must
be renewed, the ambiguity of the expression might, perhaps, afford
room for cavil; but here pointing with the finger to the bodies with
which we are clothed, and promising that they shall be
incorruptible, he very plainly affirms that no new bodies are to be
fabricated. "Nay," as Tertullian says, "he could not have spoken
more expressly, if he had held his skin in his hands," (Tertull. de
Resurrect. Carnis.) Nor can any cavil enable them to evade the force
of another passage, in which saying that Christ will be the Judge of
the world, he quotes from Isaiah, "As I live, saith the Lord, every
knee shall bow to me," (Rom. 14: 11; Isa. 45: 23;) since he openly
declares that those whom he was addressing will have to give an
account of their lives. This could not be true if new bodies were to
be sisted to the tribunal. Moreover, there is no ambiguity in the
words of Daniel, "Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth
shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and
everlasting contempt," (Dan. 12: 2;) since he does not bring new
matter from the four elements to compose men, but calls forth the
dead from their graves. And the reason which dictates this is plain.
For if death, which originated in the fall of man, is adventitious,
the renewal produced by Christ must be in the same body which began
to be mortal. And, certainly, since the Athenians mocked Paul for
asserting the resurrection, (Acts 17: 32,) we may infer what his
preaching was: their derision is of no small force to confirm our
faith. The saying of our Savior also is worthy of observation, "Fear
not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but
rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in
hell," (Matth. 10: 28.) Here there would be no ground for fear; were
not the body which we now have liable to punishment. Nor is another
saying of our Savior less obscure, "The hour is coming, in the which
all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come
forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and
they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation," (John
5: 28, 29.) Shall we say that the soul rests in the grave, that it
may there hear the voice of Christ, and not rather that the body
shall at his command resume the vigor which it had lost? Moreover,
if we are to receive new bodies, where will be the conformity of the
Head and the members? Christ rose again. Was it by forming for
himself a new body? Nay, he had foretold, "Destroy this temple, and
in three days I will raise it up," (John 2: 19.) The mortal body
which he had formerly carried he again received; for it would not
have availed us much if a new body had been substituted, and that
which had been offered in expiatory sacrifice been destroyed. We
must, therefore, attend to that connection which the Apostle
celebrates, that we rise because Christ rose, (1 Cor. 15: 12;)
nothing being less probable than that the flesh in which we bear
about the dying of Christ, shall have no share in the resurrection
of Christ. This was even manifested by a striking example, when, at
the resurrection of Christ, many bodies of the saints came forth
from their graves. For it cannot be denied that this was a prelude,
or rather earnest, of the final resurrection for which we hope, such
as already existed in Enoch and Elijah, whom Tertullian calls
candidates for resurrection, because, exempted from corruption, both
in body and soul, they were received into the custody of God.
    8. I am ashamed to waste so many words on so clear a matter;
but my readers will kindly submit to the annoyance, in order that
perverse and presumptuous minds may not be able to avail themselves
of any flaw to deceive the simple. The volatile spirits with whom I
now dispute adduce the fiction of their own brain, that in the
resurrection there will be a creation of new bodies. Their only
reason for thinking so is, that it seems to them incredible that a
dead body, long wasted by corruption, should return to its former
state. Therefore, mere unbelief is the parent of their opinion. The
Spirit of God, on the contrary, uniformly exhorts us in Scripture to
hope for the resurrection of our flesh. For this reason Baptism is,
according to Paul, a seal of our future resurrection; and in like
manner the holy Supper invites us confidently to expect it, when
with our mouths we receive the symbols of spiritual grace. And
certainly the whole exhortation of Paul, "Yield ye your members as
instruments of righteousness unto God," (Rom. 6: 13,) would be
frigid, did he not add, as he does in another passage, "He that
raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal
bodies," (Rom. 8: 11.) For what would it avail to apply feet, hands,
eyes, and tongues, to the service of God, did not these afterwards
participate in the benefit and reward? This Paul expressly confirms
when he says, "The body is not for fornication, but for the Lord;
and the Lord for the body. And God has both raised up the Lord, and
will also raise up us by his own power," (1 Cor. 6: 13, 14.) The
words which follow are still clearer, "Know ye not that your bodies
are the members of Christ?" "Know ye not that your body is the
temple of the Holy Ghost?" (1 Cor. 6: 15, l9.) Meanwhile, we see how
he connects the resurrection with chastity and holiness, as he
shortly after includes our bodies in the purchase of redemption. It
would be inconsistent with reason, that the body, in which Paul bore
the marks of his Savior, and in which he magnificently extolled him,
(Gal. 6: 17,) should lose the reward of the crown. Hence he glories
thus, "Our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for
the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our vile body,
that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body," (Phil. 3: 20,
21.) As it is true, "That we must through much tribulation enter
into the kingdom of God," (Acts 14: 22;) so it were unreasonable
that this entrance should be denied to the bodies which God
exercises under the banner of the cross and adorns with the palm of
victory.
    Accordingly, the saints never entertained any doubt that they
would one day be the companions of Christ, who transfers to his own
person all the afflictions by which we are tried, that he may show
their quickening power. Nay, under the law, God trained the holy
patriarch in this belief, by means of an external ceremony. For to
what end was the rite of burial, as we have already seen, unless to
teach that new life was prepared for the bodies thus deposited?
Hence, also, the spices and other symbols of immortality, by which
under the law the obscurity of the doctrine was illustrated in the
same way as by sacrifices. That custom was not the offspring of
superstition, since we see that the Spirit is not less careful in
narrating burials than in stating the principal mysteries of the
faith. Christ commends these last offices as of no trivial
importance, (Matth. 16: 10,) and that, certainly, for no other
reason than just that they raise our eyes from the view of the tombs
which corrupts and destroys all things, to the prospect of
renovation. Besides, that careful observance of the ceremony for
which the patriarchs are praised, sufficiently proves that they
found in it a special and valuable help to their faith. Nor would
Abraham have been so anxious about the burial of his wife, (Gen. 23:
4, 19,) had not the religious views and something superior to any
worldly advantage, been present to his mind; in other words, by
adorning her dead body with the insignia of the resurrection, he
confirmed his own faith, and that of his family. A clearer proof of
this appears in the example of Jacob, who, to testify to his
posterity that even death did not destroy the hope of the promised
land, orders his bones to be carried thither. Had he been to be
clothed with a new body would it not have been ridiculous in him to
give commands concerning a dust which was to be reduced to nothing?
Wherefore, if Scripture has any authority with us, we cannot desire
a clearer or stronger proof of any doctrine. Even tyros understand
this to be the meaning of the words, resurrection, and raising up. A
thing which is created for the first time cannot be said to rise
again; nor could our Savior have said, "This is the Father's will
which has sent me, that of all which he has given me I should lose
nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day," (John 6:
39.) The same is implied in the word sleeping, which is applicable
only to the body. Hence, too, the name of cemetery, applied to
burying-grounds.
    It remains to make a passing remark on the mode of
resurrection. I speak thus because Paul, by styling it a mystery,
exhorts us to soberness, in order that he may curb a licentious
indulgence in free and subtle speculation. First, we must hold, as
has already been observed, that the body in which we shall rise will
be the same as at present in respect of substance, but that the
quality will be different; just as the body of Christ which was
raised up was the same as that which had been offered in sacrifice,
and yet excelled in other qualities, as if it had been altogether
different. This Paul declares by familiar examples, (1 Cor. 15: 39.)
For as the flesh of man and of beasts is the same in substance, but
not in quality: as all the stars are made of the same matter, but
have different degrees of brightness: so he shows, that though we
shall retain the substance of the body, there will be a change, by
which its condition will become much more excellent. The corruptible
body, therefore, in order that we may be raised, will not perish or
vanish away, but, divested of corruption, will be clothed with
incorruption. Since God has all the elements at his disposal, no
difficulty can prevent him from commanding the earth, the fire, and
the water, to give up what they seem to have destroyed. This, also,
though not without figure, Isaiah testifies, "Behold, the Lore comes
out of his place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their
iniquity: the earth also shall disclose her blood, and shall no more
cover her slain," (Isa. 26: 21.) But a distinction must be made
between those who died long ago, and those who on that day shall be
found alive. For as Paul declares, "We shall not all sleep, but we
shall all be changed," (1 Cor. 15: 51;) that is, it will not be
necessary that a period should elapse between death and the
beginning of the second life, for in a moment of time, in the
twinkling of an eye, the trumpet shall sound, raising up the dead
incorruptible, and, by a sudden change, fitting those who are alive
for the same glory. So, in another passage, he comforts believers
who were to undergo death, telling them that those who are then
alive shall not take precedence of the dead, because those who have
fallen asleep in Christ shall rise first, (1 Thess. 4: 15.) Should
any one urge the Apostle's declaration, "It is appointed unto all
men once to die," (Heb. 9: 27,) the solution is easy, that when the
natural state is changed there is an appearance of death, which is
fitly so denominated, and, therefore, there is no inconsistency in
the two things, viz., that all when divested of their mortal body
shall be renewed by death; and yet that where the change is sudden,
there will be no necessary separation between the soul and the body.
    9. But a more difficult question here arises, How can the
resurrection, which is a special benefit of Christ, be common to the
ungodly, who are lying under the curse of God? We know that in Adam
all died. Christ has come to be the resurrection and the life, (John
11: 25.) is it to revive the whole human race indiscriminately? But
what more incongruous than that the ungodly in their obstinate
blindness should obtain what the pious worshipers of God receive by
faith only? It is certain, therefore, that there will be one
resurrection to judgment, and another to life, and that Christ will
come to separate the kids from the goats, (Matth. 25: 32.) I
observe, that this ought not to seem very strange, seeing something
resembling it occurs every day. We know that in Adam we were
deprived of the inheritance of the whole world, and that the same
reason which excludes us from eating of the tree of life excludes us
also from common food. How comes it, then, that God not only makes
his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, but that, in regard to
the uses of the present life, his inestimable liberality is
constantly flowing forth in rich abundance? Hence we certainly
perceive, that things which are proper to Christ and his members,
abound to the wicked also; not that their possession is legitimate,
but that they may thus be rendered more inexcusable. Thus the wicked
often experience the beneficence of God, not in ordinary measures,
but such as sometimes throw all the blessings of the godly into the
shade, though they eventually lead to greater damnation. Should it
be objected, that the resurrection is not properly compared to
fading and earthly blessings, I again answer, that when the devils
were first alienated from God, the fountain of life, they deserved
to be utterly destroyed; yet, by the admirable counsel of God, an
intermediate state was prepared, where without life they might live
in death. It ought not to seem in any respect more absurd that there
is to be an adventitious resurrection of the ungodly which will drag
them against their will before the tribunal of Christ, whom they now
refuse to receive as their master and teacher. To be consumed by
death would be a light punishment were they not, in order to the
punishment of their rebellion, to be sisted before the Judge whom
they have provoked to a vengeance without measure and without end.
But although we are to hold, as already observed and as is contained
in the celebrated confession of Paul to Felix, "That there shall be
a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust," (Acts 24:
15;) yet Scripture more frequently sets forth the resurrection as
intended, along with celestial glory, for the children of God only:
because, properly speaking, Christ comes not for the destruction,
but for the salvation of the world: and, therefore, in the Creed the
life of blessedness only is mentioned.
    10. But since the prophecy that death shall be swallowed up in
victory, (Hosea 13: 14,) will then only be completed, let us always
remember that the end of the resurrection is eternal happiness, of
whose excellence scarcely the minutes part can be described by all
that human tongues can say. For though we are truly told that the
kingdom of God will be full of light, and gladness, and felicity,
and glory, yet the things meant by these words remain most remote
from sense, and as it were involved in enigma, until the day arrive
on which he will manifest his glory to us face to face, (l Cor. 15:
54.) "Now" says John, "are we the sons of God; and it does not yet
appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we
shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is," (1 John 3: 2.)
Hence, as the prophets were unable to give a verbal description of
that spiritual blessedness, they usually delineated it by corporeal
objects. On the other hand, because the fervor of desire must be
kindled in us by some taste of its sweetness, let us specially dwell
upon this thought, If God contains in himself as an inexhaustible
fountain all fulness of blessing, those who aspire to the supreme
good and perfect happiness must not long for any thing beyond him.
This we are taught in several passages, "Fear not, Abraham; I am thy
shield, and thy exceeding great reward," (Gen. 15: 1.) With this
accords David's sentiment, "The Lord is the portion of mine
inheritance, and of my cup: thou maintainest my lot. The lines are
fallen unto me in pleasant places," (Ps. 16: 5, 6.) Again, "I shall
be satisfied when I awake with thy likeness," (Ps. 17: 15.) Peter
declares that the purpose for which believers are called is, that
they may be "partakers of the divine nature," (2 Pet. 1: 4.) How so?
Because "he shall come to be glorified in his saints and to be
admired in all them that believe," (2 Thess. 1: 10.) If our Lord
will share his glory, power, and righteousness, with the elect, nay,
will give himself to be enjoyed by them; and what is better still,
will, in a manner, become one with them, let us remember that every
kind of happiness is herein included. But when we have made great
progress in thus meditating, let us understand that if the
conceptions of our minds be contrasted with the sublimity of the
mystery, we are still halting at the very entrance. The more
necessary is it for us to cultivate sobriety in this matter, lest
unmindful of our feeble capacity we presume to take too lofty a
flight, and be overwhelmed by the brightness of the celestial glory.
We feel how much we are stimulated by an excessive desire of knowing
more than is given us to know, and hence frivolous and noxious
questions are ever and anon springing forth: by frivolous, I mean
questions from which no advantage can be extracted. But there is a
second class which is worse than frivolous; because those who
indulge in them involve themselves in hurtful speculations. Hence I
call them noxious. The doctrine of Scripture on the subject ought
not to be made the ground of any controversy, and it is that as God,
in the varied distribution of gifts to his saints in this world,
gives them unequal degrees of light, so when he shall crown his
gifts, their degrees of glory in heaven will also be unequal. When
Paul says, "Ye are our glory and our joy," (2 Thess. 2: 19,) his
words do not apply indiscriminately to all; nor do those of our
Savior to his apostles, "Ye also shall sit on twelve thrones judging
the twelve tribes of Israel," (Matth. 19: 28.) But Paul, who knew
that as God enriches the saints with spiritual gifts in this world,
he will in like manner adorn them with glory in heaven, hesitates
not to say, that a special crown is laid up for him in proportion to
his labors. Our Savior, also, to commend the dignity of the office
which he had conferred on the apostles, reminds them that the fruit
of it is laid up in heaven. This, too, Daniel says, "They that be
wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that
turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever," (Dan.
12: 3.) Any one who attentively considers the Scriptures will see
net only that they promise eternal life to believers, but a special
reward to each. Hence the expression of Paul, "The Lord grant unto
him that he may find mercy of the Lord in that day," (2 Tim. 1: 18;
4: 14.) This is confirmed by our Savior's promise, that they "shall
receive an hundredfold and shall inherit everlasting life," (Matth.
19: 29.) In short, as Christ, by the manifold variety of his gifts,
begins the glory of his body in this world, and gradually increases
it, so he will complete it in heaven.
    1l. While all the godly with one consent will admit this,
because it is sufficiently attested by the word of God, they will,
on the other hand, avoid perplexing questions which they feel to be
a hindrance in their way, and thus keep within the prescribed
limits. In regard to myself, I not only individually refrain from a
superfluous investigation of useless matters, but also think myself
bound to take care that 1 do not encourage the levity of others by
answering them. Men puffed up with vain science are often inquiring
how great the difference will be between prophets and apostles, and
again, between apostles and martyrs; by how many degrees virgins
will surpass those who are married; in short, they leave not a
corner of heaven untouched by their speculations. Next it occurs to
them to inquire to what end the world is to be repaired, since the
children of God will not be in want of any part of this great and
incomparable abundance, but will be like the angels, whose
abstinence from food is a symbol of eternal blessedness. I answer,
that independent of use, there will be so much pleasantness in the
very sight, so much delight in the very knowledge, that this
happiness will far surpass all the means of enjoyment which are now
afforded. Let us suppose ourselves placed in the richest quarter of
the globe, where no kind of pleasure is wanting, who is there that
is not ever and anon hindered and excluded by disease from enjoying
the gifts of God? who does not oftentimes interrupt the course of
enjoyment by intemperance? Hence it follows, that fruition, pure and
free from all defect, though it be of no use to a corruptible life,
is the summit of happiness. Others go further, and ask whether dross
and other impurities in metals will have no existence at the
restitution, and are inconsistent with it. Though I should go so far
as concede this to them, yet I expect with Paul a reparation of
those defects which first began with sin, and on account of which
the whole creation groaneth and travaileth with pain, (Rom. 8: 22.)
Others go a step further, and ask, What better condition can await
the human race, since the blessing of offspring shall then have an
end? The solution of this difficulty also is easy. When Scripture so
highly extols the blessing of offspring, it refers to the progress
by which God is constantly urging nature forward to its goal; in
perfection itself we know that the case is different. But as such
alluring speculations instantly captivate the unwary, who are
afterwards led farther into the labyrinth, until at length, every
one becoming pleased with his own views there is no limit to
disputation, the best and shortest course for us will be to rest
contented with seeing through a glass darkly until we shall see face
to face. Few out of the vast multitude of mankind feel concerned how
they are to get to heaven; all would fain know before the time what
is done in heaven. Almost all, while slow and sluggish in entering
upon the contest, are already depicting to themselves imaginary
triumphs.
    12. Moreover, as language cannot describe the severity of the
divine vengeance on the reprobate, their pains and torments are
figured to us by corporeal things, such as darkness, wailing and
gnashing of teeth, inextinguishable fire, the ever-gnawing worm,
(Matth. 8: 12; 22: 13; Mark 9: 43; Isa. 66: 24.) It is certain that
by such modes of expression the Holy Spirit designed to impress all
our senses with dread, as when it is said, "Tophet is ordained of
old; yea, for the king it is prepared: he has made it deep and
large; the pile thereof is fire and much wood; the breath of the
Lord, like a stream of brimstone, does kindle it," (Isa. 30: 33.) As
we thus require to be assisted to conceive the miserable doom of the
reprobate, so the consideration on which we ought chiefly to dwell
is the fearful consequence of being estranged from all fellowship
with God, and not only so, but of feeling that his majesty is
adverse to us, while we cannot possibly escape from it. For, first,
his indignation is like a raging fire, by whose touch all things are
devoured and annihilated. Next, all the creatures are the
instruments of his judgment, so that those to whom the Lord will
thus publicly manifest his anger will feel that heaven, and earth,
and sea, all beings, animate and inanimate, are, as it were,
inflamed with dire indignation against them, and armed for their
destruction. Wherefore, the Apostle made no trivial declaration,
when he said that unbelievers shall be "punished with everlasting
destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his
power," (2 Thess. 1: 9.) And whenever the prophets strike terror by
means of corporeal figures, although in respect of our dull
understanding there is no extravagance in their language, yet they
give preludes of the future judgment in the sun and the moon, and
the whole fabric of the world. Hence unhappy consciences find no
rest, but are vexed and driven about by a dire whirlwind, feeling as
if torn by an angry God, pierced through with deadly darts,
terrified by his thunderbolts and crushed by the weight of his hand;
so that it were easier to plunge into abysses and whirlpools than
endure these terrors for a moment. How fearful, then, must it be to
be thus beset throughout eternity! On this subject there is a
memorable passage in the ninetieth Psalm: Although God by a mere
look scatters all mortals, and brings them to nought, yet as his
worshippers are more timid in this world, he urges them the more,
that he may stimulate then, while burdened with the cross to press
onward until he himself shall be all in all.

End of Book Three.