Chapter 6: Verses 11–16

Chapter 6: Verses 11–16

time in eating and drinking, and going gorgeously, and faring deliciously every day; other in gaming, carding, dicing, rioting, reveling, and (as the term is) in swaggering, wherein they follow their father the devil, who is therefore more full of wrath, "knowing that he hath but a short time" (Rev. 12:12). To these we may add all such idle persons as follow no vocation or trade of life, but day after day, and year after year, are still devising new pastimes (as they call them) to trifle the time away. These men hasten the judgments of God and pull it upon them before God inflict it. It is a great judgment of God for a man to be in that case, that "in the morning he shall say, would God it were evening, and in the evening, would God it were morning" (Deut. 28:67). In this case is every idle loiterer, who through idleness is weary of himself, and grieved the time passes away so slowly. And to these qui nihil agunt, we may join them qui male agunt, and those also qui aliud agunt, all which are condemned in this text; and against them Titus the heathen emperor shall rise in judgment and shall condemn them because he remembering on a time as he sat at supper, that he had trifled away the day in doing nothing, said, Amici, hodie diem perdidi. "Friends, I have lost this day."

Chapter 6: Verses 11–16 11 Ye see how large a letter I have written unto you with mine own hand.

Here begins the conclusion, being the third general part of this epistle, consisting of two parts: an insinuation, in the eleventh verse, and a recapitulation in the verses following. He insinuates himself into the minds of the Galatians by a twofold argument. First from the largeness of his epistle: "Ye see how large a letter I have written."

Secondly, from the instrumental cause, in that he wrote it "with his own hand"—where he gives authority to it, and a kind of eminency above his other letters. And in both he commends his diligence, love, and care which he had of them.

The word translated "ye see" is ambiguous, and may be taken either as a commandment, "See how large a letter I have written"; or as an assertion, "Ye see …" The like ambiguity is in the word φαίνεσθε

(Phil. 2:5), and may be read either thus, "Amongst whom you do shine"; or, "See that you shine as stars." It is not material in whether exception it be taken, seeing the sense is all one.

The first argument to move the Galatians to attention and acceptation of Paul's pains and good affection is taken from the largeness of his epistle. The word in the original translated "large" is strangely wrested by sundry interpreters without cause. Hilary referring it to the loftiness of sentences.236 Hyperius, to the profundity and depth of matter. Jerome, to the greatness of the character. Chrysostom and Theophylact, to the badness of his hand, as not being able to write well; Haimo, to the Hebrew character, in which he wrote. Whereas the word does not only signify quality, but as properly quantity, as, "Consider how great this man was" (Heb.

7:4). And the word that answers unto it signifies as well quantity as quality. "I would ye knew what great fight I have" (Col. 2:1). "Behold, how great a thing a little fire kindleth?" (James 3:5). The plain and simple meaning therefore of Paul is this, that he never wrote so long an epistle with his own hand unto any church, as unto them. He wrote indeed the epistle to Philemon with his own hand, but that was short in comparison of this. And he wrote larger epistles to other churches, as to the Romans, Corinthians, etc., but by his scribes, not with his own hand. Therefore, seeing this is the longest and largest letter that ever Paul wrote with his own hand, it ought to be more

regarded and better accepted—so that as his pains were greater in writing, our diligence should be greater in reading and observing the same.

This shows Paul's great care of the churches, not only when he was present, but when he was absent. How painful he was being among them to win them to the gospel, how fearful when he was absent from them, lest their minds should be leavened by false teachers; how faithful both present and absent.

And it may serve as a precedent to all pastors having care of souls to use the like diligence and conscience in their ministry, that being absent in body from their charge upon necessary occasions (as Paul was), yet they would be present in spirit with them—and present by their letters, that so they may testify to all the world that they have a greater care of the flock, than of the fleece.

It further teaches us that if the minister being carried with discreet zeal for the good of the church go further either in word or writing than he intended, or is thought fit by some—as it seems Paul did in this place, for what needs this large letter (may some say) a shorter would have done as well—that we are not to censure him, or limit and prescribe him. It had been a great fault in the Galatians if they had found fault with Paul for his large letter; and in the disciples and Jews, if they should have blamed his long sermon, which continued at one time from morning to night (Acts 28:23); at another time, from the closing of the evening till midnight (Acts 20:7). And so it is in many hearers, who are too curious and strict in prescribing and limiting their teachers to the time, longer than which they cannot patiently endure. And in stinting them, in urging this or that point, in saying he missed his rhetoric, his epimone was too long, he was

overseen in dwelling so long upon the point—it had been better, a word and away, etc.

His second argument is taken from the instrumental cause, that he "wrote it with his own hand." Haimo says, it is the opinion of the doctors that Paul wrote not this whole epistle with his own hand, but only from hence to the end.242 Which opinion is confuted by the very text, "You see how large a letter I have written with mine own hand"—speaking of the whole epistle in the time past. Or if of anyone part more than of another, of the former part, rather than of the latter. Secondly, his assertion is not true, for (if we except Jerome) none of the ancients (as I take it) are of that opinion. Not Ambrose, who says, "Where the whole writing is his own hand, there can be no falsehood." Not Chrysostom, who says, "To the rest of his epistles he did subscribe, but this whole epistle he wrote himself."244 Not Primasius, using the word perscripsit, that he wrote it through with his own hand. Not Theodoret, affirming that "it seems Paul wrote the whole epistle." Not Theophylact, who brings in Paul speaking to them in this manner, "I am enforced to write this epistle unto you with mine own hand."246 Not Oecumenius, who calls it ἰδιόχειρον ἐπιστολὴν, an epistle written with his own hand. Not Anselm, who paraphrasing the text, says, it is all one as if he had said, "This epistle

I wrote with mine own hand." And a little before, "Not with the scribe's hand, but with mine own hand" (albeit Anselm cannot so prejudice his assertion, who lived long after him). Not the author of the Commentary upon the Epistles ascribed to Jerome, Tom. 9. For he upon the 2 Thessalonians 3:17 says plainly, "With these words he subscribes all his epistles, excepting that to the Galatians, which he wrote from the beginning to the end with his own hand." And upon these very words which we now entreat of, "See how I am not afraid, which of late time have written with mine own hand."249 (Where by the way, we may observe that Jerome is not the author of those

commentaries, being so contrary to himself.) This I confess is a light matter, and not to be stood upon, were it not that some are too hasty to swallow whatsoever comes in their way under the title of the doctors. It must therefore be as a caveat unto us, not to be too credulous in believing every one that shall avouch this or that to be the opinion of the fathers, no though it be affirmed by a father, especially by such a one as draws near the dregs, as Haimo does.

It is certain then that Paul wrote this whole epistle with his own hand. The reasons are these. First, that it might appear under his hand that he was no changeling, but the same man that he was before, in that he did not preach circumcision or the observation of Jewish ceremonies, as the false apostles slandered him (Gal. 5:11).

Secondly, that this his letter was not counterfeited by another and sent in his name, as the false apostles might have objected and the Galatians suspected. Thirdly, that he might testify his sincere love towards them, and how he did (as it were) travail in pain of them, till

Christ were formed in them, shunning no labor that might further their salvation.

We may hence further observe a threefold difference of the books of Scripture in the New Testament. Some were neither written by an apostle, nor subscribed—as the Gospel of Mark and Luke. Some subscribed, but not written—as the Epistle to the Romans and others. Some both written and subscribed—as this epistle and that to Philemon, "I have written it with mine own hand: I will recompense it …" (v. 19). Now that Paul subscribed every epistle with his own hand, he himself witnesses, "The salutation of me Paul with mine own hand, which is a sign in every epistle" (that is mine, and not forged in my name by another) "so I write; the grace of our Lord

Jesus Christ be with you all" (2 Thess. 3:17). In which place he warns the Thessalonians again of false teachers and forged letters. For, he

had besought them, "They would not be troubled by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter, as though it came from him" (2 Thess. 2:2). And here he shows how they may know whether the epistle be his or not.

If it have this sign, it is mine, else it is counterfeit. For this note or mark is to be found in all and every one of my epistles.

Now these words, "Which is a sign in every epistle," cannot be meant (as some are of opinion) of the former words only, viz., "The salutation of me Paul with mine own hand." First, because he says, it is a sign in every epistle, whereas it is only to be found 1 Corinthians

16:21; Galatians 6:11; Colossians 4:18; 2 Thessalonians 3:17; Philemon 19, and not in any other of his epistles. Secondly, the words

"so I write" should be false, if they be referred only to the former words, because that manner of salutation is not to be found in every epistle (as I have already showed). And except they be referred to the words following, "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ," etc., they have either none, or a very hard construction. Thirdly, if Paul's salutation

(which he affirms to be a certain note of his epistle) be understood of these words, "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ," etc., it agrees unto all (as Anselm confesses) whereas being meant of the former words only, it does not agree to all, but to a few. And yet Paul makes it a general, infallible note and sign of every epistle. Besides, Ambrose and Primasius, in their commentaries upon the place, as also the author of the commentaries which goes under Jerome's name, affirm the sign whereby we may know Paul's epistles from counterfeit and forged epistles to consist in these words: "the grace of our Lord," etc.

Chrysostom and Theodoret likewise say that Paul "calls the salutation a benediction or blessing, which is in the end of the epistle." And a little after, "Hence we learn that he was accustomed to write these words, 'the grace, etc.' instead of adieu or farewell unto them."252 And Haimo (long after) expounds these words, "So I write, how?" (says he) "Even thus as it follows, The grace of our Lord,

etc." I grant it is probable that Paul wrote his own name in the end of every epistle—whether in the Greek tongue, and in the Hebrew characters (as Haimo affirms) I leave it as uncertain—and that by the salutation or sign of his epistle, his name written with his own hand, is in part to be understood. Yet it is not only nor principally meant.

The certain sign therefore of his epistles is beside the subscription of his own name, the farewell that he gives them in these words, "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all," or the like to the same effect; I say to the same effect, because these very formal words, are not to be found in every [one] of Paul's epistles.

Therefore Cajetan is far wide, who takes the entire and formal salutation, as it is literally set down (2 Thess. 3:17), to be a note that the epistle is his, so that if it want any one word, either the epistle is not Paul's, or there is some defect in the text. For hereupon he concludes that the Epistle to the Colossians only has something wanting in the farewell or salutation, because it is said, "Grace be with you" (Col. 4:18)—and not, "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you," as it is in all his other epistles. But first, it is an untruth, for they are not only wanting in the Epistle to the Colossians, but also in the first to Timothy, and in that to Titus, where it is only said,

"Grace be with thee, Grace be with you all" (1 Tim. 6:21; Titus 3:15).

Secondly, it is a flat mistaking of the text, for Paul's meaning was not in every epistle to tie himself precisely to so many words and syllables, but to commend them to the grace of Christ—sometime making express mention of Christ, sometime concealing His name; yet so as that it is always understood, though not expressed.

12 As many as make a fair show in the flesh, compel you to be circumcised, only because they would not suffer persecution for the cross of Christ.

From hence to the end is laid down the second part of the conclusion, which I call a recapitulation, wherein the apostle does very artificially (as orators are accustomed) repeat those things which he would have specially to be remembered, the main points handled in the epistle. First, that neither circumcision is necessary to justification, nor the ceremonial law to salvation. Secondly, that the false apostles urging the observation of the law as a thing necessary to salvation sought not herein God's glory or the edification of their hearers, but their own ease and freedom from the cross and persecution. Thirdly, that Christ crucified is the only thing that justifies a sinner without the works of the law. Fourthly, that the true religion stands not in outward things, but in the renovation of the inward man.

In this verse and the next following, Paul describes the false apostles by five properties, three whereof are laid down in this verse. The first is that "they make a fair show." The second, that "they compel them to the observing of their devised religion. The third, the end and scope they aim at, that they may always be in the sunshine, living at ease, and having the world at will, "only because they would not suffer persecutions for the cross of Christ."

First, the apostle says that "they make a fair show in the flesh"— which is taken diversely, for it signifies sundry things. First, to make an outward glorious show according to the flesh, as that they were true Israelites, of the seed of Abraham, etc. Of which boasting Paul speaks, "Seeing that many glory after the flesh, I will glory also. They are Israelites, so am I. They are the seed of Abraham, so am I" (2 Cor.

11:18, 22). Secondly, to please the Israelites which are after the flesh, and to approve themselves unto them which held the keeping of the ceremonial law. Thirdly, to vaunt themselves to the Jews and them of the circumcision, of the Galatians whom they had circumcised in the

flesh, as being made proselytes and won to their profession by their means. Lastly, to pretend great zeal and religion in outward observing of the law, standing in carnal rites and bodily exercises, as circumcision, meats, purification, and the like. Which carnal rites the apostle opposes to spiritual worship (Rom. 12:1), and to the new creature (v. 15 of this chapter)—and bodily exercise (which profits little) to true piety and the sincere practice thereof, which is profitable for all things (1 Tim. 4:8). The words may be taken in all these acceptions, though principally in the last.

Here we have a notable property of false teachers, which is, to set a fair face upon the matter, to carry all before them with a smooth countenance and in outward appearance to excel. For as Satan, though a black devil, an angel of darkness, does change himself into a white devil as though he were an angel of light, so that a man can hardly distinguish his wicked suggestions, from the good motions of the Spirit of God, and therefore may say, as Joshua said to the angel,

"Art thou on our side, or on our adversary's?" (Josh. 5:13). So his instruments "transform themselves, as though they were the apostles of Christ" and "ministers of righteousness" (2 Cor. 11:13, 15).

In the Old Testament, false prophets were accustomed outwardly to conform themselves to the habit and attire of the holy men of God in wearing a rough garment, as Elijah and the rest of the prophets did

(Zech. 13:4). Under the New Testament, in the time of Christ, the Pharisees in hypocrisy under a show of long prayer devoured widows' houses (Matt. 23:14). In the apostles' time, false teachers with their will-worship, as "touch not, taste not, handle not," (which had a show of wisdom in voluntary religion, and humbleness of mind, and not sparing the body) did undermine the religion of God

(Col. 2:21–23).

And after that, in the primitive church, the heretics called Catharists, under a show of holiness, fasting, prayer, etc., did sow most damnable heresies in the church.

And as in former times, the Jews under the glorious titles of "the children of Abraham, the scholars of Moses, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord," made many proselytes by deceiving the souls of the simple—so, at this day, under the glorious titles of the church, of councils, fathers, antiquity, consent, universality, the pretended

Roman Catholics have ensnared many a simple soul. And no marvel, considering that these are the times of which Christ foretold that false prophets should deceive (if it were possible) the very elect

(Matt. 24:24), and of which St. Paul prophesied that antichrist should come, "through the efficacy of Satan, with all power, and signs, and lying wonders, and in all deceivableness of unrighteousness, among them that perish" (2 Thess. 2:9–10). And all this is done by outward signs and semblances, which our Savior

Christ terms "sheep's clothing" (Matt. 7:15), and it stands in these four particulars. First, in great swelling titles, as the only true

Catholic Church, the Vicar of Christ, the Ecumenical Bishop. Most profound, illuminate, angelical, seraphical doctors. Jesuits, the only true followers of the doctrine and example of Jesus, etc. Secondly, in pretended zeal and devotion, whereby they would persuade that their religion is the only true religion. All others, which swerve from it, are nothing but false and fabulous. And this they do three ways. First, δοξολογία, by having God always in their mouths, crying in hypocrisy with the false prophets, "Lord, Lord" (Matt. 7:22), or as the Jesuitical faction do, "Jesu, Maria." Secondly, πιθανολογία, with enticing words, consisting in probable reasons, and persuasive arguments

(Col. 2:4). Thirdly, χρηστολογία, with fair and flattering words, to deceive the hearts of the simple (Rom. 16:18). By which three means the Jesuits have prevailed much in princes' courts in these latter days

(Rev. 16:14). Thirdly, in the glorious outside of holiness of life and conversation, in not sparing the body, by whipping of themselves, as Baal's priests lanced themselves till the blood gushed out (1 Kings

18:28), in strict fasts, canonical hours, hard fare, bad lodging, coarse apparel, and such like. Lastly, in rare and excellent gifts of prophecy, tongues, eloquence, miracles, etc. And thus they make Paul's "show of godliness" (2 Tim. 3:5) to be Peter's "cloak of wickedness" (1 Peter

2:16), so that as the devil with fair words put Eve into a fool's paradise, till at length he had driven her out of the terrestrial paradise, and made her also hazard the celestial. So his ministers, false teachers, by fair and flattering speeches, deceive the minds of the simple, and cause them to fall from their own stability.

By this we may see how hypocrites and false teachers stand especially upon outward things, as external rite and ceremonies, which are but "devices and doctrines of men" (Matt. 15:9). The Pharisees made much ado about washing of the outside of the cup and of the platter, when as the inside was full of rapine and all uncleanness (Matt.

23:25); very curious about washing of their hands before meat (Mark 7:3), and yet careless to wash their hearts from wickedness (Jer.

4:14); precise in small matters, as in tithing of mint, anise, and cumin, but profane in the practice of the weightier things of the law, as judgment, mercy, and fidelity (Matt. 23:23); whited tombs, fair without and filthy within (v. 27). Thus the popish worship consists especially in outward things which may please the senses of carnal men, as in vocal and instrumental music to please the ear; censings and perfumes to delight the smell; gilding and painting with other sights and spectacles to affect the eye. And at this day, in the Mass

(which they account the very marrow of their Matins) there is nothing but dumb shows, histrionic gestures, and tricks fitter to mock apes withal, than to edify the people. For whereas in former time they were wont to say, "Let us go hear a Mass," now the

common saying in Italy is this, "Let us go see a Mass." Let us therefore try the spirits before we trust them, and especially in matters of religion, follow Christ's precept, "not to judge by the outward appearance" (John 7:24), but to judge of prophets by the fruit of their doctrine (Matt. 7:16), and of their doctrine by the touchstone of the word (Isa. 8:20), so that though the devil transforms himself into an angel of light; nay, though an angel from heaven preach any other thing beside that we have received from Christ, we must hold him accursed. And in so doing, we shall follow

Christ's practice, "who was prudent in the fear of the Lord, and did not judge by the sight of his eyes, nor reprove by the hearing of his ears" (Isa. 11:3).

The second note and mark of these false teachers is that "they compel men to be circumcised." The word "compel" has great emphasis, for it signifies that they did not convince the judgment or persuade the will and affection of the Galatians, but enforced them against their wills; for though circumcision be nothing of itself (as Paul says), yet to be compelled to receive circumcision and to place justification in the use of it and sin in the neglect of it, is the ready way to overturn Christ, the foundation of our salvation (Gal. 5:2–4).

Here sundry questions are to be answered. [Question I.] First, it may be demanded whether it be lawful to compel men to embrace religion, as the false apostles compelled the Galatians to circumcision? Answer. The magistrate may and ought to compel obstinate recusants to profess true religion. For he is custos utriusque tabulae, and therefore is to have care that true religion be professed, and the contemnors thereof punished. An example hereof we have in good King Josiah who "caused all that were found in Jerusalem and Benjamin" (that is, all his subjects) "to stand to the covenant which he made with the Lord," nay, which is more, "He

compelled all that were found in Jerusalem to serve the Lord their God" (2 Chron. 34:32–33), among which multitude many there were

(no doubt) which did like better of idolatry, than of God's worship, as the word "compelled" does import. The king that made the great supper, commanded his servants to "compel the guests to come in unto him" (Luke 14:23), whence Augustine gathers that it is the magistrate's duty to compel recusants, schismatics, heretics, and such like, to the hearing and professing of the word. But here three things are commonly objected against this doctrine.

Objection I. To compel men to embrace true religion is to make them go against their conscience, which the magistrate ought not to do. As some papists have affirmed, that they would not for ten thousand worlds compel a Jew to swear that there were a blessed Trinity, because he should be damned for swearing against his conscience, although the thing were never so true. Answer. I. If it were so heinous a sin to compel any to embrace true religion because it is against their conscience, why do popish prelates and magistrates compel Protestants (and that by exquisite torments) to reconcile themselves to the Church of Rome, to swear obedience to the pope, to acknowledge transubstantiation, and to hear Mass, which they know are directly against their conscience? II. If they will not compel men to do anything (though never so good or godly) because it is against their conscience, why should they not be as scrupulous in restraining them from doing that which is unlawful, because they are persuaded in conscience they ought to do it? For if they compel men to omit that which they believe to be good, because they know it to be evil (as their own practice proves, in that they will not suffer

Protestants to pray publicly in a known tongue, nor receive the sacrament in both kinds, etc.), why do they not compel them also to do that which they know to be good, though they think it to be evil?

III. The magistrate is to compel men to embrace true religion, or to

punish them for their obstinacy in not harkening to the word, because he is to use the means to reclaim them and to win them to a love and liking of the truth. Now so long as they are urged to hear the word, there is hope they may be won again. And experience shows

(as Augustine testifies of the Donatists), that they which did profess religion at the first merely by compulsion, may afterwards (by the mercy of God) profess it only for devotion. And what though some come not to learn, but to carp and cavil? Yet God may cast the net of His mercy so far over them, that contrary to their purpose they may be caught. IV. If the magistrate who may compel them and so reclaim them do suffer them to continue in their errors or heresies, without controlment, he is guilty of their sin; but by compelling them, he has discharged his duty. For albeit they being compelled, do dissemble and play the hypocrites, do lie and foreswear themselves—that is not the magistrate's sin, who intends nothing but their conversion and salvation; it is their own proper and personal sin.

Objection II. Men ought to be persuaded to embrace religion and induced to believe, but not compelled, for the will cannot be compelled. Answer. True it is; the will cannot be compelled; and as true is it likewise, that the magistrate cannot compel any to believe.

For when a man does believe and from his heart embrace true religion, he does it willingly. Notwithstanding means are to be used to make them willing that are unwilling, and the means is to compel them to come to our assemblies to hear the word, and to learn the grounds of true religion. For it is God's commandment men should

"prove the spirits" (1 John 4:1) that so they may know the truth, and cleave unto it. Augustine says fitly and finely to this purpose, Quod autem vobis videtur, invitos ad veritatem non esse cogendos, erratis nescientes Scripturas, neque virtutem Dei, qui eos volentes facit, dum coguntur inviti. Secondly, when Papists receive the sacrament, swear allegiance to their prince, present themselves in our

congregations, who knows that they do these things against their conscience? Nay rather we ought in charity to think that they are persuaded in conscience they may do them, when by oath and protestation they contest so much. But be it they did all in hypocrisy, shall the execution of godly laws therefore cease, because hypocrites will not obey but in dissimulation?

Objection III. The magistrate, by compelling recusants to the outward profession of religion, makes them to play the hypocrites, to counterfeit and dissemble. Answer. The magistrate in executing the laws has no such intent but only that they might hear the word, believe it, and be saved. Again, Protestant recusants in other countries are not allowed by papists to allege their conscience for their refusal, but are compelled either to conform themselves or to undergo cruel torments. No more may such pretense of conscience excuse the papists, or other heretics, but that they should receive the same measure which they mete to others.

Question II. How can it be truly said that the false apostles compelled men to receive circumcision, seeing "Titus was not compelled to be circumcised" (Gal. 2:3)? Answer. That place makes nothing against the text in hand. The meaning is that Paul for his part was ready to have circumcised Titus (as he did Timothy, Acts

16:3), rather than offend the weak brethren. But when it came to this point, that they would urge circumcision as a thing necessary to salvation, Paul refused to do it, "for all the false brethren that crept in" (Gal. 2:4), that is, notwithstanding they labored by all means to bring it in use again. Neither did the apostles urge it, or require it, as a thing necessary to salvation.

[Question] III. It may be demanded, whether that circumcision being so vehemently urged by the false apostles, might not have been used?

Answer. It might not. For albeit it be in itself a thing indifferent, and so it skills not whether a man be circumcised or not, (as Paul says),

"Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing." Yet being urged as a matter of absolute necessity, as without which men could not be saved (Acts 15:1), it ought not to be used. The like may be said of all indifferent things if they be made essential parts of God's worship or necessary to salvation, as the use of meats and drinks, observing of times and seasons, wearing this or that habit or attire, forbidding of marriage to some orders of men. For when things indifferent are made necessary, the nature of them is changed. Upon this ground Hezekiah broke in pieces the brazen serpent when the Israelites began to worship it (2 Kings 18:4).

First, let us observe out of these words, "They compel you to be circumcised," that Paul does not only use Christian policy, but deals very rhetorically, excusing the Galatians as though they were constrained against their wills to do as they did, and laying all the blame upon the false apostles. And so does closely alienate their affection from these seducers, who would have them circumcised, either by voluntary submission or by violent compulsion. The like godly policy we ought to use in dealing against heretics and false teachers, that the people's minds may be estranged from them, and take no love of their doctrine, nor liking of their persons.

Here we have a second note of false teachers, which is, not only to retain ceremonies themselves, but to urge them upon others and constrain men to the observing of them. For they were more earnest and forward in urging circumcision (their own device) than the keeping of the moral law. And so are all seducers. The Pharisees did urge their own ceremonies, as washing before meat, washing of pots, cups, and beds, etc., more than the commandment of God. And the papists urge the Lent fast more strictly than fasting from sin, which

is the only true fast (Isa. 58:6). And their own stories do show that men have been more severely punished for eating flesh upon Good

Friday, than for committing of simple fornication or following of strange flesh. They stand more in urging the outward worshiping of an image, or a piece of bread, than the inward spiritual worship. And as they have made the saints' days equal with the Sabbath days, so have they made the profanation of them an equal sin, and have punished it with equal punishment.

It is further to be observed how they abuse circumcision; for whereas by God's ordination it was but a "seal of the righteousness of faith"

(Rom. 4:11), they perverting the end of it, make it a meritorious cause of salvation, and therefore "compel men to be circumcised." It is God's work; they make it their own work, yea such a work as by which they hope to be saved. And this their dealing may fitly be paralleled by the popish practice at this day, in making baptism, which is but a sign and seal of grace, to be the proper, immediate, and physical cause of conferring grace by the work wrought. Alms, prayer, and fasting (which are but signs and testimonies of justification) to be causes thereof. Nay their own devices of confession, satisfaction, supererogation, to be meritorious causes of justification and salvation.

Lastly, see here how the perverseness of the corrupt heart of man does thwart the ordinance of God. As long as circumcision was commanded by God, most abhorred it; for the heathen testify so much that the Jews were odious for it. But now being abolished, they take it up again, receive it, and urge it as a thing necessary to be observed upon pain of damnation. Whereas if God should enjoin it again, they would (no doubt) account it as a heavy yoke, which neither they nor their fathers were able to bear. This improving of that which God commands and approving that which He forbids

argues the great corruption of the heart, and that the wisdom of the flesh is not only an enemy, but even flat "enmity against God" (Rom.

8:7). It must therefore teach us to captivate our reason and to subject our wills to the will of God in all things.

The third property of the false apostles is the teaching of circumcision, that is, of false doctrine, "because they would not suffer persecution for the cross of Christ," that is, for preaching the true doctrine of the gospel concerning Christ crucified. It may be demanded whether it was necessary that those which taught not circumcision, but spoke against it, should be persecuted? To which I answer, that it was necessary, according as Paul affirms, "If I teach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution?" (Gal. 5:11). The reason was this. The Roman emperor had given liberty to the Jews to live according to their own laws, and that without molestation or disturbance in all places of the Roman Empire, so that if a Jew became a Christian, he had the privilege of a Jew so long as he kept the ceremonial law and taught no departing from Moses. Whereas they which taught that ceremonies were abrogated, and that men were justified only by faith in Christ, wanted this privilege and so were persecuted of no men more than of the Jews, either by themselves or by incensing others against them (1 Thess. 2:15–16).

The false apostles therefore to avoid persecution coined a new gospel, in matter of salvation joining Christ and Moses, justification by faith and by works. So that here we have another character and mark of false teachers, which is, to labor by all means to enjoy the world and to eschew the cross, and rather than they will suffer persecution, to make a hotch-potch of religion, as we may see, not only by this particular, but by the course of the history of the church, and in latter times, by the Interim under Charles V, and the Six

Articles under Henry VIII269—by our mediators and reconciliators, who either (as it is said of old Conciliator) labor to accord fire and

water, or else like hucksters mix wine and water for their own advantage. And by all neuters and mongrels in religion, who hover in the wind, because they would stand sure for all assays, or win the favor of great men, that they might not stand in the way of their preferment. This is the sin of the multitude among us who desire to have Christ, but they will none of His cross. They would be with Him upon Mount Tabor but not upon Mount Calvary, crowned with glory, but not crowned with thorns.

Further, we may hence gather an essential difference of the true and false teachers. The one seeks the good of the church; the other seeks themselves—the one the glory of God; the other their own glory. It is observed by popish priests and others that though the Jesuits pretend they do all things in ordine ad Deum, yet they intend themselves, doing all things in ordine ad seipses—it being the mark they shoot at in all their Machiavellian plots and policies, that they may have cum dignitate otium, a lordly command and a lazy life.

Again, here we see that the love of the truth and of the world, the fear of the face of man and the fear of God can never stand together. As also how dangerous a thing it is to be addicted to the love of the world. For it has been always the cause of revolt, in that men never embraced religion so as that they could be contented to suffer persecution for the profession of it, nor lay down their lives in the maintenance thereof. "As soon as tribulation or persecution cometh, by and by they are offended" (Matt. 13:21). Whereas we ought to have the same mind that Paul had, who knowing that bonds and imprisonment abode him, yet passed not for them, either was his life dear unto him (Acts 20:23), and was not only ready to be bound, but to die also, for the name of the Lord Jesus (Acts 21:13). The reasons which should make us willing to take up our cross and follow Christ are these. First, it is a great mercy and favor of God that we are

accounted worthy to suffer anything for His sake. "The apostles departed from the council rejoicing that they were accounted worthy to suffer rebuke for his name" (Acts 5:41). Secondly, it is a means (by the merciful promise of God) to procure and obtain the blessing of this life (Mark 10:30). Thirdly, it has blessedness annexed to it, with a promise of assistance and help of God's Spirit. "If ye be railed on for the name of Christ, blessed are ye, for the Spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you, which on their part is evil spoken of, but on your part is glorified" (1 Peter 4:14). Lastly, the end of the cross is glory unspeakable. "If we suffer with him, we shall also be glorified with him" (Rom. 8:17).

Further, whereas St. Paul links together persecution and the preaching of the cross, we may see that the profession of the gospel and persecution do either go hand in hand, or do follow one another inseparably; for "as many as will live godly in Christ Jesus, must suffer persecution" (2 Tim. 3:12). Moses is said to have "chosen rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season" (Heb. 11:25). Where we see that affliction is the lot and portion of the godly. The reason hereof is twofold: the malice of the devil who is always nibbling at the heel

(Gen. 3:15), and the hatred of the malignant church (the devil's seed) ever maligning the church and people of God. The devil makes war with the remnant of the woman's seed, which keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus (Rev. 12:17).

The malignant church persecutes the church of God, as we may see in their types, namely, in Cain hating and persecuting Abel; Ishmael,

Isaac; Esau, Jacob. Which they did only "because they saw their own works to be evil, and theirs to be good" (1 John 3:12). And if it be demanded, why those that preach the word plainly and powerfully to the consciences of men, in evidence of the Spirit, are so extremely hated and maligned? Answer. It is for no other thing, but "even for

the works' sake," for which they ought to be reverenced (1 Thess.

5:13), and because "they prophesy not good unto them, but evil" (1 Kings 22:8), that is, preach not pleasing things, by sewing pillows under their elbows, and lulling them asleep in the bed of security, but denounce the judgments of God against them, and so disquiet and trouble their guilty consciences. And what (I beseech you) is the reason why those that make conscience of sin are so maligned of the wicked world, and branded with the black names of Puritans and Precisians, but this, which our Savior Christ gives, "Because they are not of the world, therefore the world hateth them" (John 15:19)?

Now all this comes to pass, by reason of that enmity which God has put betwixt the woman and the serpent; his seed and her seed (Gen.

3:15).

This teaches us, first, that we should suspect ourselves, that our hearts are not sound, nor our practice sincere, when all men speak well of us. For true profession is always accompanied with persecution. "Woe be to you, when all men speak well of you" (Luke

6:26).

Secondly, that we must not be discouraged in our profession, though there be never so many that make opposition, or so mighty that raise persecution against us. Though they tell us as they did Paul,

"Concerning this sect, we know that every where it is spoken against"

(Acts 28:22); or take us up with Nicodemus, "Art thou also of Galilee? Search and look for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet" (John

7:52). In these blasts and storms of temptations, we ought to make that saying of Christ our anchor-hold, "Blessed is he that is not offended in me" (Matt. 11:6).

Lastly, that we think it not strange when we find affliction, or meet with persecution (1 Peter 4:12–13).

13 For they which are circumcised, keep not the law, but desire to have you circumcised, that they might glory in your flesh.

Here the apostle prevents an objection, which might be made against the former conclusion (v. 12). For it might be said, Paul did them wrong in slandering them, to urge circumcision only because they would avoid persecution, when as they did it as zealous observers of the law. To this he answers negatively, that whatsoever they did pretend, they intended no such thing. And he proves his former assertion by two arguments, and withal describes the false apostles by two other properties. His first reason may be framed thus. If they did urge circumcision as being zealous of the law and having conscience of the observing thereof, they would keep it themselves, as well as compel others to the keeping of it. But they keep it not themselves. Therefore they urge it not in conscience to have it obeyed, but for some sinister end. The second reason is this. They that propound no other end to themselves in urging of circumcision, but vaunting and boasting in the flesh—they seek not the observation of the law. But these seducers urge circumcision and other ceremonies that they might glory in the flesh. Therefore they seek not the observation of the law. So that here we have two other properties of false teachers. The first is to compel men to the observing of that, which they will not observe themselves. For thus these seducers urged the ceremonial law, resembling herein the scribes and Pharisees "who bound heavy burdens, and grievous to be borne, and laid them on men's shoulders, whereas they themselves would not move them with one of their fingers" (Matt. 23:4).

The popes and prelates of the Romish church are notorious in this kind, in urging men to make conscience of that, which they themselves will not keep, to practice that which they will not perform, and to believe that which they count false and fabulous.

For, first, they strictly require regular obedience to be performed of their novices and others to their generals or governors, specially to the Vicar of Christ and See of Rome, whereas they will not be subject to the higher powers as they ought (Rom. 13:1), nor obedient to governors, as it is required (1 Peter 2:13–14). Nay, their practice is notorious in these four particulars. First, in freeing children from obedience to their parents. Secondly, in exempting their shavelings from subjection to the civil magistrate. Thirdly, in freeing subjects from their oath of allegiance to the sovereigns. And lastly, by advancing that Man of Sin above all that is called God or worshiped,275 and giving him power to depose princes, to dispose of crowns and kingdoms, and to impose laws which shall properly bind the conscience, yea, to tread kings and emperors under his feet, and cause them like vassals to hold his stirrup. Again, they compel others to fast, especially in Lent, when as they in the meantime feast; their fast being to eat fast, and drink fast, in mortifying the flesh with their

Indian capons277 and peacocks, and that upon Good Friday; whereas to eat white meats upon that day should be in others a mortal sin. Further, they bear the poor people in hand, that indulgences are means to remit sins; and that those that are excommunicated by the pope are in a damnable estate—whereas many of them, account popes' bulls to be but bullae, mere trifles, and such as buy them, stark fools; witness the speech of the Duke of Valence, bastard to Pope Alexander VI, who having lost certain thousand crowns at a throw at the dice: "Tush" (said he) "these are but the sins of the Germans." And that of Charles V (though a favorer and maintainer of the Roman religion) who being menaced by Pope

Paulus III with excommunication, if he would not yield up Playsance into his hands, let him understand by his ambassador, that he would thunder at St. Angela with his canons and artillery, if he would needs be thundering out his excommunications. Lastly, they use confession of purgatory almost as an article of faith, whereas some of them are

so far from believing it, as that they think there is neither heaven nor hell, witness the speech of Pope Leo X to Cardinal Bembus: "O

Bembus, what riches have we gotten by this fine fable of Jesus Christ?" By this we are contrarily admonished to practice that we profess. The ministers of the word especially ought verba vertere in opera (as Jerome speaks), that is, to turn words into works, that their lives may be real sermons to the people. For otherwise they pull down with one hand, as fast as they build with another. Let us consider how Peter's bad example is said to have compelled the Gentiles to live as the Jews (Gal. 2:14). For actions abide, and are of force, when words pass as the wind.

Moreover, upon this depends another property of seducers, which is, to set a fair gloss upon the matter, and to make the world believe they do these and these things for such and such ends (as these false teachers did, pretending religion and conscience, but intending freedom from the cross and their own vain glory), whereas they mean nothing less. Like Herod, who made show of worshiping

Christ, when his purpose was to have destroyed Him (Matt. 2). This property and practice is and has been usual, specially in the Church of Rome. For generally, they would have the world believe that the pope's triple crown and hierarchy of that see is for the maintenance and defense of the gospel. Whereas all the world knows, it is only to keep their kitchens hot, to uphold their Persian pomp and ambitious tyranny. Particularly, there be two politic practices of theirs, which prove the point in hand. First, it is well known that popes have never ceased from time to time to solicit the princes of Europe to maintain the holy war (as they call it), pretending the recovery of the Holy

Land out of the hands of the Turks and Saracens. When as (at least in the beginning) they intended nothing less, but that by this means they might set the East and West together by the ears, whilst they played their parts at home in Italy. The second is their shrift or

auricular confession, which they practice for this end (as they say) that they may pacify distressed consciences, by absolving them of their sins. When as the truth is, they first brought it into the church and do still continue it in a politic respect, as being the only way in the world to know all the secret purposes, plots, policies, and practices that are either in church or commonwealth.

We are therefore here admonished to take heed of dissembling, in making Christianity a cloak of impiety, or to pretend one thing and intend another, like the heart pointing upward and poising downward; for that will be a far fouler solecism than that which the heathen committed with his hand, in pointing to heaven when he spoke of the earth. But let us always labor for sincerity, to be at least that which we pretend to be, or rather like Solomon's Temple, whose windows were larger within than without, and not like the glow worm, making a fair glittering show of that which we have not.

14 But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, whereby the world is crucified to me, and I unto the world.

In these words Paul comes to the reddition of the dissimilitude betwixt him and the false apostles, his glorying and their. In them we may consider two general points. First, wherein he would not glory

"in nothing, save in," etc. Secondly, the thing wherein he would glory, "in the cross of Christ," whereof he renders a reason in the words following, taken from the effects which the cross wrought in him, for "by it, the world was crucified to him, and he unto the world."

For the first, to "glory," implies three things. First, to rejoice, exult, and triumph in a man's self, in regard of some good thing, or some supposed good. Secondly, to bewray this great exultation, by speech,

or action, or both. Thirdly, by boasting of it, to look for praise and applause of men, which glorying (according to the nature of the object and the end) is either good or evil. For if it have a right object, namely, "the cross of Christ," and a right end, "the glory of God," it is good; otherwise it is evil—such as was this glorying of the false apostles, and all other carnal glorying, which is not in the Lord. For it is nothing else but vain glory. Vain, I say, first, in regard of the things wherein men glory, which are either such as are not, as when a man boasts of that which he has not, but would seem to have—or such as he has not of himself (1 Cor. 4:7), or such as have no continuance, but are transitory and fading, as all earthly things are, seeing man himself is but "as grass, and all the glory of man, but as the flower of the field" (Isa. 40:6). Secondly, it is vain in regard of man, from whom we look for glory and admiration, seeing his judgment is erroneous. Thirdly, in regard of the end, in not referring it to the main and proper end, the glory of God and the good of His church.

The prophet reduces all those things wherein we ought not to glory to three heads: wisdom, strength, and riches [Jer. 9:23]—all which we have received, and therefore ought not to boast of them, as though we had not received them. In particular, wisdom is not to be gloried in, seeing it is very defective, whether we speak of speculative wisdom standing in contemplation, or practical, consisting in action.

For in arts and sciences, as also in the secrets of nature, our ignorance is greater than our knowledge. He that knows not that he knows nothing in these things, let him read the book of Job, chapters

28, and 37 and 38. And as for wisdom in divine things, "We know nothing as we ought to know" (1 Cor. 8:2), "for we know but in part, and see but as in glass, darkly" (1 Cor. 13:12). And as for practical wisdom standing in policy, it is not demonstrative, but merely conjectural, and therefore we cannot build upon it, considering in it there is the concurrence of so many causes that are casual, and of so many minds which are mutable. Solomon the great politician had

experience hereof. For he thought that by joining affinity with his neighbor princes round about him, and taking their daughters to be his wives, he should establish his own house, strengthen his kingdom, and draw the heathenish idolaters to the worship of the true God. But all things fell out contrary to this his plot and project.

For it was so far from winning others to embrace true religion, as that it drew him to idolatry—and so far from stablishing his house, or strengthening his kingdom, as that it was the cause of the rending of the one, and the ruinating of the other. Constantine the Great was persuaded that by building the city of Constantinople in the confines of Europe and Asia, and there placing one of his sons, as his lieutenant to keep his court, he should fortify his empire as with a wall of brass. But he was deceived, for the building of new Rome was the decay of the old, and the dividing of the empire was the destruction thereof. So that it is truly said, Policy is often the overthrow of polity.

Now if wisdom may not be gloried in, much less may strength, seeing that "wisdom is better than strength" (Eccl. 9:16), seeing that the greatest strength of man is not comparable to that of behemoth (Job

40) and other brute beasts. Seeing it is but the strength of flesh.

Seeing no power nor might can deliver from wrath in the day of wrath. Of all the puissant princes and plotting politicians, the psalmist says, they are so vain that if they be laid upon the balance, even vanity itself will weigh them down (Ps. 62:9).

And as for riches, besides that they make us never a whit the better (nay oftentimes much worse), they are also uncertain. Solomon says,

"They make themselves wings like an eagle, and fly away" (Prov.

23:5). They may not unfitly be compared to Jonah's gourd, which flourished in the morning, yielding him content and delight, but shortly after (to his great grief) it was stricken by a worm and

withered away. The like may be said of honors and pleasures. For what more vain than to glory in honor, which is not in a man's power, seeing as the Philosopher teaches, "Honor is not in him that is honored, but in him that honors." And therefore courtiers are compared to counters,284 which stand sometime for pounds, sometime for pence, being now advanced, now debased, according to the pleasure of the prince. Haman today highly honored in the court at Shushan, the next day hanged upon a tree [Esth. 7]. To omit the examples of Job, and Nebuchadnezzar (in whom we may see the mutability of worldly dignity). Consider it in the glass of these examples. First of Geliner a puissant prince of the Vandals, who was brought so low that he was enforced to request his friend to send him a loaf of bread, a sponge, and a harp—a loaf, to slake his hunger; a sponge, to dry up his tears; a harp, to solace him in his misery. Of Bellisarius (for prowess and honor, the only man then living) who came to that miserable estate, that having his eyes put out, he was led in a string to beg by the highway-side, crying, Date obulum

Bellisario. And of the victorious emperor Henry IV, who had fought fifty-two pitched fields, and yet was driven to that exigent, as that he became a suitor for a poor prebend in the church of Spira, to maintain himself in his old age. And as for worldly pleasures, least cause is there that any man should glory in them, seeing they are more vanishing than the former. Seeing they are common to us with brute beasts. Seeing they are mingled with much grief and vexation, for "in the midst of laughter the heart is sorrowful" (Prov. 14:13).

And lastly, seeing they leave a sting behind them, for the end of pleasure is nothing but pain, as Solomon says, "The end of rejoicing is mourning" [Prov. 14:13]. For feasting and banqueting are often turned into surfeiting and vomiting; drinkings, into palsies; lusts, into gouts, etc. And if pleasures were but only painful, the matter were the less; but they are also sinful (Heb. 11:25), and therefore in no wise to be gloried in.

By this we see that Paul had just cause in this earnest manner to say, "God forbid that I should glory but in the cross of Christ," considering that this boasting in outward things is not only a fault of vanity, but also of impiety, as may appear by these reasons. I. God has expressly forbidden it (Jer. 9:23; Gal. 5:26). II. He has always severely punished it, as in David, for numbering the people in a vainglorious mind (2 Sam. 24). In Hezekiah, for showing his treasures in a bravery to the ambassadors of the king of Babylon (Isa. 39). In Herod, for ascribing to himself the glory proper to God alone (Acts

12). III. The saints of God have always abhorred it, as Paul does in this place, and, "If I must needs glory, I will glory in mine infirmities"

(2 Cor. 11:30), as if he should say, I will be far from carnal boasting.

IV. The heathen by the light of nature have condemned it. The Grecian orator calls it "an odious and burdensome thing." And the Roman orator proves it to be most true by his own practice, making his words which flowed from his mouth as sweet as honey, to taste as bitter as wormwood by interlacing his own praises.

Objection I. Paul gloried in something besides the cross of Christ when he said, "It were better for him to die, than that any should make his glorying vain" (1 Cor. 9:15). Answer. Paul in glorying does distinguish his calling from his person; "Of such a one I will boast, of myself I will not boast," and, "I was nothing inferior to the very chief apostles, although I am nothing" (2 Cor. 12:5, 11). Of his person or personal gifts he boasts not, but only of his apostolic calling and his faithful discharge thereof—to the end he may stop the mouths of the false apostles. Thus to confess the good things we have to the glory of God, being urged thereunto, is lawful boasting, nay, it is sometime necessary, making much for the maintenance of the gospel, as Paul's boasting made much for the good of the church of Corinth. Again, there is a twofold lawful boasting: one before God; another before men (Rom. 4:2). Of the former the apostle speaks in this verse; of the

latter, in 2 Corinthians 12. He gloried not in the testimony of a good conscience before God, but only before men. Before God he gloried in nothing, but in the saving knowledge of Christ and Him crucified.

And whereas it may be said that this his boasting in regard of the false apostles, as also his glorying in the testimony of his conscience

(2 Cor. 1:12), and in his infirmities (2 Cor. 11:30), were not in the cross of Christ—I answer, they were. For his glorying over the false apostles in teaching freely was in the good and prosperous success of the gospel, which is the doctrine of the cross, and his glorying in the testimony of his conscience; in that it was washed by the blood of the cross, as Paul speaks (Col. 1:20). In his afflictions, in that they were the afflictions of Christ, and he by them made conformable to Him.

But it will be said, that he gloried in his revelation, in his pains and travail, in preaching the gospel, and in the multitude of churches which he had planted. Answer. First, he did it being urged thereunto; secondly, he did it to defend his calling and the credit of the gospel.

And therefore this boasting was not unlawful; nay, it was necessary, and in the Lord. For when we are compelled, we may confess the good things we have, if we do it sparingly, and for the edification of others, that they may be bettered by our example—and that they seeing our good works may glorify God our heavenly Father (Matt.

5:16).

Here we see what glorying is unlawful, namely, when men ascribe unto themselves either that which they have not, or more than they have, or as proceeding from themselves, their wisdom, strength, industry, in sacrificing to their own nets, and burning incense to their own yarn (Hab. 1:16), or in boasting of them without necessary cause, either for their own vain glory, as Nebuchadnezzar did (Dan.

4), or not for God's glory, as Herod did (Acts 12). And if this glorying be so great a sin, surely boasting in wickedness (as Doeg did, Ps.

52:1) must needs be most damnable. As when the greatest swearers and swaggerers count themselves the best companions; the greatest idolaters and superstitious persons, most religious; the greatest oppressors, surfeiters, drunkards, fighters, most valiant and courageous, etc. Now this may be done three ways: either ignorantly, as when Paul gloried in his cruel persecuting of the saints before his conversion (Acts 26:11); or presumptuously, when men glory in wickedness, notwithstanding they be persuaded in conscience that it is evil, and then it is the sin of Sodom (Isa. 3:9); or maliciously, to despite God, and then it is the sin against the Holy Ghost.

The second point to be considered in the words is the thing wherein he will glory, called here the cross of Christ. "Save in the cross of our

Lord Jesus Christ." The words in the original translated "save" are exceptive—as if he should say, I will glory in nothing except in the cross of Christ; and exclusive—only in the cross of Christ, and in nothing else. Albeit they are sometimes adversative, as Galatians

2:16 and Revelation 21:27, "There shall enter into it no unclean thing εἰ μὴ but they that are written," etc., where the words are not exclusive. For then it would follow that some which work abomination should enter into heaven; but adversative as Matthew

12:4 and Luke 4:26 which may serve (by the way) to clear the text, "Those thou gavest me have I kept, and none of them is lost, but the child of perdition" (John 17:12)—that is, "But the child of perdition is lost." For the words εἰ μὴ (as I take it) are not so well translated by the exceptive conjunction nisi, as by the adversative sed—seeing here is no exception made of Judas, as though he had been given to Christ and afterward had fallen away. Which exposition must needs be made, if the words be read nisi filius perditionis.

Further, by the cross of Christ, the apostle understands synecdochically the all-sufficient, expiatory, and satisfactory sacrifice

of Christ upon the cross, with the whole work of our redemption—in the saving knowledge whereof he professes he will glory and boast.

For "Christ is made unto us wisdom, righteousness.… that as it is written, he that glorieth, should glory in the Lord" (1 Cor. 1:30–31).

Even to make boast of Him all the day long, as the psalmist speaks.

And the reason why Paul professes that he will glory only in the cross of Christ is because Christ crucified is the treasury and storehouse of the church—seeing that in Him are hid, not only the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Col. 2:3), but of bounty and grace (John

1:16), and of all spiritual blessings (Eph. 1:3). For first, by Christ crucified, we have reconciliation with God, remission of sins, and acceptation to eternal life. Secondly, we have the peace of God which passes all understanding, peace with God, with angels, with men, with ourselves, with the creatures. Thirdly, we recover the right and title which we had in the creation to all the creatures and blessings of God (1 Cor. 3:22). Fourthly, all afflictions and judgments cease to be curses and punishments, and become either trials or corrections.

Lastly, death itself is no death, but a sleep. For all that die in the Lord are said to sleep and to rest upon their beds (Isa. 57:2). Indeed, if we look upon death through the glass of the law, it is the very downfall to eternal destruction. But if we consider it as it is changed by the death of Christ, it is but a passage from this transitory life to eternal life. Christ by His death has taken away sin, the sting of death—so that though it seize upon us, yet (having lost his sting) it cannot hurt us. So that in a word, in Christ crucified, are all things that a man can glory of. If we would glory in knowledge and wisdom, He is the wisdom of the Father, seeing that all treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hid in Him. And therefore Paul desired to know nothing among the Corinthians, "but Christ and him crucified" (1

Cor. 2:2), for this knowledge is eternal life (John 17:3). If in the love and favor of great men, by Him we are highly advanced into the love and favor of God (Eph. 1:6). If in honors and riches, by Him we are

made kings and priests (Rev. 1:6). If in liberty, by Him we are delivered from the hands of our enemies, sin, Satan, etc. (Luke 1:74).

If in pleasures, comfort, and content, He is our felicity, in Him we are complete (Col. 2). By Him we have right "to those things which eye hath not seen, ear hath not heard, neither can the heart of man conceive."

It may be said, why does Paul glory in the ignominious death of Christ, rather than in His glorious resurrection, triumphant ascension, and imperial jurisdiction now sitting at the right hand of the Father? Answer. These are not excluded, but included in the cross. Yet he names the cross rather than them. First of all, to show that upon the cross, Christ did fully finish the work of our redemption. For being now ready to give up the ghost, He said, "It is finished" (John 19:30). This made Paul to desire to know nothing but Christ, and Him crucified (1 Cor. 2). For in His humiliation stands our exaltation; in His weakness stands our strength; in His ignominy, our glory; in His death, our life. Secondly, to show that he was not ashamed of the cross of Christ, though never so ignominious in the eyes of the world. It had been no great thing for Paul to have gloried in the resurrection, ascension, wisdom, power, and majesty of Christ, wherein the world can and does glory. But to glory in the shameful, contemptible, accursed death of the cross was a matter of great difficulty, and the work of faith, judging that which the world counts ignominious, to be most glorious—that which the learned philosophers counted foolishness, to be the wisdom of God (1 Cor.

1:24).

The popish sort abuse this text two ways. First, in applying it to the transient cross. Secondly, to the permanent or material cross. To the transient cross, in that they glory in it—first, as having a virtue in it

(when it is made in the air) to drive away devils. Secondly, being

made in the forehead to be as an amulet against charms, blastings, and other such like casualties. To the material cross, when they adorn it with gold and jewels, and so cause it to be carried in great pomp before them. When the Crucigeri wear it in their hats in a white, red, or green color. When they put their confidence in it, and pray unto it, "Holy Cross, save us." This is popish and a carnal glorying in the cross, and not spiritual, in the death of Christ upon the cross, of which only the apostle speaks in this place.

The reason why he would glory in nothing but in the cross of Christ follows to be considered, in these words, "By which the world is crucified to me, and I unto the world." It is taken from a double effect, which Christ, or the cross of Christ, wrought in him. (For the words δἶ οὗ, "by which," may be referred to either indifferently). The first, "to be crucified to the world." The second, "the world to be crucified to him." By "the world," we are not to understand the frame of heaven and earth, nor the creatures, nor mankind; but honor, riches, pleasures, favor, wisdom, glory, and whatsoever is opposed to the kingdom of Christ and the new creature. "To be crucified to the world" is to be dead unto it, to despise and contemn it, to count all the glory of it to be no better than dung, in respect of Christ and His righteousness, as Paul did (Phil. 3:8). The world is said "to be crucified to us," when it hates and persecutes us and accounts us the filth and the off-scouring of all things (1 Cor. 4:13). Yet here observe that we are crucified to the world, and the world to us, by the virtue of the death of Christ, after a different manner. We are crucified to the world properly by the Spirit of Christ weaning our affections from the love of this world. The world is crucified to us by the death of Christ improperly and by accident, in that we are made such as the world cannot but hate and persecute. For seeing we are made new creatures and chosen out of the world, therefore the world hates us

(John 15:19).

Here we see who those are that can truly glory in the cross of Christ, namely those that are dead to the world, and the world to them— such as feel the power of the Spirit of Christ crucifying the flesh in them with the affections and lusts. Others can no more glory of the cross of Christ than he that glories of the victory which his prince has gotten over his enemies, himself in the meantime being a vassal and slave unto them.

Secondly, that it is not sufficient for a Christian that the world is crucified to him except he also be crucified to the world, neither loving the world nor the things in the world.

Thirdly, that to be crucified to the world is not to profess monastical life, and to be shut up in a monastery, but to renounce the world and the corruptions that are therein, both in affection of heart and practice of life.

Fourthly, we are taught to carry ourselves to the world as crucified and dead men, not to love nor like it, to seek or affect it, but to renounce and forsake it, with all the vanities, delights, and pleasures thereof. And to be as dead men to our own wicked wills, and to our carnal reason, letting them lie dead in us and suffering ourselves to be ruled, ordered, and guided by the Spirit of God—making His will our will; His word, our wisdom.

Fifthly, by this we may examine our hearts, for if we have our affections glued to the world, and set upon the honors, pleasures, profits, and preferments thereof, we are worldlings indeed. For they that are Christ's are crucified with Christ (Gal. 2:20), and have crucified the flesh, with the affections and lusts (Gal. 5:24), and therefore must needs be crucified to the world. A man that is hanged upon a gibbet ceases from his thefts and murders. So all that are indeed crucified with Christ to the world cease from their old

offences. For as the apostle reasons, if we be risen with Christ, we ought to seek the things that are above, and not the things that are upon the earth (Col. 3:1–2). So if we be dead with Christ from the vanities of the world, we ought as dead men to abstain from all worldly lusts, which fight against the soul (1 Peter 2:11).

15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.

Here the apostle proves his former assertion (v. 14), that he neither did, nor ought to glory in anything, save in the cross of Christ, because nothing is of any account in the kingdom of God, but a new creature. And this he proves by the removal of all those things that are either opposite to, or diverse from a new creature, signified by circumcision and uncircumcision. And withal he lays down two conclusions. The first is that "in Christ Jesus," that is, in the kingdom of grace, "neither circumcision, nor uncircumcision are anything," that is, are neither acceptable to God, nor available to salvation.

Under these two synecdochically comprehending all outward privileges and prerogatives, dignities and regalities, or whatsoever can be named. Under circumcision comprising the preeminence of the Jew, and the profit of circumcision, which was much every way

(Rom. 3:1), seeing that "to them appertained the adoption and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises" (Rom. 9:4). Under uncircumcision containing the Gentiles, with all their wealth, wisdom, strength, laws, policy, and whatsoever is of high account and glorious in the eyes of the world. All which he excludes and accounts as "nothing" in respect of regeneration. "For that which is highly accounted of among men, is abomination in the sight of God" (Luke 16:15). Therefore wisdom, wealth, nobility, strength are nothing (1 Cor. 1:26). Outward callings, as to be king or Caesar, prophet or apostle. Outward actions of

fasting, alms, prayer. Nay, kindred and alliance, as to be mother or brother of Christ, is nothing. For if the blessed virgin had not borne

Christ in her heart, as she did in her womb, she would never have been saved (Luke 11:27–28). And if His kinsmen had not been His brethren by spiritual adoption as well as by natural propagation, they should have had no inheritance in the kingdom of God (Mark 3:32–

35). Nay, the outward element of baptism, without the inward grace, is of no force, for it is "not the washing away of the filth of the flesh"

(that is acceptable to God) "but the stipulation of a good conscience, which maketh requests unto God" (1 Peter 3:21). And if the communicant at the Lord's Table do not eat panem Dominum as well as panem Domini (as Augustine speaks), that is, if he do not receive

Christ spiritually by the hand of his faith, as he does corporally receive the elements by his bodily hand, he "receiveth unworthily, and so eateth and drinketh his own judgment" (1 Cor. 11:29). Now the reason why these outward things are nothing available is because the things that are accounted of with God are spiritual and eternal, not temporal and carnal as these are. Which as they shall utterly cease in the kingdom of glory (Matt. 22:30), "for then Christ will put down all rule, authority, and power" (1 Cor. 15:24), so are they not of any moment or account in the kingdom of grace, as Paul teaches (2

Cor. 5:16; Gal. 3:28; Col. 3:11).

It may be said, these privileges and outward things, as prince and people, master and servant, bond and free, etc., have place in the kingdom of grace, seeing Christianity does not abolish nature, nor civil policy. To which I answer that man must be considered two ways, in respect of the outward or inward man. Consider him as he is a member in civil society, as of the family, church, or commonwealth.

There are sundry differences of persons, as bond, free; magistrate, subject; poor, rich, etc. In which sense the apostle's exhortation takes place, "Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands.… children, obey

your parents.… servants, be obedient to your masters" (Col. 3:18, 20, 22). But if a man be considered in respect of his spiritual estate, as he is a member of the invisible or catholic church, under spiritual government consisting "in righteousness, peace of conscience and joy in the Holy Ghost" (Rom. 14:17), there is no distinction of calling, condition, or sex; "for we are all one in Christ" (Gal. 3:28), or "Christ is all and in all things" (Col. 3:11), in that though we be many, yet are we but one body in Christ (Rom. 12:5), seeing we are quickened with one Spirit (Eph. 4:4). The popish opinion therefore which teaches that there be some outward callings and actions which commend us to God, as to lead a single life, to fast, to vow voluntary poverty, to perform regular obedience, to profess monkery, to be buried in a friar's cowl, or to abstain from these and these meats is here condemned when Paul says that outward privileges will not serve the turn, and that "meat commendeth us not to God" (1 Cor. 8:8).

Again, neither this nor the like places (Gal. 3:28; Col. 3:11), do anything favor the Anabaptist fancy, of bringing in an anarchy, that is, an ataxy into Christian society, by taking away Christian magistrates, and distinction betwixt master and servant. For by the same reason we may confound the sex of man and woman, for Paul says, "There is neither male nor female, but we are all one in Christ"—the meaning thereof is this, that although in respect of our inward or spiritual estate before God, there be no such difference; yet that hinders not but there may be in respect of our outward estate.

Further, we learn from hence, that no man is to think highly of himself in regard of outward privileges, as birth, honor, wealth, favor, nor to glory in them (Jer. 9:23). Rich men must not be high minded (1 Tim. 6:17). Nay, the king may not lift up his mind above his brethren (Deut. 17:20). Paul's example is notable, who accounted all the privileges which he had before his conversion, whilst he was a

Jew (as that he was a citizen of Rome, a Pharisee, a great Rabbin, instructed by Gamaliel, of the tribe of Benjamin, circumcised the eighth day, etc.) and after his conversion being a Christian (as that he was an apostle, taken up into the third heaven, etc.) to be as nothing or worse than nothing, even as loss or dung in respect of being a new creature in Christ, that is, in respect of justification and sanctification. And therefore we may not set our minds too much upon outward things, as riches, honors, pleasures—seeing they are not available to salvation.

Besides, this teaches all those that are but in mean and base estate to be content. For outward privileges avail nothing. Outward wants and miseries hinder nothing. If a man be rich, he is nothing the nearer, and if he be poor, he is not a whit the further off. It is the poverty of the spirit which makes a man rich in grace. For though the poor man be the rich man's slave, yet he is the son of God and fellow heir with Christ. And though the rich man be the poor man's master, yet he is the servant of Christ, as Paul says, "He that is called being a servant, is God's free man; and he that is called being free, is Christ's servant"

(1 Cor. 7:22).

Lastly, this crosses the opinion of the multitude, who think that if a man be increased in riches, graced with favor, advanced with honor, that he is a godly, wise, religious man; and that religion which he professes is the truth. This is nothing else but "to have the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ in respect of persons" (James 2:1).

The second conclusion is that the new creature is the only thing that is acceptable to God. "Circumcision," etc., "availeth nothing, but a new creature." By the "new creature," the apostle understands the image of God or renovation of the whole man, both in the spirits of our minds, and in the affections of our hearts, which is also called the

new man. We shall the better conceive it by the contrary, namely, by the old man, which is want of knowledge in the mind and delight in ignorance; want of subjection and conformity in the will and rebellion withal; want of holiness in the affections and proneness to evil. The new man then is the restoring of all these defects. For the understanding hereof, consider that there are three things in the soul. The substance of the soul; the faculties or powers of the soul; and the qualities of these faculties. Now neither the substance nor faculties are lost by the fall, but only the qualities of the faculties—as when an instrument is out of tune, the fault is not in the substance of the instrument, nor in the sound, but in the disproportion or jar in the sound. Therefore the qualities only are renewed by grace. These qualities or habits are either in the understanding, or will and affections. The quality in the understanding is knowledge: "Ye have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge, after the image of Him that accreted him" (Col. 3:10). In the will and affections, they are principally two, righteousness and holiness, both which are in truth and sincerity, without all hypocrisy: "Put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness, and true holiness" (Eph.

4:24)—where holiness and righteousness are opposed to concupiscence and lusts of the old man; truth (which has relation to both), to spiritual guile and dissimulation. So that each of these qualities has two parts: a want of the contrary evil and a positive quality or habit of goodness. Holiness respects God, and contains all duties of piety contained in the first table. Righteousness respects man and the creatures and comprises all the duties enjoined in the second table. Truth respects the manner how both the former are to be practiced, viz. with an upright and sincere heart, free from all hypocrisy and deceit. These three making a perfect harmony in all the faculties of the soul: holiness performing all the duties of piety; righteousness, the duties of humanity; truth, seasoning both the former with sincerity.

But (some may say) how is the new creature opposed to all external things, or said to be of any force in the kingdom of Christ, seeing it is not available to justify a man before God, being stained with manifold imperfections? For answer whereof, we are to know that outward things are sometime opposed to Christ and His righteousness, as, "There is neither Jew, nor Grecian, circumcision nor uncircumcision," etc., "but Christ is all, and in all things" (Col.

3:11), sometime to faith, as, "Neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but faith which worketh by love" (Gal. 5:6), sometime to the new creature or sanctification, as in this place, and,

"Circumcision is nothing," etc,.

"but the keeping of the commandments of God" (1 Cor. 7:19). But the sense is all one, for they are opposed to Christ, as to the matter of our justification; to faith, as to the instrument apprehending it; to the new creature, as to the sign of them both.

Further, whereas both here and 2 Corinthians 5:17, the image of God is called "a new creature" (or as it is in the original καινὴ κτίσις, "new creation"), the meaning is not that either the substance or faculties of the soul are created anew, but that the work of regeneration is wholly to be ascribed to God alone (not as though we were stocks or stones without life or motion), but because God does create these new qualities in us, quickening us when we were dead in sin, and working in us both the will and the deed (Phil. 2:13).

If regeneration then be a new creation, it must needs follow that before our conversion we were not only dead, but even flat nothing in godliness and grace. By which we see what to judge of the semiPelagian heresy, which teaches that a man by an internum principium may dispose himself to will that which is truly good. And that man is not stark dead in sin, but only sick or wounded and half dead, as the man which fell among the thieves (Luke 10), or as a

prisoner that is shackled and manacled, who can walk of himself if his fetters be taken from him. So we (if Christ loose the chains of our sins) have power of ourselves to move ourselves. Which doctrine we know is most injurious to the mercy of God and most derogatory to the merits of Christ, seeing it makes Him in the work of our salvation to be but causa remouens prohibens, which (as logicians teach) is but causa sine qua non, which in truth is no cause at all. So that they make themselves their own saviors, and Christ to be but an instrument whereby they save themselves. For if He do but remove the impediment, they without any more ado are able to move and act themselves. When as the conversion of a sinner is as great a work as the creation of heaven and earth. For Paul calls it here "a new creation." Nay, here is a greater power required (if I may so speak) than that whereby the world was created. For though an infinite power be required as well to the creating of the great world, as the recreating or regenerating of the less world, as our Savior Christ signifies, "Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins are forgiven thee, or to say Arise, take up thy bed and walk?" (Mark

2:9); yet the Holy Ghost seems of the two, to make it more difficult to create a new heart than a new world, in that speaking of the creation of the world, He says it was made by the word of God, "By the word of the Lord were the heavens made" (Ps. 33:6), or by His fingers,

"When I consider the heavens, the works of thy fingers" (Ps. 8:3), or by His hands, "The heavens are the works of thy hands" (Ps. 102:25).

But the redemption of man and the conversion of a sinner is said to be wrought by the arm of God. Mary in her Magnificat says, "He hath showed strength with his arm" (Luke 1:51). Nay, He was fain to set his side to it, and it made Him shed many a tear, and sweat as it were

"drops of blood trickling down to the ground" (Luke 22:44). Before our conversion, we are like the dry bones, for as when the wind of God came upon them, bone came to bone, and were joined with sinews, and covered with flesh, and had their senses restored (Ezek.

37); so when the Spirit of God, like the Favonian wind blows upon us, it revives us again, giving us a new life, new senses, a new heart, new wills, and affections. For "all old things pass away, and all things become new" (2 Cor. 5:17). For it opens the eyes of our understanding, making us discern of things that differ (Eph. 1:18;

Phil. 1:10). It bores a new ear of obedience in us (Ps. 40:6), and gives us a new taste, not to savor the things of the flesh, but of the Spirit

(Rom. 8:5).

Further, this serves to detect the natural popery of the multitude and of our own hearts, when we persuade ourselves (though falsely) that though we go on in our sins, yet that we can repent when we list.

When as the prophet says, "O Lord I know that the way of man is not in himself" [Jer. 10:23]. And Paul says that it is as great a work to create a new heart, as to create a new world. For regeneration is "a new creation" (2 Cor. 5:17). Augustine says well, "He that will grant pardon to him that repents will not always give repentance to him that sins."

Again, in the sense that Paul calls the image of God a new creature or the new man, and corruption, the old man—we grant that our religion is new, and popish religion is old. For as the new man is the restored image of God, in which Adam was first created, though afterwards defaced by "his own inventions" (Eccl. 7:29), so our religion is the restored or reformed doctrine first taught by the apostles, which afterward was corrupted by men's devices. Albeit, in Tertullian's sense, ours is the old religion, and theirs the new—as the image of God is the old man, and corruption the new.

Use. If we be not changed in our lives, but remain old Adams still, even the same men we were before in minding, willing, affecting earthly things, and fashioning ourselves to the guise of the world, we

are no new creatures, though we promise and protest never so much.

We are but hypocrites, deceiving others and ourselves also. For where this new creature is, there is a change in all the faculties and powers of soul and body. The mind is not set upon the world, but minds heavenly things. The will, affections, and conversation of the whole man is in heaven (Phil. 3:20). For the Spirit of regeneration is like the leaven which a woman took and hid in three pecks of meal till all was leavened. For after the same manner, by a secret operation it alters the mind, will, affections. "If any be in Christ," (says the apostle), "he is a new creature, old things are passed away, behold, all things are become new." If therefore we be new creatures, why lead we not a new life? If we be changed in affection, why are we not changed in conversation?

But by this we may perceive that all which are Christians in profession are not Christians in conversation. All that are washed with the outward element of water are not washed with the inward baptism, the laver of regeneration. As first, those that are as good fellows (that is, as bad) as ever they were before and make no conscience of sin. Secondly, such as are no more but civil honest men, like those honest women which raised persecution against Paul and Barnabas, and expelled them out of their coasts (Acts 13:50).

Thirdly, worldly wise men which savor of nothing but the world.

Lastly, such as have some love and liking of the word, and are in some sort outwardly conformable thereunto, having some legal sorrow for sin arising from legal terrors—but have no thorough change nor renovation.

Lastly, we may not marvel if the world hate and malign those that are new creatures—seeing they neither mind nor affect the same things.

For there can be no true love where there is contrariety of judgments,

wills, affections, which has been, is, and will be betwixt those that are born of the flesh, and those that are born of God (Gen. 3:15).

16 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace shall be upon them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.

Here Paul commends this glorying in the cross of Christ and study of piety in becoming a new creature, as the only rule of faith and manners, which all teachers and hearers were to observe and follow

—enforcing the keeping and observing of this double duty, by the fruit and benefit that comes thereby, specified here by "peace" and "mercy." In the words two things are generally to be considered.

First, the duty of walking, in these words, "As many as walk according to this rule." Secondly, the reason or motive to the practice thereof, in these, "Peace shall be upon them, and mercy"—which is amplified by the generality thereof, that is, shall light upon "as many" as walk according thereto, and "upon the Israel of God." The duty is that we walk according to this canon, or rule. The word translated "walk" signifies not simply to walk, but to walk warily and circumspectly (as it is expounded, Eph. 5:15); or to walk by rule in order and measure, without treading aside but making straight steps to our feet (Heb. 12:13). Paul's rule which we must walk by is faith in Christ, called here glorying in the cross of Christ; and repentance towards God, called regeneration or the new creature. Which is rightly called a rule of faith and manners, of things to be believed and practiced, because by it all doctrines and actions are to be examined.

Nay, the Scripture is therefore called canonical because it sets down an exposition of this rule—there being nothing from the first chapters in Genesis to the last words in the Apocalypse which aims not at one of these two, either repentance towards God or faith in Christ.

Here all ministers are taught what rule to follow in preaching the word, or building the church of God, namely faith and repentance, the doctrine of the cross and conversion, or the new creature. And all hearers according to what rule to order their lives and actions. For this metaphor of walking, and that by a rule or line, shows that we are travelers or pilgrims, that this world is a strange country, that we are to go to another, that the world is an endless labyrinth in which we shall forever lose ourselves, except we be guided by this rule.

And here we see that there is a certain rule for regulating of all things appertaining to faith and manners, though we cannot apply it nor use it as we should. The fault is in us, not in the rule.

Whereas Paul says, as many as walk according to "this rule," he shows that Christians have but one only rule which they are to follow, and according to which they must frame their lives; for the apostle exhorts us that "we all proceed by one rule" (Phil. 3:16).

Therefore the papists do notoriously offend not only in wresting, perverting, and breaking this rule, but in making other new Lesbian rules, which they prescribe as necessary to be followed. As the rule of St. Francis, of St. Dominic, St. Austen, St. Jerome, etc., holding one man's baptism better than another, one man's profession holier than another, one man's rule perfecter than another—following any rule rather than Christ's, and so divide His seamless coat. And that these sundry rules of monks are vain and wicked, it may appear. First, because they agree not with this rule of Paul, they being many, it but one—it directing and leading to Christ; they leading to by-paths, obscuring the merit of Christ, and prescribing many things partly frivolous, partly impious, contrary to faith and good life. Secondly, in that they agree not among themselves, every sect having his own proper orders, and contending their own to be better, holier, perfecter than the rest. Thirdly, in that they divide into divers sects

those that ought to be all one in Christ, for which cause Paul calls the Corinthians carnal in holding some of Paul, others of Apollos (1 Cor.

3:4). For how can they be spiritual who in speech, action, habit and attire, profession and conversation, profess nothing but schism and dissension? Jerome against the Luciferians, says, Sicubi audieris eos qui dicuntur Christi, non a Domino Jesu Christo, sed a quoquam alio nuncupari, puta Marcionitas, Valentinianos, Montenses, Campates, scito non Ecclesiam Christi, sed Antichristi esse Synogogam. That is,

"Wheresoever you shall hear those that are called Christians, not to have their name from our Lord Jesus Christ, but from some other, as Marcionites, Valentinians, Montenses, Campates, know thus much, that they are not the church of Christ, but the synagogue of Antichrist."

Nay further, solitary life, in leaving the society of men and sequestering themselves from all company, which is the ground and general practice of monkish Eremites (for Cenobites to speak properly are no monks, as the word teaches) is against the very light of nature itself. First, because it is natural for men to live together, nay, it is the ground of the family, the church and commonwealth.

There was never nation so barbarous or savage, but endeavored to live together by associating themselves in cities, towns, villages, caves, woods, tents, or some other way, according to the custom of the country. Which general practice of all argues the impression of nature in all. Secondly, speech is given men for this end, that they might converse together. For it were little or nothing available if men should live alone, and converse with none. Thirdly, sundry virtues bestowed upon men, as justice, fortitude, love, and friendship, should be given in vain if men should live solitary, sequestered from all company. Fourthly, man's imbecility argues thus much; for whereas all other creatures are armed by nature, as the bull with horns, the boar with tusks, other with teeth, feathers, swiftness, etc.,

man is born feeble and naked, not able to provide or defend himself, but only by help of others, which is an argument that he is born to live in civil society, and to be holpen306 by others. Lastly, man is born to do good to himself and others in some estate and calling (1

Cor. 7). But he that lives alone can do no good to others, nor receive good from them. For whereas they plead for themselves that they leave their particular callings and betake themselves to hermitages that so they may renounce the world, I answer that to renounce the world is not to leave their places and callings whereunto God has called them, but "to renounce the corruption that is in the world through lust" (2 Peter 1:4). These and the like reasons made the Philosopher to say that he which left the society of men, and betook himself to a solitary life, was either a god or a beast.

By this we may see what Lesbian rules they follow—and how that which they account the highest degree of perfection is in truth the depth of abomination. That it has been the cause of much wickedness, as of idleness, hypocrisy, whoredom, sodomitry, besides the cruel murdering of many poor innocents. Therefore let neither their hypocrisy, nor the church's pretended authority, nor the long received custom, anything move us, but that leaving them, we follow the rule of Paul in this place. For they that walk according to it,

"peace shall be upon them and mercy."

By "peace," we are to understand outward peace, as prosperity and good success in all things we go about. For "whatsoever they do, shall prosper" (Ps. 1:3). And peace with the creatures; as first with the good angels (Col. 1:20), who "are ministering spirits, sent forth to minister, for their sakes that shall be heirs of salvation" (Heb. 1:14), pitching their tents about them (Ps. 34:7), and bearing them in their hands as the nurse her child (Ps. 91:12). Secondly, with the godly.

The prophet says that in the kingdom of Christ, "the wolf shall dwell

with the lamb, the leopard shall lie with the kid," etc. (Isa. 11:6), that is, men of fierce, savage, and wolfish natures shall be so changed by grace, as that they shall live peaceably and lovingly together. Thirdly, with the wicked their enemies, partly because they seek to live in peace, as David says of himself, "I labor for peace" (Ps. 120:7), partly, because God so inclines their hearts, as that they are peaceable.

Lastly, with the beast of the field and all the creatures. The Lord promises to make a covenant with the wild beasts and fowls of the heaven in behalf of His people, that they may sleep safely (Hos.

2:18). But the peace which is principally meant in this place, is peace of conscience, which passes all understanding (Phil. 4:7), which is peace with God, being reconciled and at one with Him. "Being justified by faith, we have peace with God" (Rom. 5:1). And peace with ourselves, which is threefold as it is opposed to a threefold dissension in man. The first is when the will and affections renewed by grace are obedient to the mind enlightened by the Spirit, and at peace therewith—opposed to the dissension that is betwixt rebellious affections and natural reason. The second is when grace (though strongly assailed) gives corruption the foil, whereupon follows the calming and quieting of the mind, opposed to the combat between the flesh and the Spirit. The third is when the conscience persuaded of remission of sins and reconciliation with God, ceases to accuse and terrify, and begins to excuse and comfort us—opposed to the conflicts that a distressed conscience has with legal terrors and the anger of God. By "mercy" (which is the cause of this peace) are understood all spiritual blessings which flow unto us from the love and favor of God in Christ, as remission of sins, justification, sanctification, and eternal life itself. The words ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς, "upon them," have great emphasis, signifying that these blessings come down from heaven, and light upon them that follow this rule, and that they cannot be hindered by the malice of men.

Let the pope then anathematize, curse, and excommunicate us, both prince and people, because we tread not in the steps of his faith, but in the faith of our father Abraham, and walk not according to his rule, but according to this rule of the apostle. For we need not fear his thunderbolts nor curses, seeing "the causeless curse shall never come" (Prov. 26:2). For what though he curse, if God do bless? It was the thing that comforted David being cursed of his enemies, in that "though they did curse, yet God would bless" (Ps. 109:28). And let us comfort ourselves in this, that He will curse them that curse His people (Gen. 12:3).

Again, if peace and mercy shall be upon them that walk according to this rule, then wrath and indignation shall light upon those that follow any other rule, or devise any other way, or set down any other means of salvation besides, or contrary to this. False therefore is the opinion of Pucksius, that if a man lead an outward civil life, he may be saved in any religion, the Jew in his Judaism, the Turk in his

Mohammadism, the heathen in his paganism. For they that walk not in this way, according to this rule, do but weary themselves in endless labyrinths. And so walking without line or rule in "their crooked ways, shall be led with workers of iniquity, when as peace shall be upon Israel" (Ps. 125:5). Other uses are made of mercy and peace, to which places I refer the reader.

The apostle adds that peace and mercy shall be upon all them that walk according to this rule, "and upon the Israel of God." There is a double Israel mentioned by Paul, "Israel according to the flesh" (1

Cor. 10:18), and "the Israel of God." As there is a twofold Jew, one outward in the flesh; another inward in the Spirit (Rom. 2:28–29).

By "the Israel of God," the apostle means all such as are like to Nathaniel, who was "a true Israelite, in whom there was no guile"

(John 1:47), whether they be the faithful Gentiles or believing Jews.

And he makes mention of the Israel of God, partly by reason of the adversaries who bragged so much of their father Abraham, and that they were the only true Israelites, and yet were no Israelites, because they trod not in the steps of the faith of Abraham. Partly for the weak converts, who thought it a hard thing to be severed from the society of those to whom the promises were made; partly for us Gentiles, that we might know that "all are not Israel, which are of Israel"

(Rom. 9:6), but that all they which are of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham (Gal. 3:9), seeing that God is no accepter of persons

(Acts 10:34).

↑ Back to top