Chapter 4: Verses 21–31
The occasion of Paul's desire is in these words: "I doubt of you," or thus, "I am in perplexity for you." And this Paul speaks as a mother in some dangerous extremity, in the time of her travail—as Rachel was in the birth of Benjamin (Gen. 35). And the words carry this sense: I am troubled for your recovery, and I fear it will never be.
Here we learn how dangerous a thing it is to fall from grace, though it be but in part. For a man cannot recover himself when he will. We do not the good we can, unless God make us do it (Ezek. 36:27; Song
1:4; Jer. 31:33). Therefore it is an error to think that we may repent and turn to God when we will, as many suppose. And this must be a warning unto us to preserve the good things that God has put into us, and not to quench the Spirit.
And though Paul doubt of the recovery of the Galatians, yet he spares not to send his epistle to them and to use means. And thus in desperate cases, we must use the best means and leave the success to God. Thus the Israelites, when there was no other help, went into the sea as into their deathbed or grave, by faith staying themselves on the promise of God (Heb. 11:29; 2 Chron. 20:12).
That which Paul here says, may be said to many among us in whom Christ is not yet framed, whether we respect knowledge or good life.
For they give just occasion of doubting whether they will ever return to God or no.
Chapter 4: Verses 21-31 21 Tell me ye that will be under the law, do ye not hear the law?
22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, one by a servant, and another by a free woman.
23 But he which was of the servant, was born after the flesh: and he which was of the free woman, by promise.
From the eighth verse of this chapter to the twentieth verse, Paul has handled the conclusion of the principal argument of this epistle touching the apostasy of the Galatians. And here he returns again to his former doctrine touching the justification of a sinner by faith, without the works of the law. And he confirms it by another argument, the sum and substance whereof is this. Your liberty from the law was prefigured in the family of Abraham. Therefore thou art not bondmen to the law, but free men.
The argument is at large propounded, and it has four parts: a preface in the twenty-first verse; a history of Abraham and his family (vv.
22–23); the application of the history from the twenty-fourth verse to the thirtieth; the conclusion (v. 31).
And first of the preface. "Law"—the word "law" in the first place is taken properly for the moral and ceremonial law of Moses, and in the second place, for the books of Moses, and namely, for the book of Genesis. And in this sense the word is taken when Christ is said to "expound the law and the prophets" (Luke 24). And sometimes it signifies all the books of the Old Testament (John 15:25).
"Under the law"—to be under the law is to hold ourselves bound to the fulfilling of the law and to look for life eternal thereby.
"Do ye not hear the law?"—that is, you read and hear indeed, but you understand not the scope and drift of that which you read.
In this preface, first Paul meets with the pride of man's nature, whereby the Galatians went about to establish their own righteousness by the law, when he says, "Ye that will be under the
law," etc. With this pride were the Jews tainted (Rom. 10:3), and the young prince that came to Christ and said, "Good master, what must
I do to be saved?" And the papists of our time, who will not be subject to the justice of God, but set up their own justice in the keeping of the law. The like do the ignorant people among us, who hold that they are able to fulfill the law and that they are to be saved thereby. And when they say, they look to be saved by their faith, they understand thereby their fidelity, that is, their good dealing.
Again, Paul here notes the servile disposition of men that loves rather to be in bondage under the law, than to be in perfect liberty under the grace of God. This we see in daily experience. All profess
Christ among us. Yet is it even a death to the most, to forsake the bondage of the flesh. Christ we profess, yet so as we take liberty to live after the lusts of our own hearts.
When Paul says, "Do ye not hear the law?," he notes the cause of our spiritual pride and of the servile disposition before named, namely, ignorance in mistaking and misconceiving the true scope of the law.
For the Galatians did not consider that Christ was the scope of the law, but they supposed that the very observation of the law, even since the fall of man, did give life and justice. This ignorance was to the Jews as a veil before their eyes in the reading of the law (2 Cor.
3:14). And this ignorance has blinded the papist at this day. For he supposes that the gospel is nothing else but the law of Moses. And that Christ indeed is but an instrument to make us keepers of the law and consequently saviors of ourselves.
In the history of Abraham I consider three things: the fact of Abraham in taking two wives; the event upon this fact, he had two sons by them; the condition of these sons.
Touching the fact of Abraham, it may be demanded, what is to be judged thereof? The ground to the answer shall be this: that marriage is the indivisible conjunction of one man and one woman only. This
Christ of purpose teaches (Matt. 19) where He says that "God created them at the first man and woman," and not women (v. 4), "that a man must forsake father and mother, and cleave to his wife," not to his wives (v. 5), that "they twain shall be one flesh" (v. 6). And in all this Christ makes no new law, but only revives the first institution of marriage made in paradise. And Moses having set down this divine institution, adds withal that Lamech was the first that broke it by taking many wives.
Now then, the answer to the question is two-fold. Some say that Abraham and the rest of the patriarchs had a dispensation from God to marry many wives, and therefore that it was no sin in them. Of this mind are sundry learned men, both Protestants and papists. But the answer is only conjectural and has no evidence in Scripture.
The second answer is that God did not approve the polygamy of the fathers or commend it, but did only tolerate it as a lesser evil for the preventing of a greater. This toleration appears in that God commanded that "the king must not multiply his wives" (Deut. 17:17) and that the child of the hated wife (though she be the second wife), if it be first born, shall be the heir (Deut. 21:15). The occasions of this toleration were two. One was a desire in the patriarchs to multiply their posterity, that if it were possible the Messiah might descend of their line. The second was the common custom of men in the East countries who made no matter of it to marry many wives. And a common custom bred a common error, and a common error bred common ignorance, whereby that which was indeed a sin was esteemed no sin.
It may be objected, if the having of many wives were an offence, that Abraham and the rest of the holy patriarchs lived and died in a sin without repentance, because we find nothing in Scripture touching their repentance for that sin. Answer. Known sins require particular repentance. But if sins be unknown or unconsidered by reason that men are carried away with the sway of the times (as the patriarchs were), a general repentance suffices (Ps. 19:12).
Again, it may be alleged that Abraham took Hagar by the consent of Sarah. Answer. That suffices not to make a full excuse for Abraham.
For if marriage were a mere civil contract, as it is made by the consent of men and women, so it might be dissolved by like consent.
But it is more than a civil contract, because in the making of it, beside the consent of the parties, the authority of God is interposed.
And therefore Sarah's consent (in giving Hagar to Abraham) is nothing without the allowance of God. And we may not think that God will allow of that which is directly against His own ordinance.
Thirdly, it may be alleged that if the having of many wives be a fault, then Abraham and the rest were adulterers. Answer. Not so, the polygamy of the fathers is to be placed in the middle between adultery and holy wedlock. They took not wives of a lewd mind for the satisfying of their lust, but of a conscience not rightly informed in this point.
The event upon the fact of Abraham was that his two wives bare him two sons. He had indeed more sons by Keturah (Gen. 25:2), but these two, Ishmael and Isaac, are only here mentioned because by the special appointment of God they were ordained as types of true believers and hypocrites (read Rom. 9:7–8).
The condition of the two children is set forth by a double difference.
The first is that "one was born of a bondwoman," and therefore a
bondman; "the other of a free woman," and therefore a free man and the heir. Here it may be demanded, how the same person can be both a wife and a bond woman? Answer. Among the heathen (as also among the Jews) there were two sorts of wives. Of the first kind were they that were joint governors of the family with the husband, and they were called mistresses of the house. Of the second sort were they that served only for propagation, and were in all other respects as servants or strangers.48 Of the first kind was Sarah; and of the second, Hagar and Keturah.
The second difference of the children was this. One, that is, "Ishmael," was "born after the flesh," that is, by the strength of nature, and according to the fleshly counsel of Sarah, who did substitute Hagar into her own room. The other, namely, "Isaac," was
"born by the promise," that is, according to the order of nature yet not by the strength of nature, but by the virtue of the promise of God.
In the birth of Ishmael, Sarah's desire was good that the promise of God might be accomplished. But the means was carnal, the substitution of her handmaid. This is the condition of the godly. They intend and desire the best things, but they fail in the matter of doing.
The Spirit stirs up good motions, and the flesh corrupts them. Paul says that "to will was present with him, but he could not do that which was good as he ought." This must cause us always to humble ourselves for our best works.
Again, we are here taught not to make haste to accomplish our desires, but when God promises anything to wait His leisure and in the mean season to live in subjection. Sarah with all her haste could not prevent God's providence. She has her desire in the birth of Ishmael, but yet he is born according to the flesh, in bondage; and he is not the promised seed.
In the birth of Isaac we see the virtue of the promise of God when it is mixed with our faith. For then it makes things possible that are otherwise impossible (Matt. 17:20). If then we desire any good things at the hands of God, our duty is in silence and patience to rest on the promises of God, and then our desire shall indeed be accomplished.
24 By the which things another thing is meant. For these mothers are the two testaments, the one (which is Hagar) of Mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage.
25 For Hagar, or Sinai, is a mountain in Arabia, and it answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and she is in bondage with her children.
The application of the former history here begins. And the sense of the words is, "another thing meant"—the words are thus: "These things are spoken by allegory." That is, one thing is said, and another thing is meant. "Two mothers"—Hagar and Sarah. "Are two"—they represent or signify the two testaments. Est is put for significat. Of the two testaments I will speak afterward.
"The one"—the one testament, which is the covenant of works.
"Which is Hagar"—which testament is figured by Hagar. "Is of Mount Sinai"—came from Mount Sinai, where the law was delivered to the Israelites. "And gendereth to bondage"—that is, it makes all them bondmen that look to be justified and saved by the works of the law.
"For Hagar or Sinai"—here the translators are deceived, supposing that Mount Sinai had two names, Hagar and Sinai. But this opinion of theirs has no ground, and the words are thus to be read, "Hagar is
Sinai." Here Hagar signifies not so much the person of Abraham's handmaid, as that which is said in the former history of Hagar. For
the words are τὸ Ἁγὰρ. And Sinai must be considered as a place where it pleased God to publish the law. And the words thus considered have this sense: "Hagar is Sinai," that is, Hagar figures
Sinai two ways. First, in condition. For as Hagar was a bondwoman, so Sinai in respect of the law was a place of bondage. And in this respect also it is called Sinai of Arabia, which was a desert out of the land of Canaan. Secondly, in effect: For as Hagar bare Ishmael a bondman to Abraham, so Sinai or the law makes bondmen. "And it answereth"—Sinai answers to Jerusalem, that is, as Hagar figures
Sinai, so Hagar figures Jerusalem. And by this means: Sinai and Jerusalem are alike and stand both in one order. Now Hagar figures
Jerusalem two ways, in condition and effect. In condition: For as Hagar was a bondwoman, so Jerusalem or the nation of the Jews refusing Christ and looking to be saved by the law are in spiritual bondage. In effect: For as Hagar brings forth Ishmael a bondman, so Jerusalem by teaching the law makes bondmen. Therefore Paul says in the last place of Jerusalem, "And she is in bondage with her children."
The Use. "These things are said by allegory." Here the papists make a double sense of Scripture: one literal, the other spiritual. Literal is twofold. Proper, when the words are taken in their proper signification. Figurative, when the Holy Ghost signifies His meaning in borrowed terms.
Spiritual senses they make three. One allegorical, when things in the Old Testament are applied to signify things in the New Testament.
The second is tropological, when Scripture signifies something touching manners. The third is anagogical, when things are in Scripture applied to signify the estate of everlasting life. Thus
Jerusalem properly is a city; by allegory, the church of the New Testament; in a tropological sense, a state well ordered; in an
anagogical sense, the estate of eternal life. These senses they use to apply to most places of the Scripture, specially to the history. But I say to the contrary that there is but one full and entire sense of every place of Scripture, and that is also the literal sense, sometimes expressed in proper and sometimes in borrowed or figurative speeches. To make many senses of Scripture is to overturn all sense and to make nothing certain. As for the three spiritual senses (so called), they are not senses, but applications or uses of Scripture. It may be said that the history of Abraham's family here propounded has beside his proper and literal sense, a spiritual or mystical sense. I answer, they are not two senses, but two parts of one full and entire sense. For not only the bare history, but also that which is thereby signified, is the full sense of the Holy Ghost.
Again, here we see the Scripture is not only penned in the proper terms, but also in sundry divine figures and allegories. The Song of Solomon is an allegory borrowed from the fellowship of man and wife to signify the communion between Christ and His church. And so is the forty-fifth psalm. The book of Daniel and the Revelation is an allegorical history. The parables of the Old and New Testaments are figures or allegories. When David says, "Ride on upon the word of truth, meekness, and justice" (Ps. 45:4), he describes a prince's chariot by allegory. The guide is the word; the horses that draw it are three: truth, meekness, justice. And thus the throne of God is described by like allegory (Ps. 89:14); the foundations of the throne are righteousness and equity. The main bearers to go before the throne are mercy and truth.
It may be demanded, when does the Scripture speak properly, and when by figure? Answer. If the proper signification of the words be against common reason, or against the analogy of faith, or against good manners, they are not then to be taken properly but by figure.
The words of Christ, "I am the true vine, and my Father is a husbandman" (John 15:1)—if they be taken properly, they are absurd in common reason. Therefore the words are figurative, and the sense is this: "I am as the true vine, and my Father as a husbandman." The words of Christ, "Take, eat, this is my body" (1 Cor. 11:24), taken properly, are against the articles of faith: "He ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of God." And they are against the sixth commandment, "Thou shalt not kill." And therefore they must be expounded by figure thus: "This bread is a sign of my body." The like is to be said of other places. They must be taken properly, if it be possible; if not, by figure.
Here then they are to be blamed that make the use of rhetoric in the Bible to be a mere foppery. For to this purpose there is a book in English heretofore published. As also they of the Family of Love54 are justly to be condemned, who in another extremity turn all the Bible to an allegory, yea, even that which is said of Adam and of Christ.
"They are two testaments." "They are," that is, they signify. And so "Hagar is Sinai a mountain in Arabia," that is, signifies Sinai. Thus
"the rock in the wilderness is Christ" (1 Cor. 10:4), that is, figures Christ. Like to this is the sacramental phrase, "This is my body," that is to say, "This bread signifies my body." Great is the madness of men that hence gather transubstantiation or the real conversion of bread into the body of Christ. They might as well gather hence the conversion of Hagar into Mount Sinai.
The two testaments are the covenant of works and the covenant of grace, one promising life eternal to him that does all the things contained in the law, [and] the other to him that turns and believes in Christ. And it must be observed that Paul says, "They are two,"
that is, two in substance or kind. And they are two sundry ways. The law, or covenant of works, propounds the bare justice of God without mercy. The covenant of grace, or the gospel, reveals both the justice and mercy of God, or the justice of God giving place to His mercy.
Secondly, the law requires of us inward and perfect righteousness, both for nature and action. The gospel propounds unto us an imputed justice resident in the person of the mediator. Thirdly, the law promises life upon condition of works. The gospel promises remission of sins and life everlasting upon condition that we rest ourselves on Christ by faith. Fourthly, the law was written in tables of stone; the gospel, in the fleshy tables of our hearts (Jer. 31:33; 2 Cor.
3:3). Fifthly, the law was in nature by creation. The gospel is above nature and was revealed after the fall. Sixthly, the law has Moses for a mediator (Deut. 5:27), but Christ is the mediator of the New
Testament (Heb. 8:6). Lastly, the law was dedicated by the blood of beasts (Ex. 24:5); and the New Testament, by the blood of Christ
(Heb. 9:12).
Here then falls to the ground a main pillar in popish religion, which is, that the law of Moses and the gospel are all one law for substance.
And that the difference lies in this: that the law of Moses is dark and imperfect, and the gospel or the law of Christ more perfect, because
He has (as they say) added counsels to precepts. Again, the law (they say) without the Spirit is the law properly, and with the Spirit, it is the gospel. But all this is false which they teach. For the two testaments, the law and the gospel, are two in nature, substance, or kind. And the difference lies not in the presence or absence of the Spirit.
And whereas the papists make two justifications: the first merely by grace; the second by works. Besides the two testaments, they must establish a third testament compounded of both, and it must be
partly legal and partly evangelical; otherwise the two-fold justification cannot stand. For the law propounds only one way of justification; and the gospel, a second. The doctrine therefore that propounds both is compounded of both.
God did not approve the polygamy of Abraham, yet does He use it to signify the greatest mystery of our religion. Here we see a great point of the divine providence of God, who orders and uses well the things which He does not approve. This is the foundation of our patience and a means of true comfort. Joseph thus comforts himself and his brethren that God ordered and disposed their bad enterprise to his and their good (Gen. 45:5–7).
Here again Paul sets down two properties of the testament of works, or of the law. The first is that "it came from Mount Sinai." And here lies the difference between the law and the gospel. The law is from Sinai; the gospel, from Zion or Jerusalem. For there it was first to be preached, and thence conveyed to all nations (Mic. 4:1; Ezek. 47:1).
The second property of the law is that it genders to bondage because it makes them bondmen that look to be saved and justified thereby.
And this it does by revealing sin and the punishment thereof, which is everlasting death, and by convincing all men of their sins and of their deserved condemnation. In this respect, it is called "the ministry of death" (2 Cor. 3:7), and Paul says that after he knew his sins by the law, he died, and the law was the means of death unto him (Rom. 7:10). Here is another difference between the law and the gospel. The law genders to bondage; the gospel genders to life. For it is an instrument of the Spirit for the beginning and confirming of our regeneration and salvation; and so is not the law, which is no cause, but only an occasion of the grace of God in us.
Whereas Jerusalem that now is, is said "to be in bondage, as Sinai and Hagar," it is to be observed that there is no church in the world, nor people, which is not subject to apostasy. For God had made great and large promises to Jerusalem (Pss. 122; 132), and yet for all this,
Jerusalem by refusing Christ and by establishing the justice of the law is come into bondage and deprives herself of the inheritance of eternal life. Therefore it is a falsehood which the papists teach that the infallible assistance of the Spirit is tied to the chair and consistory of the pope, so as he, and consequently the Church of Rome, cannot err. Here again, we see what may be the future condition of England. For it may be said of it hereafter, England that now is, is not that which it has been, namely, a maintainer of the gospel of Christ. Therefore we must not be high-minded but fear, and now take heed of the first beginning of the apostasy. The Holy Ghost set down the degrees thereof, and they are five in number (Heb.
3:12–13). The first is the deceit of sin. The second is the hardening of the heart after men are deceived by sin. The third is an evil heart which grows upon hardness of heart. The fourth is unbelief whereby the word of God is called in question and the truth thereof. And after unbelief follows a departure from God and Christ. That this may not be, we must carefully avoid all the deceits of sin, as namely, covetousness, ambition, lust, etc.
Again, as Hagar figures the law, so does Ishmael all justiciaries that look to be saved by the law. Here then we see the condition of the world, the greatest part whereof are Ishmaelites. For the Turks and the Jews look at this day to be saved by their works. The papist ascribes his conversion not wholly to grace, but partly to grace and partly to nature, or the strength of man's will helped by grace. And thus are they born after the flesh as Ishmael was. And our common people, though in show they profess reformed religion, yet indeed a great part of them are Ishmaelites. For they look to be saved by their
good serving of God and by their good deeds, and they little think on Christ and His merits. And thus they deprive themselves of all title to eternal life. Therefore it stands them in hand to condemn nature and the strength thereof, and to renounce their own works, and to rest only on the promise of mercy for eternal salvation. Thus shall they be the children of the promise and heirs of God.
Lastly, in that Jerusalem is in bondage like Hagar, or Mount Sinai, we see how vain are the pilgrimages to the holy land, and how needless were the wars made for the recovery thereof.
26 But Jerusalem which is above, is free: which is the mother of us all.
Here Paul shows what is figured by Sarah, namely, the new Jerusalem, which is the catholic church (Heb. 12:22–23; Rev. 21:2).
And it is here so termed because Jerusalem was a type thereof in six respects. First, God chose Jerusalem above all other places to dwell in (Ps. 132:13). And the catholic church is the company of predestinate, chosen to be a particular people to God. Secondly,
Jerusalem is a city compact in itself by reason of the bond of love and order among the citizens (Ps. 122:3). In like sort the members of the catholic church are linked together by the bond of one spirit. Thirdly, in Jerusalem was the sanctuary, a place of God's presence and of His worship, where also the promise of the seed of the woman was preserved till the coming of the Messiah. And now the catholic church is in the room of the sanctuary. In it must we seek the presence of God and the word of life. Therefore it is called "the pillar and ground of truth" (1 Tim. 3:15). Fourthly, in Jerusalem was the throne of David (Ps. 122:5), and in the catholic church is the throne or scepter of Christ, figured by the kingdom of David (Rev. 3:7).
Fifthly, the commendation of a city (as Jerusalem) is the subjection
and obedience of the citizens. Now in the catholic church all believers are citizens (Eph. 2:19), and they yield voluntary obedience and subjection to Christ their king (Ps. 110:3; Isa. 2:5). Lastly, as in Jerusalem the names of the citizens were enrolled in a register, so the names of all the members of the catholic church are enrolled in the book of life (Rev. 20:15; Heb. 12:23).
Again, the catholic church dwelling here below is said to be "above in heaven" for two causes. First, in respect of her beginning, which is from the election and grace of God, and from Christ the mediator, of whose flesh and bone we are that believe (Eph. 5:30). The justice whereby we are justified is in Christ. Our holiness and life flows from the holiness and life of Christ as from a root. Secondly, the church is said to "be above" because it dwells by faith in heaven with Christ.
For the property of faith is to make us present after a sort, when we are absent (Heb. 11:1).
The Use. This being so, we are admonished to live in this world as pilgrims and strangers (1 Peter 2:11), and therefore we must not set our love upon any earthly thing, but our minds must be upon the country to which we are traveling. And whatsoever is a hindrance to us in our journey, we must cast it from us, that we may go lightly.
And if we have any wrongs done us either in goods or good name, we must the rather be content because we are out of our country in a strange place. And hereupon we must take occasion to make haste to our journey's end, to our own city and last abode. Thus did the patriarchs (Heb. 11:13, 15).
Secondly, we must carry ourselves as burgesses of heaven (Phil.
3:20). And this we shall do, by minding, seeking, affecting of heavenly things, by "speaking the language of Canaan," which is, to invocate and praise the name of God. Lastly, by leading a spiritual
life, that may beseem the citizens of heaven. Many fail in this point, when they come to the Lord's Table, they profess themselves to be citizens of the city of God, but in their common dealings in the world, they play the stark rebels against God and His word and live according to the lusts of their blind and unrepentant hearts.
Thirdly, when Paul says that "Jerusalem which is above is free," etc., he shows that the catholic church is one in number, and no more.
"My dove is alone, and the only daughter of her mother" (Song 6:9).
"One sheepfold" (John 10:16). "There be many members, but one body" (1 Cor. 12:12).
Fourthly, hence we gather that the catholic church is invisible. For the company of them that dwell in heaven by their faith cannot be discerned by the eye. John saw the heavenly Jerusalem descending from heaven, yet not with bodily eye but "in spirit" (Rev. 21:10). The things which make the catholic church to be the church, namely, election, vocation, justification, glorification, are invisible. The papist therefore errs when he teaches that the catholic church is a visible company under one pastor, namely the pope. And the places which they bring to prove the visibility of the universal church concern either particular churches or the churches which were in the days of the apostles, or again, they speak of the inward glory and beauty of the church.
"Free"—that is, redeemed from the bondage of death and sin, and so from the curse of the law. Of this freedom I will speak more afterward.
"The mother of us all"—she is called a "mother" because the word of God is committed to the keeping of the church, which word is "seed"
(1 Peter 1:23) and "milk" (1 Cor. 3:2) and "strong meat" (Heb. 5:14).
And the church as a mother, which by the ministry of the said word,
brings forth children to God, and after they are born and brought forth, she feeds them with milk out of her own breasts, which are the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament.
Here a great question is to be propounded, namely, where we shall find this our mother? For it is the duty of all children to have recourse unto their mother and to live under her wing. The advocates of the popish church, priests and Jesuits, say we must be reconciled to the Church and See of Rome, if we would be of the catholic church.
To this purpose they use many motives. I will here propound seven of them, because heretofore they have been scattered abroad among us.
The first motive. The Church of Rome has means of sure and certain interpretation: tradition, counsels, fathers. We have nothing but the private interpretation of Luther, Melanchthon, Calvin, etc. Answer.
Scripture is both the gloss and the text. And the principal means of the interpretation of Scripture is Scripture itself. And it is a means when places of Scripture are expounded by the analogy of faith, by the words, scope, and circumstances of the place. And the interpretation which is suitable to all these is sure, certain, and public. For it is the interpretation of God. Contrariwise, the interpretation which is not agreeable to these, though it be from church, fathers, and counsels, is uncertain, and it is private interpretations. Now this kind of interpretation we allow. And therefore it is false that we have only private interpretations, and that all the interpretations of the Church of Rome are public. Secondly, I answer that we are able to justify our interpretation of Scripture for the main points of religion by the consent of fathers and councils as well as they of the Church of Rome.
The second motive. We have no divine and infallible authority to rest on in matter of religion. But they of the Church of Rome have.
Answer. In the canonical Scriptures of the prophets and apostles, there is divine and infallible authority. For they are now in the New
Testament, instead of the lively voice of God. And this authority we in our church acknowledge. Secondly, I answer, that the church has no divine and infallible authority distinct from the authority of Scriptures (as the papists teach), but only a ministry, which is, to speak in the name of God according to the written Word.
The third motive. We have no limitations of opinion and affection, but they of the Church of Rome have. I answer, first, we suffer ourselves to be limited for opinion by the analogy of faith and by the written Word, and so does not the papist, which adds tradition to the Scripture. And for affection we suffer ourselves to be limited by the doctrine of repentance and new obedience. Secondly, I answer that the Church of Rome uses false means of limitation. For it teaches that for opinion we must captivate our senses to the determination of the church by believing as the church believes though it be not known what the church believeth. And it limits affection by auricular confession and by canonical satisfactions, mere inventions of men.
The fourth motive. The Roman religion draws the multitude. Answer.
It draws them indeed, because it is a natural religion. But it does not turn them from darkness to light, from death to life. Secondly, I answer, that antichrist in his coming shall draw the multitude (2
Thess. 2:9).
The fifth motive. There were never but two alterations of religion.
One, in the days of Elijah; the other in the days of John the Baptist.
Answer. I will show a third. Paul says that before the end there shall be a departure (2 Thess. 2), and this departure is general in all
nations (Rev. 13:8, 16); and after a thousand years, there shall be the first resurrection (Rev. 20:5); and this resurrection is the reviving and the restoring of the gospel, after long ignorance and superstition.
The sixth motive. The Church of Rome has a judge to end controversies. We have none. Answer. Christ is our judge. And the Scripture is the voice of this judge, determining all things pertaining to salvation, fully and plainly, to the contentation of any conscience.
The seventh motive. The Roman religion is suitable to ancient tradition. Answer. It is contrary. For it abolishes the second commandment touching images, and the tenth touching lust. And it overturns sundry articles of faith. For it abolishes one of the natures of Christ by the real presence, and His three offices by joining partners and associates with Him.
To these seven, I add three other. The eighth motive then is this. Our ministers (say they) took unto themselves new callings, and, consequently, that we are but schismatics. Answer. The offices of the first restorers of the gospel were ordinary. And their vocation to the said offices was ordinary. For they were all either priests or school doctors. It may be said that they departed from their callings. I answer they departed only from the common abuse of their callings, which they restored to their right use.
The ninth motive. The Church of Rome has true baptism, and therefore it is a true church. Answer. Baptism in the papacy pertains not to it, but to another hidden church in the midst of the papacy—as the light in the lantern pertains not to it, but to the passenger.
Secondly, though the Church of Rome hold the outward baptism, yet does it overturn the inward which stands in the justification of a sinner by imputation of the obedience of Christ. Thirdly, baptism severed from the preaching of the gospel is no mark of a church.
Circumcision was used in Samaria, and yet they were no people of God (Hos. 1:9).
The tenth motive. The Church of Rome has antiquity and succession from the apostles. Answer. They are no marks of the church unless they be joined with prophetical and apostolical doctrine. The kingdom of darkness has also antiquity, succession, universality, and unity.
Now then we are to hold the Church of Rome as a stepmother, nay, as a professed harlot. She is no mother of ours. For the Lord says,
"Come out of her my people" (Rev. 18). Let us therefore come to the true answer.
The catholic church our mother is to be sought for and to be found in the true visible churches, the certain marks whereof are three. The preaching of the word of God out of the writings of the prophets and apostles with obedience (John 10:27; Eph. 2:20). True invocation of God the Father in the only name of Christ by the assistance of the Spirit (Acts 9:14; 1 Cor. 1:2). The right use of the sacraments, baptism and the Lord's Supper (Matt. 28:19). And by these shall we find the true church of God in England, Ireland, Scotland, Germany,
France, etc.
Again, in that the church is called our mother, the papist gathers that her commandments must be obeyed (Prov. 1:8), and therefore in their catechisms, beside the commandments of God, they propound the commandments of the church. But I answer, that the precepts of the father and the mother must be one. And then the mother must be obeyed.
The church is called "the mother of us all," that is, of all true believers. Hence it follows that wicked men are not members of the
catholic church (as popish doctors erroneously teach) for then the church shall be a mother, not only to the children of God, but also the children of the devil.
Lastly, in that the church is our mother, we are taught that we must despise our first birth and seek to be born again unto God, and suck the breast of our mother, feeding on the milk of the word (Ps. 45:10;
1 Peter 2:2). Thus to be born a member of the new Jerusalem is a great privilege (Ps. 87:5; Rev. 3:12).
27 For it is written, Rejoice thou barren that barest no children, break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children, than she which hath an husband.
These words are the testimony of the prophet (Isa. 54:1), and they are brought to prove that which Paul said in the former verse, that the catholic church is "the mother of us all," that is, not only of the Jews, but of all believing Gentiles.
In these words, I consider the preface to the testimony and the testimony itself. The preface, "It is written," where two points are to be considered. The first is, who says, "It is written"? Answer. The apostle Paul, whose authority was divine and infallible because he was led into all truth by the Spirit of God so as he could not err in delivering doctrine to the church. And yet for all this he follows the rule of the written Word. And his manner was so to do (Acts 26:22).
This shows the shameless impudence of the Church of Rome, which takes to itself an absolute power of judgment in all matters, without and beside the Scripture, yea, a power to judge of the Scripture itself and of the sense thereof without the help of Scripture, upon a supposed infallible assistance of the Spirit.
The second point is, in what question says Paul, "It is written"?
Answer. In a controversy between him and the false apostles touching the justification of a sinner. This shows that the Scripture itself is the means to determine and decide controversies. There was for this purpose in the Old Testament the lively voice of God uttered in the oracle at the mercy seat. But in the New Testament there is no such voice of God, but the written Word is instead thereof to the end of the world. And therefore Paul says, "It is written."
In the testimony I consider three things: the condition of two churches, the change of the condition, the joy that is upon the change.
The condition of the church of the New Testament, in these words:
"Barren that bearest no children … thou that travailest not … the desolate."
"Barren." The Christian church is so called because by the virtue and strength of nature it bears no children to God, no more than Sarah did to Abraham (John 1:13; 1 Cor. 3:7). Secondly, it is so called in respect of the beginning thereof when the Jewish church was yet standing, till the Spirit of God was poured forth upon all flesh after the ascension of Christ. And before this, the number of them which were converted to God was very small. And therefore Christ Himself complained that He spent His strength in vain (Isa. 49:1). Thirdly, it is so called in respect of the latter times of the church in which Christ shall scarce find faith upon the earth (Luke 18:8). Further, that the church is barren, it is declared by the sign because she neither brings forth child nor bears.
"Desolate." That is, without husband in appearance, by reason of the cross and affliction, and without children, because at the first the Christian church was constrained to hide herself in the wilderness
(Rev. 12:14). It may be demanded, how the catholic church should be desolate? Answer. The estate of the church is twofold: inward or outward. The inward estate stands in the true knowledge of God in Christ, in comfort touching remission of sins, and life everlasting, in the hearing of our prayers, in protection and deliverance from all spiritual enemies, in the gifts of the Spirit, faith, hope, love, etc. In respect of this estate, the church is all glorious within, and never desolate (Ps. 45:13). The outward estate of the catholic church stands in visible assemblies, in the public ministry of the word and sacraments, in a government according to the word of God. In respect to this second estate, the church may be in desolation. This was the condition of the church in paradise upon the fall of our first parents, of the Israelites at Mount Horeb when they worshiped the golden calf, and in the days of Elijah (Rom. 11:3), and afterward (2
Chron. 15:3). When Christ suffered, the shepherd was smitten, and the sheep were scattered. After Christ's ascension, all the earth worshiped the beast (Rev. 13:12).
Hence it follows that the catholic church is not a visible estate or company of men under one visible head because in respect of her outward estate she may be for a time in desolation. And as this is the estate of the church, so is it also of the members thereof. They shall be "hated of all men" (Luke 21:17). "Men shall think they do God good service, when they kill them" (John 16:2). And Christ Himself was a man "without form or beauty" (Isa. 53:2).
"Having a husband." In these words the condition of the Jewish church is set forth, that she is married or espoused to God, who is her husband (Ezek. 16:8–9; Hos. 2:19). The like may be said of any other church, and namely of the Church of England.
The Use. This must teach us to dedicate our bodies and souls to God and Christ and to give the main affections of our hearts unto Him, as our love, and our joy, etc.
Secondly, we must adorn and trim ourselves with grace, that we may please our husband (Ps. 45:11).
Thirdly, we must be the glory of Christ, as the wife is to her husband (1 Cor. 11:7), and that is by subjecting ourselves to Christ and His laws.
Again, if we betroth ourselves to Christ indeed, we may assure ourselves that Christ is our Christ and that He has given Himself unto us. And consequently that He will sanctify us (Ezek. 16:9); protect us as a husband does his wife (Gen. 20:16); and endow us with all things needful for this life and the life to come (Ezek. 16:10–
11).
The second point is the change of the church of the New Testament, because she shall cease to be barren and bring forth many children.
This is the promise of God. And hereupon Paul concludes that the church is a mother of all believers, both Jews and Gentiles. Observe that the promise of God is of infinite virtue in His time and place. In the beginning God said, "Let there be this or that, and it was so." Of like virtue is God's promise, if we can wait His leisure. God promised that after 430 years, the Israelites should be delivered out of Egypt; presently when the time was expired, nothing could hinder the promise (read Ex. 12:41). Therefore our duty is to rest on God's promises in all times, both in life and death.
The third point is the joy upon the change. "Rejoice." Here are two things to be considered. The first, who must rejoice? Answer. The church. God's kingdom is the place of joy (Rom. 14:17). Rejoicing
belongs to the people of God (Pss. 68:3; 106:5). The music of the temple was typical, and figured the joy of the catholic church, where is the assurance of remission of sins and life eternal.
The second point is, in what must the church rejoice? Answer. In the redemption of Christ and the fruit thereof, the conversion of sinners to God. For the prophet had showed at large the passion and sufferings of Christ (Isa. 53), and hereupon he says, "Rejoice thou barren." The Israelites were commanded to feast and to be merry
"before the Lord" (Lev. 23:40; 1 Chron. 29:22), that is, before the Lord's ark, which was the pledge of His presence. Now this ark was a figure of Christ. And the mirth before the ark signified that the foundation of all our joy lies in our reconciliation with God in Christ.
The angels in heaven greatly rejoice at the conversion of a sinner.
And at the return of the prodigal son, the fat calf is killed.
The Use. It is false that religion breeds melancholy and cuts off all mirth. It does not abolish mirth, but rectifies it. Nay it brings men to true and perfect joy.
Our first and principal joy must be that we are in God's favor, reconciled to God by Christ (Luke 10:20). In David, the head of his joy was the good estate of the church (Ps. 137:6). And all other petty joys must flow from this and be suitable to it.
"Break forth." This signifies that the church upon earth is (as it were) pent in with present grief. Our joy in this life is mixed with sorrow.
The paschal lamb was eaten "with sour herbs" to signify that we feel no sweetness in the blood of Christ, till we feel the smart of our sins.
We here must rejoice in trembling (Ps. 2:11). Joy is sown for them that are upright in heart (Ps. 97:11).
"Cry." In our earthly joys, we must be moderate and sparing; we must not eat too much honey lest we surfeit. Yet in spiritual joys the measure is to rejoice without measure; if we be ravished with joy in Christ that we cry again, it is the best of all.
28 Therefore brethren, we are after the manner of Isaac, children of the promise.
Here Paul shows that as Sarah figured the catholic church, so Isaac was a figure of all true believers, the children of God.
"Therefore": or thus, "And we brethren."
"We": not only the Jews, but also believing Gentiles.
"Promise": the promise made to Abraham, "I will be thy God, and the God of thy seed"—or the promise made to the church, that being barren she shall bear many children.
"Children of promise": believers are so called, not because they believe the promise (though that be a truth), but because they are made children of God by the virtue of God's promise. For thus was
Isaac the child of promise in that he was born to Abraham, not by the strength of nature, but by God's promise. And Paul opposes the children of the promise to the children of the flesh, which were born by natural strength (Rom. 9:8).
Hence it follows that the mere grace of God is the cause of our election and adoption, and not anything in us. For the promise of God makes us God's children. And the promise is of the mere grace of God. And therefore we are God's children by the mere grace of God. For the cause of the cause is the cause of the thing caused.
Therefore Paul says that the Ephesians were "predestinate to
adoption" (Eph. 1:5). And he says the seven thousand that never bowed knee to Baal were reserved by "the election of grace" (Rom.
11:5). And it is a false position to teach that election and adoption are according to God's foreknowledge of our faith and obedience. For thus shall we elect ourselves and be children not of God's promise, but of our own freewill and faith. Moreover God foresees our future faith and obedience because He first decreed to give the grace of faith unto us—because the foreknowledge of things which are to come to pass depends upon a precedent will in God.
Mark further, the children of God are called the children of the promise, and this promise is absolute and effectual. Here a question may be resolved. And that is, whether the child of God in his conversation have a liberty and power to resist the inward calling of God? Answer. No. The absolute will of God cannot be resisted. Now the promise whereby men are made the children of God is the absolute will of God. Again, with this promise is joined the infinite power of God, which without all resistance brings that to pass which God has promised. For He makes men to do that which He commands (Ezek. 36:27). He gives the will and the deed (Phil. 2:13), so as men effectually called cannot but come (John 6:45).
It may be said that this is to abolish all freedom of will. Answer. It suffices to the liberty of the will that it be free from compulsion. For constraint takes away the liberty of the will, and not necessity.
Secondly, the determination of man's will by the will of God is the liberty of the will and not the bondage thereof. For this is perfect liberty, when man's will is conformable to the will of God.
29 But as he which was born according to the flesh, persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, so is it now.
These words are an answer to an objection, on this manner. We are hated of the Jews. And therefore we are not the children of promise.
The answer is twofold. One in this verse, thus, no marvel: This is the old fashion. It was thus in Abraham's family. For Ishmael (born after the flesh) persecuted Isaac (born after the Spirit); and so it is at this day.
Observe that there is a perpetual enmity and opposition between true believers and hypocrites. God "put enmity" between the "seed" of the serpent and the "seed" of the woman" (Gen. 3:15). The world hates them that are chosen out of the world (John 15:19). Carnal men cannot abide that their opinion and doings should be judged and condemned of others (John 3:20). And hence comes the opposition that is between believers and hypocrites who cannot abide such as are not like themselves.
This hatred and opposition shows itself in persecution. Of which three things are to be considered.
The first is, who persecutes? Answer. Carnal Ishmaelites, such as are of the same religion and family with Isaac. Thus the Jews persecuted their own prophets, and the Thessalonians were persecuted of their own countrymen (1 Thess. 2:14). Thus priests and Jesuits that have been heretofore born, baptized, and brought up among us are the causes of many seditions, conspiracies, and seek the subversion of church and land.
The second is, who are persecuted? Answer. Spiritual men, the children of the promise. They suffer wrong, but they do none. "In the mount of the Lord there is no hurt done" (Isa. 11:9). They "turn their spears and swords, into mattocks and scythes" (Isa. 2:4). And they which do no wrong, but are content to suffer wrong (and that for a good cause) are in this respect blessed (Matt. 5:10).
The third point is touching the kind of persecution. And that was scorning or mocking (Gen. 21:9). It may be demanded, how mocking can be persecution? Answer. Mocking and derision, which rises of the hatred and contempt of our brother, is a degree of murder. "He which saith Raca to his brother, is guilty of a council" (Matt. 5:22).
Here Raca signifies all signs and gestures that express contempt, as snuffing, tushing, jeering, gerning, etc. Cain is rebuked of God even for the casting down of his countenance (Gen. 4:6).
Again, the mocking wherewith Ishmael mocked Isaac proceeded from a contempt and hatred of the grace of God in Isaac, which Paul notes when he says that "he was persecuted which was born after the Spirit." This hatred of God's grace in men is the beginning of all persecution, and the deriding of the grace of God is as much as the spoiling of our goods and the seeking of our lives. Thus Cain hated his brother, by reason of the grace of God, "because his deeds were good" (1 John 3:12). A great part of the sufferings of Christ stood in this, that He was mocked for His confidence in God (Ps. 22:8; Matt.
27:43). The children of Bethel mocked Elisha. First, for his person, calling him "bald pate." Secondly, for the favor of God showed upon Elijah his master, in saying, "Ascend, bald pate"—that is, ascend not to Bethel, but ascend to heaven as Elijah did. And this profane scorning he cursed in the name of God (2 Kings 2:24). The like scorning is used among us at this day. For the practice of that religion which stands by the law of God and the good laws of this land is nicknamed with terms of preciseness and purity. A thing much to be lamented, for this betrays that there is a great want of the grace of God among us. Therefore take heed of it.
30 But what saith the Scripture? Put out the bondwoman, and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
The second answer to the former objection is in these words, that they which hate the children of promise shall at length be cast out of the house of God.
Objection I. These words, "Cast out the bondwoman," are the words of Sarah to Abraham. Therefore they are not the words of Scripture.
Answer. The words were uttered by Sarah, but they were afterward approved by God (Gen. 21:12), and thus they are the voice of Scripture.
Objection II. Sarah is commended for her subjection to Abraham (1 Peter 3:6), yet here she speaks imperiously, "Cast out the bondwoman." Answer. She speaks this not as a private woman, but as the voice and mouth of God, and that (no doubt) by instinct from God. And therefore the words she utters are to be esteemed as the commandment of God. This her case is extraordinary and not to be followed.
The Use. I. All carnal hypocrites, mockers of the grace of God, shall be cast forth of God's family, though for a time they bear a sway therein. This is the sentence of God. Let us therefore repent of our mocking and hereafter become lovers of the grace of God, as Christ was (Mark 10:21).
II. Consolation. The persecution of the people of God shall not be perpetual. For the persecuting bondwoman and her son must be cast out. "The rod of the wicked shall not rest upon the lot of the righteous" (Ps. 125:3). This is our comfort.
III. All justiciary people, and persons that look to be saved and justified before God by the law and the works of the law, either in whole or in part, are cast out of the church of God and have no part in the kingdom of heaven. The casting out of Hagar and Ishmael is a