|
ROM. IX. 1.
' I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing
me witness in the Holy Ghost."
DID I not seem yesterday to you to have spoken some great and
exorbitant things of Paul's love toward Christ? And great indeed
they were, too great for any words to express. Yet what you have
heard to-day are as far above those things, as those things were above
ours. And yet I did not think they could be exceeded, still when I
came to what has been read to-day it did appear far more glorious than
the whole of the former. And that he was aware of this himself he
shows by his exordium. For as on the point of entering upon greater
things than those, and therefore liable to be disbelieved by the
generality, he first uses a strong asseveration about the matter he is
going to speak of; which many are in the habit of doing when they are
going to say somewhat which is not believed by the generality, and
about which they feel the utmost certainty in their own minds. Hence
he says, "I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, and my conscience
beareth witness,"
Ver. 2, 3. "That I have a great heaviness and continual sorrow
in my heart. For I could wish that myself were accursed from
Christ."
What sayest thou, O Paul? from Christ, thy beloved One, from
Whom neither kingdom nor hell, nor things visible nor intelligible,
nor another world as great, would separate thee, is it from Him that
thou wouldst now be accursed? What has happened? Hast thou changed,
hast thou given over that love? No, he replies, fear not. Rather
I have even made it more intense. How then is it that thou wouldest
fain be accursed, and seekest a separation, and a removal to such a
distance, that after it there is no possibility of finding a more
distant one? Because I love Him exceedingly, he may reply. How,
pray, and in what manner? For the things seem a riddle. Or rather,
if you will, let us learn what the curse is, and then we will question
him upon these points, and shall understand this unspeakable and
extraordinary love. What then is the curse? Hear his own words,
"If any man love not our Lord Jesus Christ, let him be
accursed." (anathema, Cor. xvi. 22.) That is, let him be
set apart from all, removed from all. For as in the case of a thing
dedicated anaqhma, which is set apart for God, no one would venture
so much as to touch it with his hand or even to come near it; so too
with a man who is put apart from the Church, in cutting him off from
all, and removing him as far off as possible, he calls him by this
name anaqema in a contrary sense, thus with much fear denouncing to all
men to keep apart from him, and to spring away from him. For the
thing set apart, no one, from respect of it, ventures to come near
to. But from him who is cut off, all men separate themselves from a
very opposite feeling. And so the separation is the same, and both
the one and the other are equally removed from the generality. Still,
the mode of separation is not the same, but in this case it is the
opposite to what it is in that. For from the one they keep back as
being dedicated to God; from the other as being estranged from God,
and broken off from the Church. This then is what Paul means when he
says, "I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ." And
he does not say merely that I could be willing, but using a stronger
term, he says even, "I could wish" (or pray hukomhn). But if
what he says trouble you in your asqenesteron feebleness, consider the
real state of the case, not only that he wished to be separated, but
also the cause for which he wished it, and then you will see the
greatness of his love. For he even circumcised (Timothy, Acts
xvi. 3), and we pay no attention to what was done, but to the
intention of it, and the cause of it, and hence we wonder at him the
more. And he not only circumcised a person, but he even shaved
himself and sacrificed (Acts xviii. 18; xxi. 24), and yet
surely we do not therefore assert him to be a Jew, but upon this very
score to be perfectly free from Judaizing, and clear of it, and a
genuine worshipper of Christ. As then when you see him circumcising
and sacrificing, you do not therefore condemn him as Judaizing, but
upon this very score have the best reason for crowning him as quite an
alien to Judaism; thus when thou seest him to have become desirous of
being accursed, do not therefore be troubled, but upon this very
ground give him the loudest praise, when thou knowest the cause why he
wishes this. For if we do not look narrowly into the causes, we shall
call Elijah a man-slayer, and Abraham not a manslayer only, but a
murderer of his son. And Phinees and Peter we shall implead for
murder likewise. Nor is it in the case of the saints alone, but also
of the God of the universe, that he who does not keep to this rule,
will be suspecting sundry unbecoming things. Now to prevent this
happening in all cases of the kind, let us bring together both the
cause, and the intention, and the time, and all that makes in behalf
of what is so done, and in this way let us investigate the actions.
And this we must do now also in the case of this blessed soul. Now
what is the cause? It is Jesus Himself Who is so beloved. And yet
he does not say for Him; for what he says is, I would wish that I
were accursed from Him for my brethren. And this comes of his
humbleness of mind. For he has no wish to make himself conspicuous,
as if he were saying something great, and doing Christ a favor in
this. Wherefore also he said "my kinsmen," that he may conceal his
high aim pleonekthma. Since to see that he wished it all for
Christ's sake, just hear what comes next. After speaking of kinsmen
then, he proceeds, Ver. 4, 5. "To whom pertaineth the
adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the
Law, and the service of God, and the promises; whose are the
father's, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, Who is
over all, God blessed for ever. Amen."
And what is this? one asks. For if with a view to the belief of
others he was willing to become accursed, he ought to have also wished
for this in the Gentiles' behalf. But if he wishes it in the Jews'
behalf only, it is a proof that he did not wish it for Christ's
sake, but for his own relationship to them. But in fact if he had
prayed for the Gentiles only, this would not have been equally clear.
But since it is for the Jews only, it is a clear proof that it is
only for Christ's glory that he is thus earnest. And I am aware
that what I am saying will seem a paradox to you. Still if ye do not
make a disturbance, I will presently endeavor to make it clear. For
what he has said he has not said nakedly; but since all were talking
and accusing God, that after being counted worthy of the name of
sons, and receiving the Law, and knowing Him beyond all men, and
enjoying such great glory, and serving him beyond the whole world, and
receiving the promises, and being from fathers who were His friends,
and what was the greatest thing of all, having been forefathers of
Christ Himself (for this is the meaning of the words, "of whom, as
concerning the flesh, Christ came"), they are now cast out and
disgraced; and in their place are introduced men who had never known
Him, of the Gentiles. Now since they said all this, and blasphemed
God, Paul hearing it, and being cut to the heart, and vexed for
God's glory's sake, wished that he were accursed, had it been
possible, so that they might be saved, and this blasphemy be put a
stop to, and God might not seem to have deceived the offspring of
those to whom He promised the gifts. And that you may see that it was
in sorrow for this, that the promise of God might not seem to fall to
the ground, which said to Abraham, "I will give this land to thee
and to thy seed," that he uttered this wish, he proceeds, Ver.
6. "Not as though the word of God had taken none effect."
To show that he had courage (Mar. and 4 Mss. wished) to bear all
these things for the word of God, that is, the promise made to
Abraham. For as Moses seemed to be pleading for the Jews, yet was
doing everything for God's glory (for he says, "Lest they say,
Because He was not able to save them, He led them forth to destroy
them in the wilderness" (Deut. ix. 28); stay Thy wrath), so
also does Paul, That they may not say (he means) that the promise
of God has fallen to the ground, and He has disappointed us of that.
He vouched to us, and this word has not issued in deed, I could wish
to be accursed. This then was why he did not speak of the
Gentiles (for to them no promises had been made by Him, nor had they
worshipped Him, wherefore neither did any blaspheme Him on their
account), but it was for the Jews who had both received the promise,
and had also been brought into closer connection with Him than others,
that he expressed this wish. Do you see, that if he had expressed it
for the Gentiles, he would not have been shown to be doing this so
purely for Christ's glory? But Since he was willing to become
accursed in the Jews' behalf, then it was most evidenced that it was
for Christ's sake only that he desired this. And for this cause he
says, "To whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the
service of God, and the promises."
For the Law, he means, which speaks of Christ, comes from thence,
and all the covenants made with them, and Himself came from them, and
the Fathers who received the promises were all from them. Yet still
the opposite has resulted, and they have fallen from all their good
things. Hence, he means, I am vexed, and if it were possible to be
separated from the company about Christ, and to be made an alien, not
from the love of Him (that be far from him; for even all this he was
doing through love), but from all that enjoyment and glory, I would
accept that lot, provided my Master were not to be blasphemed, that
He might not have to hear same saying, that it has been all for
stage-effect; He promises to one, and gives to another. He was
sprung from one race, He saved another. It was to the forefathers of
the Jews that He made the promises, and yet He has deserted their
descendants, and put men, who never at any time knew Him, into their
good things. They labored in the practice of the Law, and reading
the Prophets, while men who have come but yesterday from heathen
altars and images have been set up above them. What foresight is there
in all this? Now that these things may not be said of my Master, he
means, even if they are said unjustly, I would willingly lose even
the kingdom and that glory unutterable, and any sufferings would I
undergo, as considering it the greatest consolation possible no longer
to hear Him Whom I so long for, so blasphemed. But if you be still
against allowing this explanation, just reflect that many fathers have
at many times taken up with thus much for their children, and have
chosen to be separated from them, and rather to see them in honor,
considering their honor dearer to them than their company. But since
we are so short of love like this (Bacon, N. O. Aph. lib. 2,
7), we cannot even form an idea of what is here meant. For there be
some that are so wholly unworthy even to hear the name of Paul, and
that stand at such an interval and distance from that vehemency of his,
as to fancy that he says this of temporal death. Who I should say
were as ignorant of Paul, as the blind of the sun's rays, or even
much more so. For he that died daily, and set before him dangers
thick as a snow-storm, and then said, "Who shall separate us from
the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution,
or famine?" and still unsatisfied with what he had said, and after
going above the heaven and the heaven of heavens, and running through
the Angels and Archangels, and all the higher orders of beings, and
taking in at once things present, things to come, things visible,
things intelligible, things grievous, and things good, that were on
either part, and leaving nothing out at all, yet not even thus
satiated, but even bodying forth another non-existing creation, how
should he, by way of saying some great thing after all those things,
make mention of a temporal death? It is not so, surely it is not!
But such a notion is that of worms nestling in their dunghill. For
had he said this, in what sense would he be wishing himself accursed
from Christ? For death (Phil. i. 23) of that sort would have
joined him more closely with the band of Christ, and made him enjoy
that glory the more. Yet some there are who venture to say things
different from these, even more ridiculous. It was not then, they
say, death that he wished to have, but to be a treasure, a thing set
apart, of Christ's. And who even of the most worthless and indolent
that would not wish for this? And in what way was this likely to be in
his kinsmen's behalf? Let us then leave these fables and trifles
(for it is no more worth while making a reply to these things than to
children babbling at play), and let us go back again to the words
themselves, luxuriating in this very ocean of love, and fearlessly
swimming there in every direction, and reflecting upon the unspeakable
flame of love--or rather say what one may, one shall say nothing
worthy the subject. For there is no ocean so wide, no flame so
intense, as this. And no language can set it forth as it deserves,
but he alone knew it who in good earnest gained it. And now let me
bring the words themselves before you again.
"For I could wish that I myself were accursed." What does the
"I myself" mean? It means I that have been a teacher (1 Cor.
ix. 27) of all, that have gathered together countless good deeds,
that am waiting for countless crowns, that desired Him so much, as to
value His love above all things, who all my days am burning for Him,
and hold all things (Phil. iii. 8) of second importance to the
love of Him. For even being loved by Christ was not the only thing
he cared for, but loving Him exceedingly also. And this last he
cared most for toutou malista hn. So it was that he looked to this
only, and took all things light-heartedly. For he kept one aim in
view in all circumstances, the fulfilling of this excellent love. And
this he wishes for. But since things were not to take this course,
nor he to become accursed, he next attempts to go into a defence
against the charges, and so to bring what was bruited abroad by all
before them as to overthrow it. And before he openly enters into his
defence against these, he first lays down some seeds of it beforehand.
For when he says, "to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory,
and the giving of the Law, and the service of God, and the
promises," he does but say that God willed them indeed to be saved,
and this he showed by His former dealings, and by Christ's having
sprung from them, and by what He promised to the Fathers. But they
out of their own untreatable temper thrust the benefit away from them.
And this is also the reason of his setting down such things as set
forth God's gift, not such as were encomiums upon them. For the
adoption came of His grace, and so too the glory, and the promises,
and the Law. After taking all these things then into consideration,
and reflecting how earnest God along with His Son, had been for
their salvation, he lifts up his voice aloud, and says," Who is a
blessed forever. Amen."
So himself offering up thanksgiving for all men unto the
Only-Begotten of God. What, he says, if others do blaspheme?
Still we who know His mysteries, and His unspeakable Wisdom, and
great Providence over us, know well that it is not to be blasphemed,
but to be glorified, that He is worthy. Still not satisfied with
being himself conscious of it, he endeavors next to use arguments, and
to use a sharper way of speech against them. And he does not direct
his aim at them, without first divesting them of a suspicion they had.
Lest then he should seem to be addressing them as enemies, further on
he says "Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel
is, that they might be saved." (Rom. x. 1.) And here, along
with other remarks, he so ordered things, as not to seem to be saying
what he was going to say out of enmity against them. Hence he does not
decline calling them even kinsmen and brothers. For even if it was for
Christ's sake that he said what he did, still he is for drawing
epispatai their mind to him also, and paves his way to what he has to
say, and quits himself of all suspicion owing to what had to be said
against them, and then he at last goes into the subject most of them
were looking for. For many, as I have already stated, wanted to
know what was the reason why they who had received the promise fell
short of it, while those who had even never heard of it were saved
before them.
Therefore, to clear up this difficulty, he brings forward the answer
before the objection. For to prevent any from saying, What? Art
thou more thoughtful for God's glory than God is for His own? And
does He need thy aid that His word may not fall to the ground? In
reply to these things he says, I spoke this not as if God's Word
had fallen to the ground, but to show my love for Christ. For as
things have had this issue, we are in no want of words in God's
behalf, or of showing that stand His promise did. God said to
Abraham, "To thee and to thy seed will I give the land." And,
"In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed."
(Gen. xii. 7, 3.) Let us see then, he says, of what sort
this seed is. For it is not all that are from him that are his seed.
Whence he says, "For they are not all Israel that are of (or
from)
Israel."
Vet. 7. "Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are
they all children."
Now when you come to know of what kind the seed of Abraham is, you
will see that the promise is given to his seed, and know that the word
hath not fallen to the ground. * Of what kind, pray, is the seed
then? It is no saying of mine, he means, but the Old Testament
itself explains itself by saying as follows, "In Isaac shall thy
seed be called." (Gen. xxi. 12.) What is, "In Isaac?"
Explain.
Ver. 8. "That is, they which are the children of the flesh,
these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise,
these are counted for the seed."
And observe the judgment and depth of Paul's mind. For in
interpreting, he does not say, "they which are the children of the
flesh, these are not" the children of Abraham, but, "the children
of God:" so blending the former things with the present, and showing
that even Isaac was not merely Abraham's son. And what he means is
something of this sort: as many as have been born as Isaac was, they
are sons of God, and of the seed of Abraham. And this is why he
said, "in Isaac shall thy seed be called." That one may learn that
they who are born after the fashion of Isaac, these are in the truest
sense Abraham's children. In what way was Isaac born then? Not
according to the law of nature, not according to the power of the
flesh, but according to the power of the promise. What is meant then
by the power of "the promise?"
Ver. 9. "At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a
son."
This promise then and word of God it was that fashioned Isaac, and
begat him. For what if a womb was its instrument and the belly of a
woman? Since it was not the power of the belly, but the might of the
promise that begat the child. Thus are we also gendered by the words
of God. Since in the pool of water it is the words of God which
generate and fashion us. For it is by being baptized into the Name of
the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost that we are
gendered. And this birth is not of nature, but of the promise of
God. (John iii. 3; Eph. v. 26; James i. 18; 1 Pet.
iii. 21.) For as after first foretelling the birth of Isaac, He
then accomplished it; so ours also He had announced before, many ages
ago by all the Prophets, and afterwards brought it to pass. You know
how great He has set it forth as being, and how, as He promised a
great thing, He furnished it with abundant easel (Hos. ii. 1,
etc.) But if the Jews were to say, that the words, "In Isaac
shall thy seed be called," mean this, that those born of Isaac
should be reckoned to him for a seed, then the Edomites too, and all
those people, ought to be denominated his sons, since their forefather
Esau was a son of his. But now so far are they from being tailed
sons, that they are the greatest possible aliens. You see then that
it is not the children of the flesh that are the children of God, but
that even in nature itself the generation by means of baptism from above
was sketched out beforehand. And if you tell me of the womb, I in
return have to tell you of the water. But as in this case all is of
the Spirit, so in the other all was of promise. For the womb was
more chilled than any water owing to barrenness and to old age. Let us
then gain accurate knowledge of our own nobility, and display a life
worthy of it. For in it is nothing fleshly or earthy: hence neither
let there be in us. For it was neither sleep, nor the will of the
flesh (John i. 13), nor embraces, nor the madness of desire,
but "God's love toward man," which wrought the whole. (Tit.
iii. 5.) And as in that case it was when the age was past hope, so
in this also it was when the old age of sins had come over us, that
Isaac suddenly sprang up in youth, and we all became the children of
God, and the seed of Abraham. (Is. xl. 31.)
Ver. 10. "And not only this; but when Rebecca also had
conceived by one, even by our father Isaac."
The subject in question was an important one. Hence he turns to
several arguments, and endeavors by all means to solve the difficulty.
For if it was at once strange and new for them to be cast out after so
great promises, it is much more strange that we even should come into
their good things, who did not expect anything of the kind. And the
case was the same as if a king's son, who had promises made him that
he should succeed to the power he had, were to be east into the level
of disreputable men, and in his place a condemned man, and one laden
with evils unnumbered, after being taken out of prison, were to come
into the power, which properly was the other's. For he means, what
have you to say? that the son is unworthy? Well, but so is this man
unworthy, and much more so. Hence he ought either to have been
punished along with the former, or to have been honored along with
him. Now it was something of this sort which befel the Jews and the
Gentiles, or something far more strange than this. Now that all were
unworthy, he has shown above, where he, says, "For all have
sinned, and come short of the glory of God." (Rom. iii. 23.)
But the new thing is, that when all were unworthy, the Gentiles were
saved alone. And beside this there is another difficulty that some one
may start, he says. If God had no intention of fulfilling the
promises to them, why make them at all? For men who know not the
future, and are many times deceived, do promise even the undeserving
that they shall have their largesses. But He Who knoweth beforehand
things to come as well as things present, and hath a clear knowledge
that they will make themselves undeserving of the promises, and
therefore will not receive any of the things specified,--why should
He promise at all? Now what is Paul's way of meeting all this? It
is by showing what the Israel is to whom He made the promise. For
when this has been shown, there is at the same time demonstrated the
fact that the promises were all fulfilled. And to point this out he
said, "For they are not all Israel that are of Israel." And this
is why he does not use the name of Jacob, but that of Israel, which
was a sign of the virtue of that just man, and of a gift from above,
and of having seen God. (Gen. xxxii. 28.) Yet, "all," he
says, "have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." (Rom.
iii. 23.) Now if all have sinned, how come some to be saved, and
some to perish? It is because all were not minded to come to Him,
since for His part all were saved, for all were called. However, he
does not set this down yet awhile, but meets it from an advantageous
position, and from other examples, by bringing before them another
question, and as in the former case meets a difficulty very great, by
another difficulty. For when he was discussing how by Christ being
justified all the rest enjoyed that righteousness, he brought in
Adam's case, saying, "For if by one man's offence death reigned,
much more they which receive abundance of grace shall reign in life."
(Rom. v. 17. And the case of Adam, indeed, he does not clear
up, but from it he clears up His (or his own), and shows that it
was more reasonable that He Who died in their behalf should have power
over them at His will. For that when one had sinned all should be
punished, does not seem to be so very reasonable to most men. But
that when One had done aright all should be justified, is at once more
reasonable and more suited to God. Yet still he has not solved the
difficulty he raised. For the more obscure that point remained, the
more the Jew was put to silence. And the difficulty of his position
passed over to the other, and this become clearer from it (Mar. and
4 Mss. "than that"). So in this passage also, it is by raising
other difficulties that he meets the questions raised, inasmuch as it
was against Jews that he was contending. Hence he takes no pains to
solve the examples which he has brought before us. For he was not
answerable for them as in the fight against the Jews. But from them
he makes his own subject throughout clearer. Why do you feel
surprised, he means, that some of the Jews were saved, and some not
saved at this time? Why of old, in the patriarch's times, one may
see this happening. For why was Isaac only called the seed, and yet
he was the father of Ishmael also, and of several others. "But he
was of a mother that was a slave." And what has this to do with his
father? Still I will not be captious. Let this son be set aside on
his mother's account. What are we to say of those sprung from
Keturah? were they not free, and from a mother that was free? How
came they not to be honored with the same preference as Isaac? And
why do I speak of these? for Rebecca was even Isaac's only wife,
and bearing two children she bore them both to Isaac; still those so
born, though of the same father, and the same mother, and the fruit
of the same labor, being both of one father and one mother, and twins
besides, yet did not enjoy the same lot. And yet here you have no
mother's slavery to account for it, as in Ishmael's case, nor can
you say that one was begotten of this womb and the other of a different
one, as in the case of Keturah and Sarah, since in this case they
had the same hour in common to them for their birth. This was why
Paul then, in order to give a clearer example, says that this
happened not in Isaac's case only, "but when Rebecca also had
conceived by one, even by our father Isaac."
Ver. 11-13. "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, the eider shall serve the younger. As it is written,
Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated."
What was the cause then why one was loved and the other hated? why was
it that one served, the other was served? It was because one was
wicked, and the other good. And yet the children being not yet born,
one was honored and the other condemned. For when they were not as yet
born, God said, "the older shall serve the younger." With what
intent then did God say this? Because He doth not wait, as man
doth, to see from the issue of their acts the good and him who is not
so, but even before these He knoweth which is the wicked and which not
such. And this took place in the Israelites' case also, in a still
more wonderful way. Why, he says, do I speak of Esau and of
Jacob, of whom one was wicked and the other good? For in the
Israelites' case, the sin belonged to all, since they all worshipped
the calf. Yet notwithstanding some had mercy shown them, and others
had not.
Ver. 15. "For I will have mercy, He says, on whom I will
have mercy, and I will show compassion on whom I will show
compassion." (Ex. xxxiii. 19.)
This one may see also in the case of those who are punished, for what
would you say of Pharaoh who was punished, and had to pay so heavy a
penalty? You say he was hardened and disobedient. Was he then alone
such, and not even one person else? How came he then to be so
severely punished? Why even in the case of the Jews did he call that
a people which was no people, or again, why not count all worthy of
equal honor? "For if they be" (it says) "as the sand of the sea,
yet shall a remnant be saved." (Is. x. 22.) And why is it to
be only a remnant? You see what difficulty he has filled the subject
with. And with great propriety. For when you have power to throw
your adversary into perplexity, do not at once bring forward the
answer, because if he be found himself responsible for the same
ignorance, why take unnecessary dangers upon yourself? Why make him
more bold, by drawing it all upon yourself? Now tell me, O thou
Jew, that hast so many perplexing questions, and art unable to answer
any of them, how thou comest to annoy us on account of the call of the
Gentiles? I, however, have a good reason to give you why the
Gentiles were justified and ye were cast out. And what is the
reason? It is that they are of faith, ye of the works of the Law.
And it is owing to this obstinacy of yours that ye have in every way
(Mar. and several Mss. all) been given up. For, "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. x. 3.) The clearing up then of the whole
passage, to give the whole sense summarily, is here brought out by
that blessed person. But that this may be clearer, let us investigate
the things he says also one by one; this knowing, that what the
blessed Paul aimed at was, to show by all that he said that God only
knoweth who are worthy, and no man whatever knoweth, even if he seem
to know ever so well, but that in this sentence of his there are sundry
aberrations. For He that knoweth the secrets of the hearts, He only
knoweth for a certainty who deserve a crown, and who punishment and
vengeance. Hence it is that many of those, by men esteemed good, He
convicts and punishes, and I those suspected to be bad He crowns,
after showing it not to be so; thus forming his sentence not after the
judgment of us slaves, but after his own keen and uncorrupt decision,
and not waiting for the issue of actions to look at the wicked and him
who is not so therefrom. But that we may not make the subject more
obscure, again let us go to the very words of the Apostle.
Ver. 10. "And not only this, but when Rebecca also had
conceived by one."
I might, he implies, have mentioned the children by Keturah
besides, but I do not. But to gain the victory from a vantage ground
it is those born of one and the same father, and mother too, that I
bring forward. For they were both sprung from Rebecca, and from
Isaac the true-born, the elect, the son honored above all, of whom
He said, "In Isaac shall thy seed be called," who became "the
father of us all;" but if he was our father, then should his sons
have been our fathers; yet it was not so. You see how this happens
not in Abraham's case only, but also in that of his son himself, and
how it is faith and virtue in all cases that is conspicuous, and gives
the real relationship its character. For hence we learn that it is not
only from the manner of birth, but owing to their being worthy of the
father's virtue, that the children are called children of him. For
if it were only owing to the manner of the birth, then ought Esau to
have enjoyed the same as Jacob did. For he also was from a womb as
good as dead, and his mother was barren. Yet this was not the only
thing required, but the character too, which fact contributes no
common amount of practical instruction for us. And he does not say
that one is good and another bad, and so the former was honored; lest
this kind of argument should be wielded against him, "What, are
those of the Gentiles good men rather than those of the
circumcision?" For even supposing the truth of the matter was so,
still he does not state it yet, as that would have seemed to be
vexatious. But it is upon God's knowledge that he has cast the
whole, and this no one would venture to gainsay, though he were ever
so frantic. "For the children being not yet born," he says, "it
was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger." And he shows
that noble birth after the flesh is of no avail, but we must seek for
virtue of soul, which even before the works of it God knoweth of.
For "the children," he says, "being not yet born, nor having done
any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might
stand, it was said unto her that the elder shall serve the younger:"
for this was a sign of foreknowledge, that they were chosen from the
very birth. That the election made according to foreknowledge, might
be manifestly of God, from the first day He at once saw and
proclaimed which was good and which not. Do not then tell me that thou
hast read the Law (he means) and the Prophets, and hast been a
servant for such a long time. For He that knoweth how to assay the
soul, knoweth which is worthy of being saved. Yield then to the
incomprehensibleness of the election. For it is He alone Who knoweth
how to crown aright. How many, for instance, seemed better than
St. Matthew; to go by the exhibition of works then visible. But
He that knoweth things undeclared, and is able to assay the mind's
aptitude, knew the pearl though lying in the mire, and after passing
by others, and being well pleased with the beauty of this, He elected
it, and by adding to the noble born free-will grace from Himself,
He made it approved. For if in the case of these arts which are
perishable, and indeed in other matters, those that are good judges do
not use the grounds on which the uninstructed form their decision, in
selecting out of what is put before them; but from points which they
are themselves well aware of, they many times disparage that which the
uninstructed approve, and decide upon what they disparage: and
horse-breakers often do this with horses, and so the judges of
precious stones, and workmen in other arts: much more will the God
that loveth man, the infinite Wisdom, Who alone hath a clear
knowledge of all things, not allow of man's guesses, but will out of
His own exact and unfailing Wisdom pass his sentence upon all men.
Hence it was that He chose the publican, the thief, and the harlot;
but dishonored priests, and elders, and rulers, and cast them out.
And this one may see happening in the martyrs' case also. Many
accordingly of those who were utterly cast aside, have in the time of
trial been crowned. And, on the other hand, some that have been held
great ones by many have stumbled and fallen. Do not then call the
Creator to account, nor say, Why is it that one was crowned and
another punished? For He knoweth how to do these things with
exactness. Whence also he says, "Jacob have I loved, and Esau
have I hated." That it was with justice, you indeed know from the
result: but Himself even before the result knew it clearly. For it
is not a mere exhibition of works that God searcheth after, but a
nobleness of choice and an obedient temper (gnwmhn eugnwmona)
besides. For a man of this kind, if he should ever sin through some
surprise, will speedily recover himself. And if he should even stay
long haply in a state of vice, he will not be overlooked, but God
Who knoweth all things will speedily draw him out. And so he that is
herein corrupted, even if he seem to do some good things, will
perish, in that he doth this with an ill intention. Hence even
David, after committing murder and adultery, since he did this as
being carried away by surprise, and not from habitual practice of
wickedness, speedily washed it out. The Pharisee, however, who had
not perpetrated any such crime (Luke xviii. 11), but even had
good deeds besides to boast of, lost all by the bad spirit he had
chosen.
Ver. 14. "What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with
God? God forbid."
Hence there is no such thing in the case of us and the Jews. And
then he goes on with another thing, a more clear than this. And of
what sort is it?
Ver. 15. "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."
Here again he adds force to the objection by dividing it in two and
meeting it, and starting an other fresh difficulty. But to make what
I have said clearer, one must needs explain it. God, he means,
said that "the elder shall serve the younger," before the travail.
What then? "Is God unright-eous?" By no means. Now listen to
what follows also. For in that case the virtue or the vice, might be
the decisive thing. But here there was one sin on which all the jews
joined, that of the molten calf, and still some were punished, and
some were not punished. And this is why He says, "I will have
mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom
I will have compassion." (Ex. xxxiii. 19: observe context.)
For it is not thine to know, O Moses, he means, which are
deserving of My love toward man, but leave this to Me. But if
Moses had no right to know, much less have we. And this is why he
did not barely quote the passage, but also called to our minds to whom
it was said. For it is Moses, he means, that he is speaking to,
that at least by the dignity of the person he might make the objector
modest. Having then given a solution of the difficulties raised, he
divides it in two, by bringing forward another objection besides, as
follows:
Ver. 16, 17. "So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of
him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy. For the Scripture
saith unto Pharaoh, 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."
As then in the one case, he means, some were saved and some were
punished, so here also. This man was reserved for this very purpose.
And then he again urges the objection.
Ver. 18, 19. "Therefore He hath mercy on whom He will have
mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me,
Why doth he then find fault? For who hath resisted His will?"
See what pains he takes to embarrass the subject in every way. And
the answer he does not produce forthwith, it being a useful thing not
to do so, but he first stops the disputant's mouth, saying as
follows, Ver. 20. "Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest
against God?"
This he does to take down the objector's unseasonable
inquisitiveness, and excessive curiosity, and to put a check upon it,
and teach him to know what God is, and what man, and how
incomprehensible His foreknowledge is, and how far above our reason,
and how obedience to Him in all points is binding. So when he has
made this preparatory step in his hearer, and has hushed and softened
down his spirit, then with great felicity he introduces the answer,
having made what he says easy of admittance with him. And he does not
say, it is impossible to answer questions of this kind, but that (5
Mss. No, but what? that) it is presumptuous to raise them. For
our business is to obey what God does, not to be curious even if we do
not know the reason of them. Wherefore he said, "Who art thou that
repliest against God?" You see how very light he makes of him, how
he bears down his swelling spirit! "Who art thou?" art thou a
sharer of His power? (compare Job xxxviii.) nay, art thou sitting
in judgment upon God? Why in comparison with Him thou canst not have
a being even! nor this or that sort of being, but absolutely none!
For the expression, "who art thou?" doth much more set him at
naught than "thou art nothing." And he takes other ways of showing
further his indignation in the question, and does not say, "Who art
thou that" answerest "God?" but, "that repliest against," that
is, that gainsayest, and that opposest. For the saying things ought
to be so, and ought not to be so, is what a man does that "replieth
against." See how he scares them, how he terrifies them, how he
makes them tremble rather than be questioning and curious. This is
what an excellent teacher does; he does not follow his disciples'
fancy everywhere, but leads them to his own mind, and pulls up the
thorns, and then puts the seed in, and does not answer at once in all
cases to the questions put to him.
Ver. 20, 21. "Shall the thing formed say to Him that formed
it, Why hast Thou made me thus? Hath not the potter (Read Jer.
xviii. 1-10) power, of the same lump to make one vessel unto
honor, and another unto dishonor?"
Here it is not to do away with free-will that he says this, but to
show, up to what point we ought to obey God. For in respect of
calling God to account, we ought to be as little disposed to it as the
clay is. For we ought to abstain not from gainsaying or questioning
only, but even from speaking or thinking of it at all, and to become
like that lifeless matter, which followeth the potter's hands, and
lets itself be drawn about anywhere he may please. And this is the
only point he applied the illustration to, not, that is, to any
enunciation of the rule of life, but to the complete obedience and
silence enforced upon us. And this we ought to observe in all cases,
that we are not to take the illustrations quite entire, but after
selecting the good of them, and that for which they were introduced,
to let the rest alone. As, for instance, when he says, "He
couched, he lay down as a lion;" (Numb. xxiv. 9) let us take
out the indomitable and fearful part, not the brutality, nor any other
of the things belonging to a lion. And again, when He says, "I
will meet them as a bereaved bear" (Hos. xiii. 8), let us take
the vindictiveness. And when he says, "our God is a consuming
fire" (Deut. iv. 24; and Heb. xii. 29), the wasting power
exerted in punishing. So also here must we single out the clay, the
potter, and the vessels. And when he does go on to say, "Hath not
the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel
unto honor, and another unto dishonor?" do not suppose that this is
said by Paul as an account of the creation, nor as implying a
necessity over the will, but to illustrate the sovereignty and
difference of dispensations; for if we do not take it in this way,
divers incongruities will follow for if here he were speaking about the
will, and those who are good and those not so, He will be Himself
the Maker of these, and man will be free from all responsibility.
And at this rate, Paul will also be shown to be at variance with
himself, as he always bestows chief honor upon free choice. There is
nothing else then which he here wishes to do, save to persuade the
hearer to yield entirely to God, and at no time to call Him to
account for anything whatever. For as the potter (he says) of the
same lump makes what he pleaseth, and no one forbids it; thus also
when God, of the same race of men, punisheth some, and honoreth
others, be not thou curious nor meddlesome herein, but worship only,
and imitate the clay. And as it followeth the hands of the potter, so
do thou also the mind of Him that so ordereth things. For He worketh
nothing at random, or mere hazard, though thou be ignorant of the
secret of His Wisdom. Yet thou allowest the other of the same lump
to make divers things, and findest no fault: but of Him you demand an
account of His punishments and honors, and will not allow Him to know
who is worthy and who is not so; but since the same lump is of the same
substance, you assert that there are the same dispositions. And, how
monstrous this is! And yet not even is it on the potter that the honor
and the dishonor of the things made of the lump depends, but upon the
use made by those that handle them, so here also it depends on the free
choice. Still, as I said before, one must take this illustration to
have one bearing only, which is that one should not contravene God,
but yield to His incomprehensible Wisdom. For the examples ought to
be greater than the subject, and than the things on account of which
they are brought forward, so as to draw on the hearer better. Since
if they were not greater and did not mount far above it, he could not
attack as he ought, and shame the objectors. However, their
ill-timed obstinacy he silenced in this way with becoming superiority.
And then he introduces his answer. Now what is the answer?
Ver. 22, 23, 24. "What if God, willing to show His
wrath, and to make His power known, endured with much long-suffering
the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: and that He might make
known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had
afore prepared unto glory, even us, whom He hath chosen, not of the
Jews only, but also of the Gentiles."
What he means is somewhat as follows. Pharaoh was a vessel of wrath,
that is, a man who by his own hard-heartedness had kindled the wrath
of God. For after enjoying much long-suffering, he became no
better, but remained unimproved. Wherefore he calleth him not only
"a vessel of wrath," but also one "fitted for destruction." That
is, fully fitted indeed, but by his own proper self. For neither had
God left out aught of the things likely to recover him, nor did he
leave out aught of those that would ruin him, and put him beyond any
forgiveness. Yet still, though God knew this, "He endured him
with much long-suffering," being willing to bring him to repentance.
For had He not willed this, then He would not have been thus
long-suffering. But as he would not use the long-suffering in order
to repentance, but fully fitted himself for wrath, He used him for
the correction of others, through the punishment inflicted upon him
making them better, and in this way setting forth His power. For
that it is not God's wish that His power be so made known, but in
another way, by His benefits, namely, and kindnesses, he had shown
above in all possible ways. For if Paul does not wish to appear
powerful in this way ("not that we should appear approved," he
says, "but that ye should do that which is honest,") (2 Cor.
xiii. 7), much less doth God. But after that be had shown
long-suffering, that He might lead to repentance, but he did not
repent, He suffered him a long time, that He might display at once
His goodness and His power, even if that man were not minded to gain
anything from this great long-suffering. As then by punishing this
man, who continued incorrigible, He showed His power, so by having
pitied those who had done many sins but repented, He manifested His
love toward man. But it does not say, love towards man, but glory,
to show that this is especially God's glory, and for this He was
above all things earnest. But in saying, "which He had afore
prepared unto glory," he does not mean that all is God's doing.
Since if this were so, there were nothing to hinder all men from being
saved. But he is setting forth again
His foreknowledge, and doing away with the difference between the
Jews and the Gentiles. And on this topic again he grounds a defence
of his statement, which is no small one. For it was not in the case
of the Jews only that some men perished, and some were saved, but
with the Gentiles also this was the case. Wherefore he does not say,
all the Gentiles, but, "of the Gentiles," nor, all the Jews,
but, "of the Jews." As then Pharaoh became a vessel of wrath by
his own lawlessness, so did these become vessels of mercy by their own
readiness to obey. For though the more part is of God, still they
also have contributed themselves some little. Whence he does not say
either, vessels of well-doing, or vessels of boldness (parrhsias),
but "vessels of mercy," to show that the whole is of God. For the
phrase, "it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth,"
even if it comes in the course of the objection, still, were it said
by Paul, would create no difficulty, Because when he says, "it is
not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth," he does not
deprive us of free-will, but shows that all is not one's own, for
that it requires grace from above. For it is binding on us to will,
and also to run: but to confide not in our own labors, but in the love
of God toward man. And this he has expressed elsewhere. "Yet not
I, but the grace which was with me." (1 Cor. xv. 10.),
And he well says, "Which He had afore prepared unto glory." For
since they reproached them with this, that they were saved by grace,
and thought to make them ashamed, he far more than sets aside this
insinuation.
For if the thing brought glory even to God, much more to them through
whom God was glorified. But observe his forbearance, and unspeakable
wisdom. For when he had it in his power to adduce, as an instance of
those punished, not Pharaoh, but such of the Jews as had sinned,
and so make his discourse much clearer, and show that where there were
the same fathers, and the same sins, some perished, and some had
mercy shown them, and persuade them not to be doubtful-minded, even
if some of the Gentiles were saved, while the Jews were perishing;
that he might not make his discourse irksome, the showing forth of the
punishment he draws from the foreigner, so that he may not be forced to
call them "vessels of wrath." But those that obtained mercy he draws
from the people of the Jews. And besides, he also has spoken in a
sufficient way in God's behalf, because though He knew very well
that the nation was fitting itself as a vessel of destruction, still
He contributed all on His part, His patience, His
long-suffering, and that not merely long-suffering, but "much
long-suffering;" yet still he was not minded to state it barely
against the Jews. Whence then are some vessels of wrath, and some of
mercy? Of their own free choice. God, however, being very good,
shows the same kindness to both.
For it was not those in a state of salvation only to whom He showed
mercy, but also Pharaoh, as far as His part went. For of the same
long-suffering, both they and he had the advantage. And if he was
not saved, it was quite owing to his own will: since, as for what
concerneth God, he had as much done for him as they who were saved.
Having then given to the question that answer which was furnished by
facts, in order to give his discourse the advantage of other testimony
in its favor, he introduces the prophets also making the same
declarations aforetime. For Hosea, he says, of old put this in
writing, as follows:
Ver. 25. "I will call them My people, which were not My
people; and her beloved, which was not beloved."
Here to prevent their saying, that you are deceiving us here with
specious reasoning, he calls Hosea to witness, who crieth and saith,
"I will call them My people, who were not My people." (Hos.
ii. 23.) Who then are the not-people? Plainly, the Gentiles.
And who the not-beloved? The same again. However, he says, that
they shall become at once people, and beloved, and sons of God.
Ver. 26. "For even they shall be called," he says, "the
children of the living God."
But if they should assert that this was said of those of the Jews who
believed, even then the argument stands. For if with those who after
so many benefits were hard-hearted and estranged; and had lost their
being as a people, so great a change was wrought, what is there to
prevent even those who were not estranged after being taken to Him,
but were originally aliens, from being called, and, provided they
obey, from being counted worthy of the same blessings? Having then
done with Hosea, he does not content himself with him only, but also
brings Isaiah in after him. sounding in harmony with him.
Ver. 27. "For Esaias," he says, "crieth concerning
Israel."
That is, speaks out boldly, and uses no dissimulation. Why then lay
a charge against us, when they afore declared the same thing with more
than trumpet's loudness? And what does Isaiah cry? "Though the
number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant
shall be saved. (Is. x. 22.)
Do you see that he too does not say that all are to be saved, but that
those that are worthy shall? For I regard not the multitude, he
means, nor does a race diffused so far distress me, but those only do
I save that yield themselves worthy of it. And he does not mention
the "sand of the sea" without a reason, but to remind them of the
ancient promise whereof they had made themselves unworthy. Why then
are you troubled, as though the promise had failed, when all the
Prophets show that it is not all that are to be saved? Then he
mentions the mode of the salvation also. Observe the accuracy of the
Prophet, and the judgment of the Apostle, what a testimony he has
cited, how exceedingly apposite. For it not only shows us that those
to be saved are some and not all, but also adds the way they are to be
saved. How then are they to be saved, and how will God count them
worthy of the benefit?
Ver. 28. "He will finish the work, and cut it short in
righteousness," he says, "because a short work will the Lord make
upon the earth." (Ib. 23, LXX.)
What he means then is somewhat of this sort. There is no need of
fetching a circuit, and of trouble, and the vexation of the works of
the Law, for the salvation is by a very short way. For such is
faith, it holds salvation in a few short words. "For if thou shalt
confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in thine heart
that God hath raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."
(Rom. x. 9.) Now you see what this, "the Lord shall make a
short word (LXX. lit.) upon earth," is. And what is indeed
wonderful is, that this short word carries with it not salvation only,
but also righteousness.
Ver 29. "And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of
Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and had been made
like unto Gomorrha." (Is. i. 9.)
Here again he shows another thing, that not even those few were saved
from their own resources. For they too would have perished, and met
with Sodom's fate, that is, they would have had to undergo utter
destruction (for they (of Sodom) were also destroyed root and
branch, and left not even the slightest remnant of themselves,) and
they too, he means, would have been like these, unless God bad used
much kindness to them, and had saved them by faith. And this happened
also in the case of the visible captivity, the majority having been
taken away captive and perished, and some few only being saved.
Ver. 30, 31. "What shall we say then? That the Gentiles,
which followed not after righteousness, have attained to
righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith. But
Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not
attained to the law of righteousness."
Here at last is the clearest answer. For since he had used a proof as
well from facts ("for they are not all Israel that are of Israel")
as from the case of the forefathers Jacob and Esau, and from the
prophets Hosea and Isaiah, he further gives the most decisive
answer, after first adding to the perplexity. The points discussed,
then, are two; one that the Gentiles attained, and the other that
they attained it without following after it, that is, without taking
pains about it. And again in the Jews' case also there are two
difficulties of the same kind; one that Israel attained not, the
other that, though they took pains, they attained not. Whence also
his use of words is more emphatical. For he does not say that they
had, but that they "attained to righteousness." For what is
especially new and unusual is, that they who followed after it attained
not, but they which followed not after it attained. And he seems to
be indulging them by saying, "followed after." But afterwards he
strikes the blow home. For since he had a strong answer to give them,
he had no fear of making the objection a little harsher. Hence he doth
not speak of faith either, and the righteousness ensuing thereon, but
shows that before the faith even, on their own ground they were worsted
and condemned. For thou, O Jew, he says, hast not found even the
righteousness which was by the Law. For thou hast transgressed it,
and become liable to the curse. But these that came not through the
Law, but by another road, have found a greater righteousness than
this, that, namely, which is of faith. And this he had also said
before. "For if Abraham was justified by works, he hath whereof to
glory, but not before God" (Rom. iv.): so showing that the
other righteousness was greater than this. Before, then, I said
that there were two difficulties, but now they have even become three
questions: that the Gentiles found righteousness, and found it
without following after it, and found a greater than that of the Law.
These same difficulties are again felt in the Jews' case with an
opposite view. That Israel did not find, and though he took pains he
did not find, and did not find even the less. Having then thrust his
hearer into perplexity, he proceeds to give a concise answer, and
tells him the cause of all that is said. When then is the cause?
Ver. 32. "Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by
the works of the Law."
This is the clearest answer in the passage, which if he had said
immediately upon start ing, he would not have gained so easy a
hearing. But since it is after many perplexities, and preparations,
and demonstrations that he sets it down, and after using countless
preparatory steps, he has at last made it more intelligible, and also
more easily admitted. For this he says is the cause of their
destruction: "Because it was not by faith, but as it were by the
works of the Law," that they wished to be justified. And he does
not say, "by works," but, "as it were by the works of the Law,"
to show that they had not even this righteousness.
"For they stumbled at that stumbling-stone;"
Ver. 33. "As it is written, Behold I lay in Sion a
stumbling-stone, and rock of offence and whosoever believeth on Him
shall not be ashamed."
You see again how it is from faith that the boldness comes, and the
gift is universal; since it is not of the Jews only that this is
said, but also of the whole human race. For every one, he would
say, whether Jew, or Grecian, or Scythian, or Thracian, or
whatsoever else he may be, will, if he believes, enjoy the privilege
of great boldness. But the wonder in the Prophet is that he foretells
not only that they should believe, but also that they should not
believe. For to stumble is to disbelieve. As in the former passage
he points out them that perish and them that are saved, where he says,
"If the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea,
the remnant shall be saved. And, If the Lord of Sabaoth had not
left us a seed, we should have been as Sodoma." And, "He hath
called not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles;" so here too
he implies that some will believe, and some will stumble. But
stumbling comes of not taking heed, of gaping after other things.
Since then they did give heed to the Law, they stumbled on the
stone, "And a stone of stumbling and rock of offence" he calls it
from the character and end of those that believe not.
Is then the language used made plain to you? or does it still want
much in clearness? I think indeed that, to those who have been
attending, it is easy to get a clear view of it. But if it has
slipped anybody's memory, you can meet in private, and learn what it
was. And this is why I have continued longer upon this explanatory
part of the discourse, that I might not be compelled to break off the
continuity of the context, and so spoil the clearness of the
statements. And for this cause too I will bring my discourse to a
conclusion here, without saying anything to you on the more immediately
practical points, as I generally do, lest I should make a fresh
indistinctness in your memories by saying so much. It is time now to
come to the proper conclusion, by shutting up the discourse with the
doxology to the God of all. Let us then both pause, me that am
speaking and you that are hearing, and offer up glory to Him. For
His is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever and
ever. Amen.
|
|