Front matter
Ai AS on |i i nN WA aa
Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2023 https://archive.org/details/commentaryonroma0000mela
Commentary on Romans Philip Melanchthon Translated by Fred Kramer Second English Edition
GON GORDA
PUBL SHIN G
HO Use ° SrA EN ay i ORUsIeS
cA Copyright © 2010 Concordia Publishing House 3558 S. Jefferson Ave., St. Louis, MO 63118-3968
1-800-325-3040 * www.cph.org All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of Concordia
Publishing House.
Manufactured in the United States of America Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Melanchthon, Philipp, 1497-1560.
Commentary on Romans / by Philip Melanchthon ; translated by Fred Kramer. p. cm.
Translation based on the revised 1540 ed., which was published as v. 15 of Corpus reformatorum.
Includes bibliographical references.
ISBN 978-0-7586-2686-8
1. Bible. N.T. Romans—Commentaries—Early works to 1800. I. Kramer, Fred. II.
Title.
BS2665.M429 1992
227'.107—dc20 91-39381 ahs) (OF We SP ae LOIS 1 ae Se See
CONTENTS Foreword to the Second Edition
Foreword to the First Edition Ti Melanchthon ' Commentary on Romans Introduction
Chapter |
Chapter 2 ,
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Chapter 5
Chapter 6
Chapter 7
Chapter 8
Chapter 9
Chapter 10
Chapter 11
Chapter 12
Chapter 13
Chapter 14
Excursus on the Authority of Scripture
and the Fallibility of the Church Fathers Chapter 15
Chapter 16
Person Index ies) Scripture Index
- ._—_ — —o— — "abr nies 2 : ~ -
FOREWORD TO THE SECOND EDITION
Melanchthon the Exegete It is necessary that minds be fortified against all snares of this kind
[confidence in one's own good works] by sure and firm knowledge of the Word of God. As Peter says in 2 Pet. 1[:19], "You will do well to pay attention to the prophetic message as to a lamp shining in a dark place until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts."
With these words Philip Melanchthon ended his 1540 commentary on Paul's Epistle to the Romans, an admonition to be heeded by 21st-century readers of his insights into the text of what he considered to be the crown jewel of Scripture.
Why Philip Melanchthon and his Romans commentary? As with any movement that shapes society and church for generations, Martin Luther's
Reformation would not have taken place apart from the team that supported and extended Luther's work. Luther's many God-given abilities needed support and supplement from a number of others, most in Wittenberg, some in other places, who could translate his ideas into a variety of forms of communication and into the institutions of both church and society. In addition to colleagues such as Justus Jonas and Johannes Bugenhagen, and disciples not in Wittenberg, such as Nikolaus von Amsdorf and Georg Spalatin, Luther found his strongest undergirding in the intellectually most gifted of the team, Philip Melanchthon.
Neither Melanchthon nor Luther thought of the younger colleague as a clone of the older. Therefore, they never shared in the later public breast-beating about Melanchthon's divergences from Luther's theological formulations.
Instead, they continued mutual conversation and experimentation in delivering the message of forgiveness of sins, life, and salvation in Christ to their contemporaries.
Melanchthon's contributions changed European education: through his textbooks giving elementary instruction in communication and other subjects; through his plans for reform of education in primary, secondary, and higher education; through his actual teaching at Wittenberg. He functioned as an ecclesiastical diplomat for the rulers of Saxony and their Lutheran colleagues,
! See the end of this translation, pp. 296-97.
Commentary on Romans and he served as Elector John's ghostwriter for the Saxon prince's answer to Emperor Charles V justifying his introduction of Lutheran reform, in the confession which the elector and his Lutheran colleagues delivered to their overlord at Augsburg on June 25, 1530.
But among the most significant contributions Melanchthon made to the life of the church were his biblical commentaries. As a part of the movement called "Biblical Humanism," a program for reforming education at the end of the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, Melanchthon had a burning interest in rhetoric, the discipline devoted to cultivating good communication skills, and he used these principles of communication, which he regarded as gifts of God, for interpreting Scripture and applying its insights. He made best use of the dictionaries and other aids to biblical study that other humanists of his time had developed. But he subjected the work of Jacques Lefevre d'Etaples,
Johannes Reuchlin, his own patron, and Erasmus to the service of conveying the Wittenberg understanding of justification by grace through faith in Christ.
In 1519 he began lecturing on Romans, taking up the Epistle again two years later. From these lectures he developed a textbook, an introduction to the edifying and proper reading of Paul's longest letter. He entitled this reader's guide Theological Commonplaces |or Topics: Loci communes]. After his arrival in Wittenberg in 1518 he had first treated Matthew in the Latin text. He had been called, however, as an instructor in Greek, and he soon turmed to the Greek texts of the two Corinthian Epistles and John's Gospel. Pirated editions of his notes as well as his lecture manuscripts that Luther commandeered and sent to a printer brought his exegetical insights to the public before he took control of the publication of his exegetical work. Over the four decades of his teaching career he treated many parts of both Testaments, often briefly, some books only in part.
Often these lectures found their way into print as commentaries. Proverbs and Colossians were among his favorite books, but his four distinct commentaries on Romans reinforce his own claims that Romans provided readers of Scripture the key to its message.'
John Thompson, a contemporary American Reformation historian, has noted the advantages of "reading the Bible with the dead." Thompson argues that there is much to be learned for preaching and teaching from the history
> For an overview of his exegetical activity, see Timothy J. Wengert, "The Biblical
Commentaries of Philip Melanchthon," pp. 106-48 in Philip Melanchthon (1497-1560) and the Commentary, edited by Timothy J. Wengert and M. Patrick Graham (Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press, 1997). See also on Melanchthon's earliest exegetical work, Timothy J.
Wengert, Philip Melanchthon's Annotationes in Johannem in Relation to Its Predecessors and Contemporaries (Geneva: Droz, 1987).
Foreword Wl of exegesis that simple examination of the biblical text does not convey.*? We profit from the conversation that has gone on through the ages over the texts of Scripture. This volume from Melanchthon's hand offered a model for the proclamation of the Gospel and a vital help for understanding the whole body of biblical teaching to Wittenberg students in the sixteenth century. It continues to be of value to preachers and other students of Scripture today.
Robert Kolb Missions Professor of Systematic Theology Emeritus Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, MO
FOREWORD TO THE FIRST EDITION
This translation of Philip Melanchthon's Commentary on Romans is a final bequest to the church from Dr. Fred Kramer (1902-91). It takes its place next to Dr. Kramer's monumental translation of Martin Chemnitz's Examination of the Council of Trent as a reminder to the contemporary church of the rich theological heritage we have received from those who have gone before, which we must consider to be God's gift also to future generations. In offering Melanchthon's
Romans to the church, Dr. Kramer noted, "It is a masterful work, full of sound biblical theology. Especially fine are Melanchthon's excursus on the distinction between Law and Gospel, his excursus on the doctrine of the church, and his genuine moderation in tone, which some of us sorely need."
Dr. Kramer was born in Frohna, Missouri, and graduated from Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, in 1927. He entered the parish ministry in Alsace-Lorraine, followed by pastorates in the towns of Clay Center and Ellenwood, Kansas. In 1947 he joined the faculty of St. John's College in Winfield, Kansas. In 1951 he began teaching at Concordia Theological Seminary in Springfield, Illinois
(now located in Fort Wayne, Indiana). Here he served as registrar and academic dean and was instrumental in a curriculum revision which led to a raising of the seminary's academic standards. In 1950 he earned the Master of Sacred
Theology degree from his alma mater and was awarded the Doctor of Divinity degree by her in 1960. Besides matriculating at the University of Kansas and the University of Nebraska at Lincoln, he earned the Master of Arts Degree from the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor in 1950. His translation of 3 John L. Thompson, Reading the Bible with the Dead: What You Can Learn from the History of Exegesis That You Cannot Learn from Exegesis Alone (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
2007).
; Commentary on Romans Chemnitz's Examination of the Council of Trent was published by Concordia
Publishing House in four volumes (1971-86). In 1991 Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, recognized his service to the church by awarding him the seminary's
Christus Vivit award.
Melanchthon's Commentary on Romans Philip Melanchthon, Master of Arts, came to Wittenberg in 1518 with a commission to teach language and literature. At Luther's urging, he presented his baccalaureate theses to the Wittenberg faculty of theology and received his
Bachelor of Bible degree. This degree authorized him to teach theology, which he did for the rest of his life.
As part of his duties as a member of the theological faculty, Melanchthon began in 1519 to lecture on St. Paul's letter to the Romans—the course which Luther had taught from 1515-16. It is possible that Melanchthon even used
Luther's notes as a basis for his own work.* Melanchthon's first writing on Romans was "A Theological Introduction to Paul's Letter to the Romans"
(Theologica Institutio in Epistulam Pauli ad Romanos), published in 1519. In 1520 some of his students published his preliminary study of the contents of Romans arranged topically under the title "Themes or Topics of Theological
Matters" (Rerum Theologicorum Capita seu Loci). Unsatisfied with this publication, Melanchthon reworked these topics into his highly acclaimed
Loci Communes Theologici of 1521. Then, in 1522, Luther obtained a copy of Melanchthon's Romans lectures and lectures on Corinthians and had them published under the title of "Annotations" (Annotationes Phil. Melanchthonis in Epistolas Pauli ad Romanos et ad Corinthios).
Melanchthon himself did not publish a commentary on Romans edited by his own hand until 1532. The 1532 commentary is published in a modern edition in Melanchthons Werke, edited by Robert Stupperich.. Melanchthon revised and expanded this commentary, then published his revised work in 1540. This 1540 commentary, as found in Corpus Reformatorum, volume 15— and compared to an original edition in the library of Concordia Seminary, St.
Louis—is the basis for the translation presented here. (We have in a number of places indicated significant differences between the Corpus Reformatorum edition and the Concordia Seminary volume.)
Melanchthon's 1532 commentary has come under severe criticism.
Friedrich Bente contended that Melanchthon is "the father of synergism" among Lutherans, pointing to statements such as the following (on Rom. 9:6): "divine
* See Luther's Works, American Edition (St. Louis: Concordia, 1972), 25:xii.
> Melanchthons Werke in Auswahl, 5. Band (Giitersloh: Gerd Mohn, 1965).
Foreword
Compassion is truly the cause of election, but .
. there is also some cause in him who accepts, namely, in as far as he does not repudiate the grace offered."
This "cause in him who accepts" is omitted from the 1540 commentary.
One hesitates to say that Melanchthon changed his mind, because in his editions of the Loci Communes of 1543 and following he speaks openly about the "three causes of conversion," namely, "the Holy Spirit, the Word of God, and the will of man," and also asserts the human "ability to apply oneself to grace."" With these words, Melanchthon opened up a controversy that would rage for forty years, until peace was obtained—at least among the Lutherans—by Article IJ,
"Free Will," and Article XI, '"Predestination," of the 1580 Formula of Concord.
The controversial statements of 1532, however, are absent from the 1540 commentary presented here. Melanchthon speaks of the elect in words that the authors of the Formula of Concord could readily affirm: "those who believe are righteous, so the elect do not resist the calling, but believe the Gospel and do not in the end reject it. Nevertheless, it must be held in the meantime that to believe and not to reject are results [!] which come about when the Holy Spirit impels."
What comes through in this commentary 1s the careful work ofan evangelical Lutheran scholar and a master teacher. Melanchthon was not called the Preceptor of Germany without cause. In this book, he provides outlines and analysis for the student of Romans so that the student may not only understand but also be prepared to teach others. The excursus after chapter 14 on the strengths and weaknesses of the church fathers shows the breadth of Melanchthon's learning, as well as his discernment and affirmation of the principles of sola scriptura and sola gratia. In some detail, he shows his evaluation of and his appreciation for the works of those who have gone before. In a like manner, four and half centuries later, we are pleased to provide English-speaking students and pastors with the translation of this work of Philip Melanchthon, for contemporary evaluation and appreciation.
The Publishers 6 Historical Introductions to the Book of Concord (St. Louis: Concordia, 1921; repr.,
1965), p. 197; see Melanchthons Werke V, p. 254.
7 See Melanchthon's Loci Communes, trans. by J. A. O. Preus (St. Louis: Concordia,
1992), passim.
Introduction The Argumentum or Subject Matter of the Epistle of Paul to the Romans There are two parts to the epistle. The first contains a long disputation.
In the latter part there are precepts about morals. Many people judge that only the latter about morals is now worthy to be read, and they read it like a poem of Hesiod or Phocylides. They think it contains only quarrels regarding
Jewish ceremonies about which nobody now fights. But one ought to think far otherwise. The first part contains an examination (disputationem) which is most necessary for every age and for the entire church. It contains the foremost and enduring topics of Christian doctrine, distinguishes the Gospel from the Law and from philosophy, shows the benefits of Christ, the gratuitous remission of sins, liberation from eternal death, the imputation of righteousness, the gift of the Holy Spirit, and eternal life. It proclaims these great things; it does not quarrel only about ceremonies.
I am not bringing forth either an absurd or a new interpretation. The very course of Paul's argument brings about this meaning which I give. The meaning must be taken from the apostolic speech itself, not another imagined sense invented against the proper sense of the speech. Then our interpretation will agree most fittingly with the perpetual doctrine passed down in the Prophets and the Gospel. Traces are found also in Ambrose, Basil, Augustine,
Gregory, and Bernard.
Finally, the judgment of the church approves of our interpretation. Pious and experienced consciences acknowledge that it must be maintained in all true disputes, that we receive remission of sins and the imputation of righteousness not on account of our good deeds, but gratis, on account of Christ, by faith, i.e., by trust in the promised mercy on account of Christ. What darkness follows when this meaning is wiped out in the church? Then the benefits of Christ cannot be understood, then the distinction between Law and Gospel cannot be discerned, firm consolation of consciences and true prayer cannot be retained. What Paul is proclaiming about this very understanding is clear from the speech itself. Therefore we hold fast to what is said, because with it agrees the constant consensus of the rest of the prophetic and apostolic Scripture also the more learned fathers, and the judgment of the experienced and pious consciences in the church. it
Commentary on Romans Since all these are in agreement, we have sufficiently firm testimonies for our interpretation and are not afraid of the chicaneries of Mensinger,
Mustela, Campanus, and others who loudly proclaim that we are inventing for Paul a new and absurd meaning. Meanwhile they themselves bend the sayings of Paul to civil and human opinions about righteousness and morals, and think that it is a great praise of prudence to think up an elegant interpretation which agrees with philosophy and the common understanding of all the godless. They imagine that what Paul wants is this: men should have forgiveness of sins and be pronounced righteous on account of faith, i.e., profession of the history about Christ, and honorable morals. And that righteousness before God is this discipline, such as people furnish, and that this satisfies the law of God. They reject these seemingly contradictory statements, that the nature of man has been corrupted, and is not able to satisfy the law of God, and that this infirmity of nature, doubt about God, and other spiritual illnesses which original sin embraces, are truly sins in the sight of God. They proudly deride what we say about original sin and recall us to philosophy.
In sum, they imagine that righteousness in the sight of God or what the law of God demands is nothing else than the discipline with which philosophy is satisfied. Pelagius professed this opinion, but the seeds are scattered in the commentaries of Origen. And since this opinion is in agreement with the judgment of human reason, which has not truly experienced fear and true comfort in repentance, people easily embrace these reasonings.
The prophets always had controversies with hypocrites, with priests who taught that people were righteous through works of the Law, and who with this opinion heaped up ceremonies and other exercises. Therefore the Psalms constantly inculcate the conviction that no one is without sin, as in Psalm
142 [Ps. 143:2] ''No man living is righteous before you.''! And Ps. 129
[130:3] "If you, O Lord, kept track of iniquities, Lord, who could stand?''
And Ps. 31 [32:5] "'I said, I will confess my transgressions to the Lord."'
And Daniel [9:7]: '""To you, O Lord, belongs righteousness, but to us confusion of face.'' After they have shown the judgment of God against sin and hypocrisy, then they again raise us up, command us to acknowledge the promised mercy, and testify that forgiveness is given by faith in mercy, that we are received into grace, as he [Ps. 119:25] says: *'My soul was sustained by his Word,"' that is, by the promise. *'My soul hoped in the Lord, because with God there is mercy'' [Dan. 9:9], that is, because he truly wants to have pity, according to his promise.
' Scriptural quotations are Melanchthon's own translations. The chapter references are according to the Septuagint. The corresponding English Bible references have been added in brackets.
Introduction
And in such pronouncements mention is frequently made of faith, as in 2 Chron. 20[:17]: "'Believe in the Lord your God and you will be safe."'
There they do not want merely the knowledge of the history to be understood, but they call faith confidence in the promised mercy, and without this confidence reject prayer and all worship. As therefore all the prophets inculcate this doctrine, so Paul presses the same cause. He does not urge simply that ceremonies are to be omitted. The error of retaining ceremonies arises from this source: the hypocrites imagined that people are righteous through the Law and so they abandoned the doctrine about gratuitous imputation, and contended that righteousness is to be sought through works of the Law. Therefore Paul recalls the question to the source, as also the prophets do, and shows what is the use of the Law, and speaks not only about ceremonies, but about the entire Law, and most of all about the Decalog. The Decalog is satisfied least of all, so these sayings should be accepted as concerning it chiefly: The Law works wrath [Rom. 4:15]; through the Law is the knowledge of sin
{[Rom. 3:20]. Therefore he teaches that sin is revealed and condemned by the Law, not taken away.
Thereafter he adds that the proper benefit of Christ is to take away sins, as Isaiah [53:12] says: **'And he bore the sins of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.'" And John [1:29]: ''Behold the Lamb of God, which takes away the sins of the world.'' For he indicates that this one 1s the Lamb, that is, the victim destined to placate the wrath of God. Therefore people obtain forgiveness of sins, not on account of the Law or of any other sacrificial victims, but gratis, by faith in this sacrificial victim, namely, the Son of God, who by his death satisfied the Law for us and abolished the curse. Therefore he says [Rom. 3:21]: **Now however the righteousness of God was revealed without Law,"' that is, the imputation of righteousness is given on account of Christ, not on account of the Law. The Law was there before, and has not now been taken away by Christ, but he brings a far greater benefit, as John
[1:17] says: ''The Law was given through Moses. However grace and truth came about through Jesus Christ.'' Christ gives us grace, that is, remission of sins, gratis, and brings about in us true knowledge of God, true love, true faith, true prayer. Thus our interpretation agrees with the perpetual consensus of the prophetic and apostolic Scripture, and the parts of the disposition are in harmony according to our interpretation.
The interpretation of Origen tears Paul's speech shamefully apart, and it does not retain the original meaning of the words. What Paul says, **We are justified by faith [Rom. 3:28],'' means nothing to our adversaries. They excuse it by way of a synecdoche, and invent for it an entirely alien interpretation: ''By faith," i.e., we are justified by a knowledge of history; we are prepared so that we may learn the commandments by which we may
Commentary on Romans afterward merit the imputation of righteousness. Much more absurd is the interpretation of this saying: ''The righteousness of God was revealed without Law'' [Rom. 3:21], i.e., without the natural law, but Christ brought in certain new laws, such as this one: "'Let not your left hand know what your right hand does'' [Matt. 6:3]. Error, it is said, is fruitful. Otherwise so childish and foolish an interpretation could not have entered any sane mind. But I desist from following inept interpretations.
A comparison of our interpretation with its opposite shows sufficiently in which one of the two the parts are in harmony, in which one the particular nature of the speech is preserved, whether it agrees with the Prophets and the Gospel. In order that the leaders may consider this diligently, | admonish all again and again. For I do not want one lone statement to be victorious. Let studious persons compare the interpretations; let them compare them with the other sacred books, but in such a way that they judge piously, not slanderously.
If they do this, I have no doubt that they will support us. In this matter there is need also for this diligence, that they give heed to what in the sacred writings these words truly and properly mean: faith, justification, righteousness, sin, Law, Gospel.
The church unlearned its language among monks and other unlearned persons and positively, as Tyndar says to Menelaus in Euripides [Orestes, line 485]: "You have become barbarous, being a long time among barbarians.'' Thus the long servitude of the church with the monks changed the language. Nor is it easy to restore the true meanings, for the power of custom is great. The deceivers, Mensinger and Cochlaeus, scourge me about the word faith, likewise about the word justification, and they have gone completely astray. And some other person, whose authority in the state is great, argues with me whether faith signifies trust in mercy. Who would not deplore the darkness in the church? So great has been the carelessness and thoughtlessness of the bishops and teachers that they have forgotten the meaning of the words which they have in their mouths daily. When the meanings have been changed, also the things themselves have been lost, and many kinds of insane ideas have followed. I see that also now many depraved minds have arisen which, either because of curiosity or because of ambition, are eager again to disturb and destroy with new deceptions the things which are now being rightly taught in our churches and have been explained most faithfully and simply.
Therefore [ pray Christ and call to witness all pious persons who are versed in studies that they love the simple truth revealed in our churches and guard it, which I desire to illustrate and fortify as far as I am able, that it may be propagated to those who come after us. Although I have set forth the argument of the epistle to the Romans as well as I could, and have urged that the meaning of the words be observed, it seemed good to add the interpretation
Introduction
* of certain terms and to set forth the entire controversy concerning justification.
For these prolegomena add a certain amount of light to the argument. And when the reader has once embraced the entire matter in his mind, he will notice more correctly how the parts of the disputation harmonize in Paul since he had first conceived it in his mind as if it were the plan of a building.
The Sum of the Doctrine Taught in the Prophetic and Apostolic Writings about Justification before God I tried elsewhere, in my Loci Communes Theologici, to explain as simply and clearly as I could the doctrine of justification taught in the prophetic and apostolic writings. Neither am I going to say anything different here. But since these materials are the particular subject of this Pauline Epistle, I shall repeat these same things, and perhaps somewhere I may say something in plainer words.
=~ The philosophers call universal righteousness obedience according to all virtues, i.e., honorable outward discipline which a person can bring about by his own powers. This Paul also calls righteousness of the Law, or righteousness by works. We have often said God demands that all men be compelled by means of outward discipline, as Paul says: The Law was given for the unrighteous [cf. | Tim. 1:8], and God punishes those who violate discipline, such as men who swear falsely, who speak shamefully about God, seditious persons, murderers, adulterers, thieves, and liars [cf. | Cor.6:9-10]. What
Aristotle says is true: *'Neither the evening star nor the morning star is more beautiful than righteousness,' i.e., honorable discipline. For it is an outstanding ornament of man, nor is this weak nature of man able to bring about a more outstanding ornament. Nevertheless, one must know that this discipline by no means satisfies the Law, but is a kind of faint shadow of the Law, as St. Paul learnedly teaches in 2 Cor. 3[:7], when he says: '"The Jews looked upon Moses with a veiled face,'' i.e., they were not overwhelmed by the lightning of the Law; the knowledge of God did not shine forth in them, and did not bring forth perfect obedience but only outward works.
But the Law of God demands not merely outward works, but perfect obedience. Therefore it is easily understood that no one is able to be righteous before God, that is, accepted because of outward discipline, as Paul clearly says: "'By the works of the Law no flesh shall be justified'' [Rom 3:20]. This statement takes away the praise of righteousness not only from ceremonies, but also from moral works, and speaks about the entire discipline.
Furthermore, philosophy and human laws speak about this external discipline, about the veiled face of Moses. They do not ask how we are to be righteous before God, i.e., accepted. Neither are the pronouncements of the philosophers to be confused with the statement of Paul. Let this carnal righ-
Commentary on Romans teousness be given its place, that is, let the wicked be compelled by this discipline; let the philosophers wander about in the assembly of the people and look upon the veiled face of Moses; let them not ascend the mountain of God. Let Origen and those who follow him remain in this crowd, since they teach no other righteousness except the carnal.
Although reason may not see how we may be accounted righteous before God, the Gospel proclaims another righteousness, not known to reason, but revealed to the patriarchs by God, and afterward revealed more and more through the prophets, and finally disseminated in the world through Christ and the apostles. Therefore John [1:18] says: '""No one has seen God at any time: however the Son of God, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him to us."' It is as if he said: This will of God—that God wants to forgive us gratis, and to give eternal life on account of his Son—no creature, no human reason was able to grasp; but this will has been revealed only through the Son. This wonderful benefit Paul proclaims, as I shall show briefly.
And Christ, as befits a master, most aptly embraced the sum and method of the Gospel when he commands to preach repentance and remission of sins in his name. Therefore the ministry of the Gospel first accuses sins, as Christ says: "'The Holy Spirit will accuse the world because of sin...
"' [John 16:8]. Here, once the mind acknowledges sin and the wrath of God and experiences true terrors, the Gospel sets forth consolation. That word, which is the Gospel's very own—the promise of the benefit of Christ—shows the Mediator, the Son of God, as John pointed him out, saying: **Behold the Lamb of God which takes away the sin of the world"' [John 1:29]. It must establish that on account of this Mediator, the Son of God, our Lord Jesus
Christ, remission of sins is freely given to us. Righteousness is also imputed, not on account of any works or merits of ours, but gratis, by faith, that is, when we believe that these things are truly and certainly given us on account of Christ. When we raise ourselves up and sustain ourselves by this faith, looking to Christ, we truly receive remission of sins and are accounted righteous, i.e., accepted before God, and are given the Holy Spirit and made children of God and heirs of eternal life, as is written John 1[:12]: ''He gave them power to become sons of God, to those who believe in his name."'
These things are plain and clear, and suited for the use of consciences, and can be seen in examples. David, guilty of adultery and murder, was oppressed by immense fears when he was accused by the prophet. Afterward he is raised up by the word of absolution, when the prophet says: ''The Lord has taken away your sin: you will not die'? [2 Sam. 12:13]. Hearing this word, he believes that his sin is forgiven, not on account of his worthiness or merits, but gratis, through mercy, and knows that liberation from sin and
Introduction wi "death is promised on account of the Liberator who will come. He knows that Christ will be the sacrificial victim for the sins of the human race, as he Says in a Psalm [110:4]: 'You are a priest forever
'' Sustaining himself by this faith he is made righteous, i.e., accepted before God to eternal life.
Thus Luke 7[:50]:
A woman came weeping to Christ, acknowledging her sins. Afterward Christ said to her: ''Go in peace; your faith has saved you.' Thus these two emotions in conversion are described: fear and faith.
The common people call the fear contrition, but one must know that fear does not merit forgiveness of sins. Yes, unless faith comes to it, a mind oppressed by terrors rushes into eternal death, as Saul and Judas perished, since they did not raise themselves up by faith and by acknowledging mercy in the midst of terrors. That is what this saying of Paul about the Law intends: ''The Law works wrath'? [Rom. 4:15], i.e., it arouses horrible terrors, which are frequently described in the Psalms. And Ezechias [Isaiah 38:13] says: ''Like a lion he has broken all my bones.'* Therefore these terrors bring on the end— eternal death—unless faith comes to them, lifting up the minds little by little, looking at the promises of Christ, and thus laying hold of Christ.
The Psalms tell us how many such struggles there are. We see David wrestling with himself when he exclaims: "'Lord, do not accuse me in your wrath. Have mercy on me, Lord. For in death there is no one who remembers you, nor in hell who praises you. Cast me not among the damned, who are burnt by your dreadful and eternal wrath and curse you. Let me not be cast away into this assembly of your enemies'' [Ps. 6:1—5]. And Ps. 41 [Ps. 42:11]:
""Why are you cast down, O my soul, and why are you disquieted within me? Hope in God; for I shall again praise him."'
Here also Paul is preaching about these great struggles. He is not talking only about eating swine's meat or similar rites. He shouts that all are under sin; this statement is preached about the terrors. Thereafter he shows Christ and says we are justified by faith, etc. And in order that we may know that he is not speaking about idle cogitations, but about faith struggling with fears, he says: ''Being justified by faith we have peace with God, likewise access to God'' etc. [Rom. 5:1—2]. Likewise: By faith we know that we are loved by God [cf. Rom. 5:5]. Since therefore these sayings of Paul agree so aptly with the rest of the prophetic Scripture, what perversity is it to invent a different sense for Paul?
But I continue. This proposition which I have described about the conversion and justification of a person is clear and plain, useful in life, the firm and immutable sense of the Gospel, and was revealed to the fathers. Therefore the blindness of the adversaries who condemn our interpretation is generally to be deplored and their stubbornness to be detested. In the name of Christ
[ implore all pious persons to weigh what is said on each side. The adversaries
Commentary on Romans admit that terrors are necessary, but they speak differently about faith. They want a knowledge of the history, but command men to doubt the remission of sins, and if someone should happen to be forgiven, they say it is on account of his merits. Thus they simply do away with the Gospel, which teaches that this benefit happens to us on account of Christ. In order that it may be certain, the promise was sent out, and God commands that we believe and assent to the promise and declare that it pertains to us. It is necessary to confess that this is the true and perpetual meaning of the Gospel. Paul also refutes the error about doubting when he teaches that the promise must be accepted by faith. Rom. 4[:16]: "'It is by faith, gratis, in order that the promise may be firm.'' And he commands that we give God the praise that he is truthful, even as Abraham did not doubt through mistrust.
Also 1 John 5{:10):
''Whoever believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself; whoever does not believe God makes him a liar...
Therefore when we say that faith lays hold of the benefits of Christ, it is necessary to understand that people lay hold of them because of Christ, and they must assent to the divine promise and believe that the promises are truly given for us. Faith does not signify merely a knowledge of history, but trust in the promised mercy because of Christ, giving assent to the divine promise. Paul calls for the kind of faith which believes all the articles of the Creed, particularly that because Christ suffered and rose again remission of sins is given to us. For to this article, as to the ultimate cause, the earlier articles are to be referred. When in their prayers the adversaries recite this article, 'I believe the remission of sins,'' they fight with themselves. They command to doubt, and nevertheless dare to say that they should believe the forgiveness of sins. And I know certain persons whom this very article has admonished, who should accept consolation, assent to the promise of God, and cast off the doctrine of the monks about doubting and merits.
The Particle Gratis Why is the little word gratis added? Not on account of our works, but on account of Christ. Consciences (also the prophets and apostles) struggle particularly about this little word gratis. It embraces two things: it excludes our works, and sets forth the merits of Christ. Here can be seen first of all the wrath of God against sin, because no sacrificial victim was able to placate
God except the death of his Son. Second, there shines forth the greatness of his love, because he gave his Son for us. It is necessary for the conscience to struggle to hold fast to both. The merits of Christ must be set before God.
We must ask and expect grace on account of Christ, not on account of our merits.
The great violence of that struggle is this: A terrified mind does not ask
Introduction
. whether God wants to be favorable on account of other deserving and worthy works. It agrees that God is good and merciful, but only toward those who are worthy, who have no sins, or who have greater merits. The knowledge of the Law with which we are born teaches that God is good, but only toward those who are worthy. It asks whether God wants to be favorable toward me, the unworthy one.
Here the little word gratis must be examined so we may declare that God truly remits sins gratis, because of Christ, not on account of any of our works or merits. This little word gratis also shows the distinction between Gospel and Law. The Law also proclaims that God is good and merciful, but it adds the condition of worthiness or merit. It says that God is favorable toward those who are without sin. But the Gospel removes the condition of our worthiness or merits. It testifies that God is reconciled to us gratis, on account of the merits of Christ, not on account of any of our merits, since this faith, i.e., trust in mercy, rests on Christ.
Instead of exclusively using the formula, ''We are justified gratis by faith,' we are accustomed to use this formula, ''We are justified solely by faith,'" where this litthke word does not exclude other virtues so that they are not present, but excludes the opinion of merit or the condition of worthiness, or excludes them from the cause of justification, that is, of acceptance, as | shall later say at greater length. In fact, it is precisely the same thing to say,
""We are righteous by faith,' "'We are righteous gratis by faith,'' and ''We are righteous by faith alone [sola fide].'' For faith cannot exist if confidence must rest on our worthiness or merits, or partly on Christ and partly on merits, as some imagine.
Faith is driven out if one must think God will be propitious when you have enough merits. Faith can rest on nothing except the promise of God which points to Christ, on account of whom the Father has promised that he will certainly be propitious to us. And when Paul asks whether we are justified by faith or by works, he understands faith to be trust in the mercy promised because of Christ. This he opposes everywhere to our worthiness, as though he were asking, '"'Ought you to say that sins are remitted to you and that you are a child of God on account of your worthiness, on account of any virtues or actions of yours, or ought you indeed to say that sins are remitted to you and that you are a child of God through mercy alone, because of Christ?"'
Therefore the thing itself is exclusive when he says, ''We are justified by faith,'' i.e., not on account of our worthiness.
Therefore if anyone wants to judge truly, let him acknowledge that it actually means one and the same thing: We are justified by faith, and we are justified gratis by faith, and we are justified solely by faith [sola fide]. In passing, I have added these comments about the form of the language so that
Commentary on Romans the meaning may be diligently noted. As for the rest, in whatever way we speak, this must be noticed, lest the matter itself be forgotten.
The exclusive meaning must be retained about gratuitous acceptance, for this brings about the distinction between the Law and the Gospel, as has been said. I have spoken about the little word gratis. Concerning it, pious persons should also consider that merits are taken away and rejected not because we are to do nothing, but in order that the promise should be sure—it would become uncertain if it hung on the condition of merits—and also in order that due honor be given Christ, and because even if we do something, nevertheless we fall far short of the perfection of the Law. Faith arises from the Word of God, from the Gospel, which is that Word in which the benefits of Christ are both promised to us and then conferred. For the human mind could establish nothing about the remission of sins if God had not revealed his will in a sure word or with a sure promise.
One must know that this Gospel promise is universal. The godly must be reminded of this because uneasy minds argue most of all about these two questions: worthiness and election. We ask first whether God receives the unworthy. Then, even if we were worthy, we think that God nevertheless elected certain of his friends, to whom he wants to impart these benefits. We are in doubt whether it also pertains to us; we are afraid we are not in their number. Thus human reason wavers about the will of God. For also the philosophers agree that God favors a certain few, namely, heroic men, and that he governs their fate, but they believe that the rest of men are neglected by God. Precisely in this way the mind thinks about predestination, as they call it. However, the heavenly voice criticizes this human opinion. This distinguishes the Gospel from philosophical opinions and from the Law, for it shows that the will of God is otherwise. It shows that God truly wants to accept also the unworthy, and that he offers grace to all, asking only that they believe the promise.
Therefore pious persons should learn that the promise is universal, as innumberable statements testify, such as: "'Come to me, all who labor and are burdened"'
[Matt.
11:28]. Rom. 3[:22]: *'The righteousness of God through faith in Christ is for all and upon all who believe.'' Likewise Rom.
10[:12]: "'The same Lord of all is rich toward all ...
°° Let us include ourselves individually in these universal statements, and declare that the promised benefits truly pertain to us.
Therefore in the question concerning justification, disputes about predestination are to be laid aside for quite a while. We must begin with the Gospel, because it both accuses all, and offers the promised grace to all on account of Christ. Indeed it offers it to all, but they must accept it by faith.
Let us look upon the Word, which is universal, and not permit ourselves to
Introduction
be turned aside from the promise by speculations about predestination. For one must not determine the will of God apart from his Word. As the promises are universal, so I understand this statement: ''God wants all men to be saved''
[1 Tim. 2:4], even as in his promises he offers salvation to all. But the human will in those who are unwilling to believe fights against the promise. Those who sustain themselves by means of the promise declare that the benefits of Christ are truly given to them, lest they accuse God of lying. And when they accept the voice of the Gospel and sustain themselves, the Holy Spirit is efficacious at the same time through the voice of the Gospel, according to this statement: *'Faith comes by hearing'? [Rom. 10:17]. And Gal. 3[:14]:
'*That we may accept the promise of the Spirit by faith."' Thus when terrified minds are raised up by faith, they receive the Holy Spirit.
This is the conversion which in the Gospel is called regeneration. It embraces these thre€ things: remission of sins, justification or imputation of righteousness, and the gift of the Holy Spirit and eternal life. I am speaking about impulses which can be understood by the godly, about terrors, and about consolation, which results from faith. Therefore this Pauline statement is neither absurd nor intricate; neither does it contain useless sophistries, but is clear and in agreement with the other proclamations of the prophets and apostles. It sets forth the greatest things which the godly experience in life, and the knowledge which is necessary for the church. Now I shall add a brief explanation of the terms Law, Gospel, sin, justification, grace, and faith.
The Distinction between Law and Gospel There is a great difference between Law and Gospel. The Law is a doctrine in which God prescribes what manner of persons we should be, and what things are to be done and what things avoided. And although the Mosaic
[civil] state has been destroyed, the moral law nevertheless remains, which is one and the same at all times since we are born with the knowledge of it.
God wanted some knowledge to be in man which would judge sin. Sin has always been accused at all times by the voices of the Law in the preaching of repentance. Therefore Paul says: "'By the law is the knowledge of sin''
(Rom. 3:20]. He is not talking only about ceremonies, as certain persons imagine, but chiefly about the Decalog or the moral law. It always accuses, and accusés all persons. One must think far differently about the divine Law than about the morals of civil life. In civil life only outward discipline is demanded, but the Law requires perfect obedience, inward and outward, as the commandment testifies: '' You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart.
. ."' [Deut. 6:5]. In Matthew 5, Christ interprets the Law in this way.
However, since human nature, vitiated by original sin, is not able to furnish perfect obedience, the Law shows the wrath of God against sin. It accuses
Commentary on Romans and condemns all men except Christ, who, as Paul says, has set us free from the curse of the Law. He set free not only the Jews, and others who were saved after the Mosaic law was given and abolished, but also the patriarchs before Moses. Therefore they also were under the Law, i.e., they were accused and terrified by the judgment of the natural law, and they would have perished if they had not held fast to the promises concerning Christ, on account of whom they knew that liberation from sin and death had been promised.
Perhaps persons in political positions will ridicule these things, when we say that the Law demands perfect obedience, and that no one is able to satisfy the divine Law because ignorance and contempt for God cling to the nature of man. These things seem foolish to philosophers and those who judge in human fashion. But the prophets and apostles do this very thing. They want men to acknowledge the greatness of sin—that they do not truly know and glorify God. They teach that this sin is the cause of the greatest miseries and calamities by which this weak nature is oppressed, and to seek the true righteousness and deliverance from sin and death which is given through Christ.
Students (who will read these things in the interest of learning) will find more about the Law in the Loci Communes, which I have published.
The Gospel proclaims repentance and the promise of grace and eternal life. The promise should be diligently distinguished from the Law. And although the Law has certain promises of its own, nevertheless, these differ from the unique promise of the Gospel. Moreover, the promises of the Law require the condition of perfect obedience as 1s said in the first commandment:
'*T will do good to those who love me"' [cf. Deut. 5:10]. But the evangelical promise—about remission of sins, justification, and the gift of eternal life— is gratuitous, offered on account of Christ, without a condition of our merits or our worthiness.
No human language is able to express the greatness of this benefit, which God imparts to us through His Son, our Lord Jesus Christ: with sin wiped out and death destroyed, we may enjoy the vision of God in eternal life, righteousness, and joy. The promise of this benefit is only divinely revealed, as John [1:18] says: ''The Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared it to us."' For although we are born with some knowledge of the Law, we certainly are not born with knowledge of the Gospel. Human reason by itself by no means sees this will of God—that God would send His Son that he might become a sacrificial victim for the church, that God wants to remit sins gratis. These things lie far beyond the scope of human reason.
Therefore dicta of the Law ought to be carefully distinguished from the evangelical promise. In the works of Phocylides, Hesiod, and similar authors some dicta of the law are collected.
The evangelical promise of gratuitous forgiveness, or about the Son of
Introduction 23, God, is nowhere read in those who only followed the judgment of reason or the light of nature. Although we are born with some knowledge of the Law, the mind itself in us accuses sins, nor considers anything except that God punishes and rejects the unrighteous. That is the judgment of the Law, and according to the Law it is true. In the immense struggle in repentance, the gratuitous promise of mercy ought to be set in opposition to what the Law says and to our natural judgment, and preferred to the Law, because Christ has set us free from the Law.
When Adam had fallen and was accused, he could think nothing except what the Law showed—that he would perish because he had not obeyed God.
But God comes forward, and although he subjects the human race to death of the body and other ills, he nevertheless sets forth a consolation: he promises liberation from sin and death, and restoration of the human race. He says that it would come to pass that the seed of the woman would crush the head of the serpent [Gen. 3:15]. When this had been said, the Son of God moved the heart of Adam and poured new light and life into him. When the Son of God was made guardian, governor, and preserver of the church, he began to wage war with the devil. As the devil goes about with fearful savagery among humankind, he destroys very many. In his hatred for God he seeks chiefly to destroy the church, and sinks his poisonous teeth in our heel, as we frequently experience. The Son of God is again efficacious in believers as he represses the fury of the devil, restores the saints, and sets them free.
The world does not see this struggle, but the dreadful falls of very many people and the most sad and tragic calamities, and thereafter the glorious liberations (such as that of David and others) shows what kind of struggle this is. The words in Genesis [3:15]: ''The Seed will crush the head of the serpent,"' signify nothing other than the same thing which John says: *'For this the Son of God was revealed, that he might destroy the works of the devil'? [1 John 3:8]. Adam understood the promise in this way, and thereafter all the patriarchs believed that on account of this promised seed their sins were forgiven them, and that they would be set free from sin and from eternal death. Through this faith they were righteous, not through fulfillment of the Law. By this faith they were raised up in all dangers and terrors. Indeed they knew that this Lord was present with them, as Jacob plainly says, in Gen.
48|:16]: 'The Angel who set me free from all evil bless these boys''; for he proclaims him Lord who had set him free from all evils, and asks of him that he would bless his descendants. These things can be understood in no other way except as pertaining to the Son of God. Paul also says that the Son of God accompanied the camp of the people of Israel [1 Cor. 10:4]. John [1:5] also says that all things were made through this Son, and that the Light shines on the darkness. All triumphs against our adversary, the devil, are imparted
Commentary on Romans through this Son. Noah was preserved, Abraham defended, Joseph brought out of prison, the people freed from Egypt, and Daniel also spoke with him.
Thus the Gospel of the apostles preaches Christ, and testifies that He is the sacrificial victim, liberator, and Savior, and commands us to trust this leader and liberator, as also many statements of the prophets teach, as Ps. 2[:12] says: ''Kiss the Son .
. blessed are all who trust in him."' And without this faith, i.e. trust in the mercy promised because of the Son, there is no true invocation of God, no true worship. For through this Priest we have access to the Father, as we often find written.
Therefore we must renounce the blindness of those who imagine that the Gospel is a law which contains certain precepts about loving one another, however requiring faith, i.e., knowledge of the history about Christ, and that Christ is to be regarded as teacher, even as Socrates and Phocylides handed down good precepts, and that people should be considered righteous on account of these services of love, but that one must nevertheless doubt whether
God forgives us or answers our prayers, or whether he has anything to do with us. Thus the monks and now also certain would-be philosophers transform the Gospel into school-philosophy, i.e., a doctrine about works. They command us to doubt the divine promises. Neither do they teach that it is necessary to have faith, i.e., trust which rests on Christ, the liberator, and which seeks and expects the promised benefits because of him.
Therefore I ask all pious readers, if they love Christ, that they consider this distinction between Law and Gospel, between Moses and Christ, and that they diligently consider what glory should be given to the Son of God, and what true honors the fathers—Adam, Jacob, the prophets, and apostles—have given Him. From these let us learn that Christ is present with his church as leader, ruler, liberator, savior, and defender against the devil. Let us learn also that the benefits of Christ must be accepted by faith, and let us remind ourselves that the Gospel is a Word which promises and imparts these benefits, as Paul says [Rom. 1:16]: *'[The Gospel] is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes,'' i.e., the Gospel offers to us grace and eternal life gratis, on account of Christ, not on account of the Law. And through this Gospel God is truly efficacious, gives the Holy Spirit, and begins in us a new light and eternal life.
Sin Sin signifies not only evil actions, as the philosophers indicate about the term, but embraces also the immense weakness with which we are born, which is called original sin. Although carnally secure persons judge this to be a small evil, and philosophers do not even consider it to be an evil, it must be judged quite differently. For darkness and doubting whether God
Introduction
Cares about human affairs, whether he punishes, whether he nourishes, whether he aids, and whether he grants people's prayers, are not trivial evils.
Likewise, to lack fear and love for God; to love ourselves while neglecting the love of God; to admire our own wisdom; to play with opinions which flee from God—with Epicurean or superstitious opinions; to have impulses that wander about here and there, turned away from God, and fighting against the Law of God; these things are very great evils, as shown by the punishments.
For on account of these evils God subjected the human race to death, and punishes and coerces them with immense calamities. Since God was not willing to be placated by any sacrificial victim, only by the death of his Son, it must be an immense evil which had to be redeemed at so great a price. It is strange that there is such a great stupidity in human minds that they do not recognize this sickness. Therefore God wanted to make it known by means of His Word and teaching. To this let us assent, and not listen to the quibbles of the sophists, who laugh sardonically and minimize the sickness, and lightly esteem the sacrificial victim, Christ, or totally despise him. We must shrink back with minds and ears from this godless philosophy.
Justification According to the Hebrew usage of the term, to justify is to pronounce or to consider as just, as is said in Hebrew: *'The Roman people justified
Scipio when he was accused by the tribunes,"' that is, absolved him or pronounced him just. Thus we know for certain that in these disputations of Paul justification signifies the remission of sins and acceptance to eternal life, as the fourth chapter of Romans testifies in a sufficiently clear manner, where it defines justification as the forgiveness of sins. Therefore when we say we are justified by faith it is the same thing as saying that we are accounted just by God on account of Christ when we believe. And the word tustitia does not signify the righteousness of the Law, or universal obedience, or our qualities, when it is said, *'By faith there is given us iustitia."' It signifies the imputation of iustitia, or acceptance. And iustus is in this way understood relationally as acceptance to eternal life. But one must know that in the forgiveness of sins there is given at the same time the Holy Spirit, as I have said above, when we raise ourselves up by faith.
Thus the gift of the Holy Spirit is connected with justification, which begins not only one virtue—faith—but also others: fear and love of God, love of the truth, chastity, patience, justice toward the neighbor, as I shall say later about works. But these virtues do not merit forgiveness of sins, nor are they the righteousness on account of which a person is accepted though still afflicted with much infirmity. Rather, when a terrified conscience asks how we may be justified, it does not ask what virtues we possess, but how we
Commentary on Romans can receive forgiveness and reconciliation with God. It is worried about the will of God toward us; it does not contemplate its own virtues, and does not oppose them to the judgment of God. Therefore those who interpret justification as infusion of virtues do not notice that the question here is about the forgiveness of sins, and about peace of conscience in the sight of God, or about reconciliation. We are asking how we may be justified, i.e., when we may have remission of sins, and why it can be said that God is favorable toward us. Therefore it is necessary to understand justification as forgiveness of sins and divine acceptance, or imputation of righteousness.
Grace Gratia signifies gratuitous acceptance, or the mercy promised because of Christ, with which there is connected the gift of the Holy Spirit, as Paul says Rom. 5[:15]: ''How much more the grace of God, and the gift in grace."'
When he mentions grace there he means gratuitous reconciliation, and the gift in grace he understands to be the gift of the Holy Spirit and the beginning of eternal life. For in the remission of sins, as I have said, the Holy Spirit is given. And the profane philosophy of Pelagius, who contended that people become children of God and heirs of eternal life without the action of the Holy Spirit, is to be execrated. The term grace often signifies the help and activity of the Holy Spirit. However, the chief significance is gratuitous acceptance, as when we say, "'Paul received forgiveness of sins by grace,"' that is, ''Paul received forgiveness of sins gratis, on account of Christ.' To be repudiated is the explanation of the monks, who invented an interpretation which is directly opposed to Paul: We receive remission through grace, that is, we receive it on account of our virtues.
Testimonies of Scripture Where Grace Signifies Gracious Acceptance There are many sayings which testify that grace chiefly signifies acceptance promised on account of Christ, such as: *'You are not under the Law, but under grace'' [Rom. 6:14]. For God judges that the righteous, although they have sins, are nevertheless not accused because they are under grace, that is, they are already accepted as pleasing because of Christ. He does not want them to think they are pleasing because of their character.
1. Rom. 4[:16]: ''Therefore it is of faith, and according to grace, in order that the promise may be firm.'' Furthermore, the conscience is not certain on account of our character or our virtues, but on account of the gratuitous mercy which has been promised. Therefore the interpretation of the monks, who interpret grace only in regard to our virtues, by no means agrees with this passage.
2. Rom.
5[:20]: ''Where sin has abounded, grace abounded much
Introduction 2a; more.'' This means that the gratuitous mercy is perceived much more when the greatness of our sin is viewed, and we understand that we receive forgiveness of sins gratis, not on account of our merits.
3. To the Ephesians, 1[:5] ''Predestinating us through Jesus Christ, according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace.'' Here he certainly does not want our virtues to be praised, but the gratuitous mercy of God.
4. To the Galatians, 2[:21] 'I do not despise the grace of God, for if righteousness is by the Law, then Christ died in vain.'' He does not say: ''I magnify my virtues,"' but, *'I magnify the gratuitous mercy by which I state that God is rendered favorable to me on account of the death of Christ."'
5. 2 Thess. 2[:16]: ''He has given us good hope in grace.'' He does not command us to hope on account of our virtues, but on account of the gratuitous mercy promised on account of Christ.
6. To the Hebrews, 4[:16] '"'Let us approach with confidence to the throne of grace,"' that is, of promised mercy. For it is quite clear that grace cannot here be understood of our virtues.
7. Finally there is known to the learned the nature of Hebrew speech.
When this is observed it will be easy to decide the meaning of the word.
Consequently there is no one who does not know that Paul emphasizes this word grace for the very reason that we should declare that we are pleasing to God on account of Christ, not on account of our virtues. This is the interpretation the monks simply turn upside down when they command us to think that we are justified by grace, that is, on account of our virtues.
There is in the Greek term for grace something exclusive which, as | have said above, must be diligently noted. For the difference between the Law and the Gospel is shown chiefly by the exclusive particle gratis, because of Christ. However, there is not excluded, as I have said, repentance or the other virtues, but the condition of worthiness or merit, in order that terrified minds may have firm comfort. Neither do the promises become sweet for minds unless we always include for them the little word gratis. ''Everyone who shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved'' [Rom. 10:13]. If I add: ''If he is worthy,' the mind will be scared off. Therefore the Gospel proclaims about the little word gratis: Call on God even if you are unworthy, because all who call upon the Lord will be saved gratis. Thus it is said in the Psalm [Ps. 130:7]: ''For with the Lord there is mercy."' If I add: *'toward the worthy,'' the conscience shrinks back. But the Gospel commands that it be understood that gratuitous mercy is certainly promised because of Christ, as if it said: Do not shrink back, but approach God and accept the gift offered to you by faith, for on account of Christ God wants to forgive you gratis.
Therefore the decree is sure and immutable. If anyone thinks it is uncertain,
Commentary on Romans he inflicts shame on the Son of God, who is the pledge of this promise. It is necessary that the gift be accepted by faith.
I have repeated these things because it is very important that this exclusive word be diligently explained, so that the distinction between Law and Gospel will be clearly seen, and so pious minds may think that a firm comfort has been set before them and may be aroused to faith and prayer in all troubles and dangers. For this faith must be exercised in daily difficulties. Neither can the Gospel be understood without these exercises, nor is there true invocation of God without this faith, of which we have already spoken so often, as Christ says: ''Whatsoever you shall ask the Father in my name,'' that is, in faith in my name, "'that I will do'' [John 15:16]. This distinction is necessary between heathen and Christian invocation. The heathen pray doubting whether God heeds human prayers, whether he is affected by our troubles. To pray in this way is to bring shame on God. Yet such are the clamors of the ungodly in their temples, and the monks command us to doubt when we pray.
To these errors there must be opposed the following statements: Rom.
5[:2]: ''Through him we have access in faith.'' Eph. 3[:12]: *"Through whom we dare to approach confidently, through faith in him.'' And Rom. 8[:34]:
''Who sits at the right hand of God that he may make intercession for us."'
Therefore no one is able to approach God except with this Mediator and Priest bringing our prayers to God. As it is also said in Rom. 10[:14]: "'How shall they call on him in whom they do not believe?'' James [1:6] says: **'Let him ask in faith, without wavering.'' Matt. 21[:22]: ''Whatsoever you shall ask in prayer, believing, you will receive.'' Therefore in order that we may render
God the highest, true, and pleasing worship—invocation—t is necessary that this doctrine about faith and gratuitous mercy be held to and known.
Faith I come to the term faith. Many are quarreling with us chiefly concerning it. It is strange that there is so great a fog in the church that the genuine significance of this term—which has always been in the mouth of all and which resounds in the ears of everyone—should almost have been lost. To this evil there comes now another even worse one. It is difficult to tear an old error out of the minds of men, and certain deceivers, such as Cochlaeus and others, seek to preserve it. Since the deceivers are not seeking the truth but are serving their own sickness, I did not think that I should enter into a quarrel with them. However, I do not shun the judgment of the pious and learned. The prophetic and apostolic statements show so clearly what the term faith signifies that no sane person is able to contradict it. Therefore faith signifies not only knowledge of history, but trust in the mercy promised because of Christ, or assent to the promise of grace.
Introduction
This is assent in the intellect: both to want this divine consolation, and to acquiesce in it when we hear that God is propitious on account of his Son,
Jesus Christ. Therefore, when it is said, ''We are justified by faith,'' one must not imagine that we are just by faith on account of the worthiness of this virtue. These words must be understood correlatively: ''We are justified by faith,' that is, we are pleasing to God through mercy, on account of Christ. But we accept or acknowledge this mercy by faith, and apply it to ourselves. Although I fully agree that faith and trust are qualities, they nevertheless become, like the names of the other desires, relational, as love behaves itself in a way relative to that which we love, fear to the object which is feared, and trust to its object on which it rests.
These points in the art of disputing are known even to boys, but Mensinger, an ignorant and foul joker, has slandered them with the ugliest impudence. But I appeal to the judgment of saner and more learned persons, who understand what it means that something is said relationally, as it is called, and notice what is the use of these childish pre-judgments in more serious controversies.
This speech therefore is understood correlatively: through trust in his treasure a rich man is tranquil in mind when there is a poor harvest; that is, a rich man 1s tranquil in mind on account of his treasure.
Thus when you hear, '"'We are justified by faith,'' there at once comes to mind the correlative: '"We are accounted just through mercy on account of Christ.'' Therefore we are said to be righteous "'by faith'', that is, by trust in Christ, or by trust in the mercy promised because of Christ.
And I remember that I have sometimes been asked why one must say, ''We are just by faith,' if we want a person to be just through mercy. To this I answer that these expressions are correlatives: '"We are justified by faith,'' and, *"We are just through mercy."' But it is necessary that mention be made of faith because it is necessary that there be some impulse by which we accept the gift and apply it to ourselves. And when we mention faith, let the mind look upon Christ and think of the gratuitous mercy promised because of him. You are to say that you are accounted just not on account of any virtues or actions of yours, but on account of something outside of ourselves, namely, on account of Christ, the Mediator, who sits at the right hand of the Father, making intercession for us. This impulse of faith in our minds is not an idle cogitation, but it wrestles with the terrors of sin and death. It fights with the devil, who attacks weak minds in dreadful ways in order to drive them either to contempt of God or to despair, like Cain, Saul, Judas and innumerable others who decided that they had been rejected by God and so hated God furiously. Others become atheists or Epicureans when they despise the Word of God and divine comfort in great troubles. They do not sustain themselves by faith, but broken in mind they yield to the devil, as wicked
Commentary on Romans people clamor when things are against them: 'Surely there are no gods, since the world is being ruined by blind chance.'' But those who hear the Gospel— who know that the works of God are to lead into hell and to lead back out— sustain themselves in such a struggle by faith. They flee to their leader, Christ.
They know that he is the victor, who crushes the head of the serpent [Gen.
3:15], or, as is said elsewhere, who destroys the works of the devil [1 John 3:8], and who has always been with his own from the beginning. Therefore, helped by the Son of God, they overcome the devil and do not depart from God.
For that is what the fight is about. The devil urges minds to fall away from God. Faith, on the contrary, fights lest it lose God, lest it be torn away from God. It declares that there is a God who, although he punishes, nevyertheless adds the gratuitous promise of mercy on account of his Son. He gave his Son as our advocate and promised eternal salvation. God is seen in his Word, and when the mind looks upon the Word, its faith is strengthened.
It does not fall away from God, but acknowledging his mercy, it calls upon him, expects liberation, and submits to the will of God. It does not permit itself to be torn away from him. And praise for the victory belongs to Christ, who helps his own, as he himself says: ""Without me you can do nothing"
[John 15:5].
Those who experience these things in life and in invocation [worship] are able to understand the doctrine of faith, and at the same time to make the distinction that though we are just, i.e. accepted because of Christ, faith meanwhile must nevertheless be increased in us, which is true acknowledgment of God, and cannot be retained without a very sharp struggle.
Testimonies Where Faith Signifies Trust in Mercy I shall now add testimonies which show that faith does not signify mere knowledge of history but trust in mercy, which fights against despair and contempt of God.
1. Rom. 4: Paui puts together the promise and faith, so as to relate them, teaching that the promise must be accepted by faith. Therefore faith signifies trust, which rests on the divine promise. This testimony is so clear that it cannot be shaken by any sophistries. Therefore "'by faith, and according to grace,'' that is, "'I demand faith, by which the promise of reconciliation is accepted."'
2. Eph. 3[:12]: ''Through whom we dare to approach confidently through faith in him.'' Reader, what clearer testimony do you ask for? For I am now no longer fighting with the deceivers, but am addressing the glory of Christ, that they diligently weigh these testimonies. Paul is here explaining the nature of faith by means of three meaningful words. He says that by faith
Introduction
we have rappnota (boldness), Tpocaywyy (access) and TEMoLONnot< (confidence). These do not correspond to a knowledge of history, which rather deters, if one must think that we shall have access to Christ when we shall be worthy. Therefore it is necessary that faith be understood as confidence in mercy. This interpretation cannot be shaken by the sophistry of Cochlaeus, who says, "'If faith and confidence were one and the same thing, he would not have added, as though it were an effect, confidence through faith.'' O, the sophistry of those who follow Carneades! One impulse in the heart is described in many words. When faith is this impulse by which we approach
God, it certainly cannot be merely a knowledge of history, which rather deters the minds, as I have said. Thus also Paul says in Rom. 5{:12]: ''Through whom we have access by faith.'
3. Rom. 5{:1]: ''Being justified by faith we have peace with God.''
Knowledge of history by no means brings peace of conscience, but rather increases fears, when the opinio legis [the opinion that we are justified by the Law] is retained. For it is a sign of the terrible wrath of God against sin, since God was not willing to be placated with respect to it by any other sacrificial victim except by the death of his Son. When we consider this, it increases fears since we think that the benefit of Christ pertains only to those who bring with them enough merits. Since faith raises up terrified minds and comforts them, it is necessary that it be understood as trust in mercy. Since
Paul shows sufficiently that he is speaking about faith wrestling with fears, his statements cannot be understood to refer to the mere knowledge of history.
4. Col. 2[:12]: "'In which you also were raised through faith by the working of God.'' He says that we have been sanctified by faith, i.e., by the confidence that God is working in us.
5. [1] John 5[:10]: '"Whoever does not believe God makes him a liar, because he does not believe the testimony that God would give eternal life
...'? He joins faith to the promise, and demands that the promise be believed.
If anyone does not assent to the promise, he accuses God of lying, as though he did not keep his promises. Furthermore, assent to the promise is confidence in mercy.
6. Rom. 4[:18]: ''Who against hope believed in hope.'' I ask you, Christian reader; whether it is not necessary in this passage that the word, ''he believed,'' be interpreted of confidence. There is no need to seek the meaning far off. Abraham is praised because he believed that God would bring his promises to pass, although nature was against it. In this way the godly should be instructed about faith, that when we are devoid of all human support, we nevertheless expect help from God and do not let go of God. And somewhat later in the same chapter he opposes faith to doubt. Abraham did not doubt
Commentary on Romans because of mistrust. He is speaking about faith wrestling with doubt in a promise which must be accepted.
7. Mark 9[:24]: ''I believe, Lord; help my unbelief.'' This passage does not speak of a knowledge of history, but of trust by which the father expected the liberation of his son. In the gospels faith often signifies confidence which seeks and expects benefits, as in the story of the woman of Canaan, Matthew
15[:21-28], who, having been repulsed twice by Christ, and indeed insultingly, nevertheless did not cease her prayers, and with wonderful wisdom refutes the saying of Christ, confesses that she is unworthy of the benefit, but still expects a gift on account of the goodness of the Lord. Christ adorns this faith of the heathen woman with a weighty testimony when he says: *'O woman, great is your faith; be it done to you as you ask"' [Matt. 15:28]. How can we doubt here and in similar stories that by faith there is signified confidence which seeks and expects benefits. Since this ought to shine forth in invocation [worship], it is necessary that the godly be rightly instructed concerning it. But the monks command to remember history, and then say one should doubt whether God is propitious to us or regards our prayers. This teaching militates totally against the example of this highly praised woman and similar examples, and abolishes true worship of God, true invocation.
8. The description of faith in Hebrews 11[:1] shows that also there faith signifies confidence, because he says, "'Faith is the bmOOTMOLG, that is, the expectation of the things hoped for.'' This is truly the grammatical explanation of the word, as all learned persons know. Furthermore, that expectation is trust in the promise.
9. Acts 15[:9]: ''Purifying their hearts by faith."' It is clear that hearts are not purified by a knowledge of history. Shortly aftward in that passage the saying is explained: he says that neither the fathers nor anyone else had a pure heart on account of the righteousness of the Law. He says that hearts are purified if they believe that they are purified through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore he shows that the term faith signifies confidence which rests upon the mercy promised because of Christ.
10. Rom. 10[:11]: ''Every one who believes in him will not be confounded.'' Here Paul himself distinguishes the benefit of the Gospel from the Law, and he is speaking not about mere knowledge of history but about the confidence by which we declare that God is certainly propitious to us on account of Christ, not on account of the Law. The same thought is often repeated in the Prophets. Ps. 2[:12]: *'Kiss the Son.
. Blessed are all who trust in him.'' Here it is necessary that trust be understood. For he commands that the Son of God be acknowledged; he commands that we should trust this
Lord. Since it is not possible that the condition of the Law be patched on— for faith is not to rest partly on Christ and partly on the Law—it is necessary
Introduction
fhat faith be understood as confidence, which establishes that we are freed from sin and from the tyranny of the devil by the Son of God.
11. 2 Chron. 20[:20]: **Believe in the Lord your God, and you will be secure.'' The army stood prepared, and was commanded to seek and confidently expect help from God. There he is not discussing a knowledge of history; rather, confidence which seeks help from God is commanded.
These testimonies show sufficiently clearly that the word faith signifies confidence. Studious persons will find many examples when they read the Prophets. I am not ignorant of the fact that deceitful tricks can be found to escape these testimonies. There is now a remarkable frivolousness of intellects; some criticize these things from ambition, others from ill will, and others from hatred of true piety. But I beg and beseech pious readers to diligently weigh this interpretation and consider that if this is wiped out, great harm will follow. Firm comfort will be snatched away from consciences, true invocation [worship] will be destroyed, and the benefit of Christ will be obscured. Sophistry must be removed from every life, but most of all must it be kept out of the church. Neither should the mind games be tolerated which imagine, like painters, whatever they please. Let the simple truth necessary for the church be retained, and let us take care that this is transmitted uncorrupted to posterity. God requires this service of all, and most of all of those who govern doctrine, or the state, and this service is owed to the church.
Neither is any worship more pleasing to God.
The statements quoted from Paul [Rom. 4:3; cf. Gen. 15:6] should be understood in this way: '"'Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness,"' that is, Abraham acknowledged that he was not righteous because of the Law, or because of his virtues. He acknowledged the infirmity of nature, which gives birth to many vices, doubt concerning God, and lusts wandering about in different directions. He also remembered the errors he had committed among the Chaldaeans, where he was contaminated by godless worship. But because he afterward heard the promise of the Seed, and God had said to him: ''I will be your protector'' [cf. Gen. 15:1], he concluded that remission of sins had been given him through mercy, and that he had a propitious God, a defender and Savior. Thus he was pronounced just by faith, that is, by-trust in divine mercy, although he sees that his nature is infirm and evil. Frequently faith fights not only about the remission of sins or about acceptance; but also is concerned with external objects, as the faith of David in his single-handed combat with Goliath. These examples also belong here, for the faith which accepts the forgiveness of sins always precedes this faith which expects help for the body. The mind does not conclude that God will help us unless it had first concluded that God is propitious. This rule shows
Commentary on Romans that Paul is correctly quoting the testimonies about faith, and instructs us about invocation [true worship].
Dicta of the Ancient Writers I shall add also the dicta of ancient writers. Augustine says: "As a result of the Law we fear God; by faith we flee to mercy." Augustine speaks correctly, and this cannot be understood of the mere knowledge of history.
Chrysostom, in his commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, ch. 4, says:
"By faith we not only love God, but also believe that we are loved by him— although we are many times guilty—and that our sins are forgiven. This worship is superior to other kinds of worship and glorifies God more than the other worship of works, such as not to steal and not to kill." Although Chrysostom frequently drives off the road, nevertheless this saying is rightly praised. He explains the nature of faith clearly, and as I may say, in living colors when he says that we must believe that we are loved by God although we are guilty, and that we receive remission of sins: "The believer on his part boasts, not that he has loved God only and genuinely, but that although he has withheld much honor and love from God, for as soon as he loved him, telling great things about him, for this is the proof of love, and God loved him so much, although he was guilty of a thousand sins, that he not only set him free from punishment, but also made him righteous."
Worthy of praise are also the words of Bernard, who says in a sermon on the Annunciation: "First of all it is necessary to believe that you could not have remission of sins except by the forgiveness of God [. . .] But add further that you believe this also: your sins are forgiven you through him. That is the testimony which the Holy Spirit works in your heart when he says, * Your sins are forgiven you' [1 John 2:12]. For the apostle declares that a man is justified gratis, by faith." A number of similar statements by this man may also be found, although he is a more recent writer, but not one inexperienced in spiritual exercises, through which he learned that the conscience cannot be set at rest unless it is convinced by faith that sins are remitted gratis on account of Christ. Therefore he understands faith as trust, just, as we do.
I have said above that we value a knowledge of history and all the articles of faith, and when faith looks upon this article: I believe a remission of sins, it is necessary that we adopt confidence so we can truly receive this benefit. The others who understand faith only as knowledge of history do not believe this article—the forgiveness of sins—even as they publicly command to be in doubt about the remission of sins.
I think I have said enough about this word, which I hope will be satisfactory to pious, honest persons and to all who love the truth. Now I must reprove the sophistry of Origen, of the monks, and of many others who think
Introduction
that "'We are justified by faith'' is spoken according to the figure of speech called synecdoche, that is, on account of our knowledge of the history of Christ, or on account of professing [the faith] and other virtues or that we are righteous on account of general obedience. This is how they understand faith, and they think that professing is praised by Paul because, although the profession is made also by criminal persons, nevertheless, without it the other virtues, as is the case with Turks, would not please God. Thus this synecdoche transforms the Gospel into Law, transfers the glory of Christ to our virtues, destroys the comfort of consciences, and does away with the true doctrine about faith, that is, trust in mercy. Yes, the monks even command us to doubt concerning the remission of sins. For they see that doubts about the will of God inhere naturally in human minds. Therefore they confirm these doubts and do not consider them vices, darkness born with us, entirely like the school philosophers or Pyrrhonians. Therefore I shall refute this synecdoche, which militates against the entire disputation of Paul, more fully below in the commentary.
We hold fast to what is said by Paul: ''We are justified gratis, by faith''
[cf. Rom. 3:24, 28, etc.], that is, we receive remission of sins and imputation of righteousness before God, not on account of any merits of our own, but by faith, that is, by trust in the mercy promised because of Christ. Therefore we do not invent a synecdoche for Paul, neither do we change what he says, but we learn from him, we hold fast to his statement which both the character of the language and the course of the disputation call for.
I hope that when the words have been explained, the proposition will be understood: ''We are saved by faith, gratis."' It is of the greatest benefit to pious persons to keep in mind the sure testimonies and confirmations of this proposition, both for teaching the minds and to incite to faith and invocation [worship]. Elsewhere J have brought together many statements of Paul concerning this proposition. Here let it suffice to have shown the chief passages. At the close of the third chapter to the Romans Paul clearly and with many words teaches this proposition; thereafter he applies to the proposition (as the chain of the disputation demanded) the most weighty and most learned confirmations, which must be fixed in the minds so they may kindle faith and light the way before us in all dangers.
Concerning Good Works I have spoken about justification and about faith. Now I shall briefly add the doctrine about good works or about the new obedience, which ought to follow faith. These four things are being asked: What works are to be done? How can they be done? How do they please God—are the regenerate righteous on account of the new obedience, that is, accepted by God to eternal
Commentary on Romans life, or are they without sin and worthy of eternal life on account of their purity? In the fourth place the question is asked about the distinction between sins: What sins cast out grace, faith, and the Holy Spirit? Which sins are called venial?
Concerning the first question—what works are to be done: It is right to lead the minds to the Word of God so they may know that their whole life— in the midst of the struggle of the conscience and in actions—is to be ruled by the Word of God, as the prophet says, '' Your Word is a lamp to my feet"
[Ps 119:105]. Therefore I answer that the works taught to us by God are to be done. Moreover, a sure Word should be set before us, namely, the Decalog, as it is repeated and explained in the New Testament, although certain other precepts about morals are found in the preaching of Christ and of the apostles.
This must be said, lest people think it is permitted to invent acts of worship and works by our own will without a command from God, as the Enthusiasts do at all times. Some time ago the monks, and now the Anabaptists, after they had given up and cast off the Word of God, chose works according to their own judgment, and afterward invented the excuse that they were incited by the Spirit, and that the Spirit must not be hindered by the Law. Hence there followed the dreadful lawlessness of the Anabaptists.
Moreover, we shall say below what it means to be set free from the Law.
Now I shall describe it briefly. Those who have been reborn by faith, as it is said, receive the Holy Spirit in order that the new obedience, light, and life eternal may be begun in them, which is a certain beginning of the divine
Law in us. Therefore it is said in the Prophet [Jer. 31:33]: "'I shall put my Law in their hearts.' This beginning must of necessity follow faith, as many statements testify: ""If you want to enter into life, keep the commandments"
[cf. Deut. 6:2; Ez. 20:11]. Likewise: ''Unless your righteousness is better ...?? [Matt. 5:20]. Likewise: ''Fornicators and adulterers cannot inherit the kingdom of God'' [1 Cor. 6:9]. Moreover the Holy Spirit moves the hearts through the Word of God. Therefore obedience must be governed by a sure
Word of God, which we must obey, as Paul says: "*We owe it, not to live according to the flesh'' [Rom. 8:12]. Neither can faith exist without repentance, because the remission of sins must be accepted by faith. However a person who delights in crime against the conscience does not seek forgiveness.
Neither is merely outward discipline demanded, but the beginning of inner obedience, namely, pious impulses of the heart which are in agreement with the Law of God.
When our adversaries talk loudly about good works, they shout about childish discipline, about moderation in dress, in food and drink, and say something about giving alms. Meanwhile there is silence about the works of the first table, about which they are not able to say anything because they do
Introduction
not know the doctrine of faith. However, God demands the works of both tables. He wants us to be shocked as we acknowledge his wrath against our manifold infirmity and our endless errors. He wants us to believe that we are reconciled through his Son, that he will receive us into grace, that he wants to save us, that he wants to help us. In this faith he wants to be invoked, wants us to seek and expect help from him, according to Ps. 49[Ps. 50:15]:
"Call on me .
'" He wants us to depend on him by faith, not to seek help contrary to his will. These are hidden acts of worship and are peculiar to Christians. We should understand these as examples of acts of worship as seen in those excellent men whom God has set before us as teachers: Abraham,
Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Samuel, David, Jeremiah, Daniel, and similar men.
Likewise God wants us to burn with zeal to know, propagate, and adorn the Gospel. He teaches that all are chiefly prepared, regenerated, and called for this worship, as Peter says: *'Called out of darkness, that you should show forth and celebrate the benefits of God'' [1 Pet. 2:9]. And in Ps. 34 [35:18]:
"'T will confess you in the great congregation.'' And Ps. 115 [116:14]: "'I will pay my vows to the Lord in the presence of all people, in the courts of the house of our God.'' He wants us to show constancy in the profession of the Gospel, obedience in afflictions, and to seek and expect help from him.
He wants us to be careful lest we arouse offenses by our errors or evil examples. He wants us to refute and hate godless dogmas, not go along with the instruments of the devil, which try to destroy the Gospel. (However, it is not my intention here to give an explanation of the Decalog, which pious persons should always study, and consider how many great and arduous duties it embraces.) Concerning the second question: How can such great works, both within and without, be done in our infirmity? Although human diligence can provide outward discipline to some extent, nevertheless spiritual impulses cannot be brought about without the Holy Spirit. Therefore, when hearts are raised up by faith, the Holy Spirit is given in order that he may kindle a new light in the minds and excite pious impulses which are in agreement with the Law of God, according to the saying of Paul: ''In order that we may receive the promise of the Spirit through faith'' [Gal. 3:14]. And Zechariah 12[:10]: ''I will pour out the Spirit cf grace and prayer on the inhabitants of Jerusalem."'
The prophet most beautifully points out the foremost works of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of the godly, and the chief acts of worship. He calls him the Spirit of grace because, when we are raised up by faith, we are aided by the Holy Spirit to declare that God is propitious to us and that we in turn are accepted by him. Therefore he indicates first of all that faith is excited by the Holy Spirit, in which act he gives us the testimony, as Paul says.
With faith we now acknowledge the mercy and presence of God, call
Commentary on Romans upon him, subject ourselves to him, and begin to render other true acts of worship which are all embraced in the term prayer, for this is the highest honor. Therefore it is sufficient that it be understood that faith, about which we are speaking, is also the beginning of the remaining inner obedience, and, as it is called, of good intention. It is not possible to begin keeping the first commandment (which preaches about the wrath of God against sin, not about gratuitous forgiveness) unless first, after the Gospel has been heard, we declare that we receive forgiveness of sins gratis, by faith, because of Christ.
Faith looks at the Son of God as he reigns and knows that he is not idle, but wages war assiduously against the devil, who does not cease to go about with the greatest savagery and cunning against the members of Christ. He lures them into sin with his wiles, into sad falls, in order that he may draw them from there into despair. He pours out errors and strengthens Epicurean opinions, which please light minds. He incites tyrants, so that they attempt with the greatest boldness to destroy the name of Christ and exercise the most unjust cruelty. Since it is sufficiently established that human nature is far too weak to be able to defeat so vigilant and rabid an enemy without heavenly aid, faith reminds itself of the rule of Christ and knows that he was always present with the godly after the first promise, when it was said: The Seed of the woman will bruise the head of the serpent [Gen. 3:15], which statement
John gives in these words: *'Christ appeared that he might destroy the works of the devil'' [1 John 3:8].
Christ was present with Jacob, and blessed him, and strengthened him with the Holy Spirit; he was present with Daniel, and indeed conversed with him. Therefore he governs in this way, that he is present with his members, strengthens them with his Spirit, and protects them against the wiles and onsiaughts of the devil. The examples of David, Hezekiah, Daniel, and the like show what kind and how glorious such victories are, and Christ will show those triumphs in the resurrection of the dead, although the world now ignores and derides such great things. However, the godly are not totally ignorant of these battles, and individuals need to exercise their faith in their dangers and to acknowledge and invoke Christ, their leader, and with confidence in him do battle with the devil, not forgetting the words of John
[1 John 3:8]: *'For this Christ appeared, that he might destroy the works of the devil.'" From this one can know that faith is not an idle investigation, but a light which governs all actions and all dangers.
Therefore we are able to begin obedience, aided by the Son of God, who reigns, who is present with us as leader, and who imparts the Holy Spirit.
We must not think that Christ rules idly, as the poets imagine that Jupiter idly holds feasts in heaven. Such is the darkness in the minds of men about God. But these errors must be corrected by the light of the Gospel and by
Introduction
faith. But what can our adversaries say about these exercises of faith and about true invocation, since instead of faith in the Gospel they teach us the philosophy of the Pyrrhonians about doubting.
Concerning the third question: This has been explained less by the ancients than the earlier questions, although it is most necessary. There remains in the regenerate very great weakness. They fear God less than they should; they are not ardent in faith and love. Meanwhile, they seek human aid in ways that are not permitted. They go astray, are negligent in their duties, and become careless in less important matters. They harbor immoderate affections, loves, and hates; they crave forbidden pleasures. In afflictions they rage against God. They are in doubt about the mercy of God. They are oppressed by mistrust; they burn with unjust desire for protection. They do not burn with desire to make known their gratitude to God. They do not give thanks with an ardent heart for so many benefits; they do not value the Gospel highly enough. They aid the propagation of the Gospel coldly. They are not affected by the public calamities of the church and of the state. They do not offer prayers for the church and for rulers. They are inflamed with unjust zeal for acquiring riches, honors, and power. They envy others whom they see are distinguished by virtue or other good things and effort. Meanwhile, they stir up offenses, as ambition brought forth a rebellious spirit in the sister [Miriam] against Moses and Aaron.
These things are not to be considered trivial evils. They are vices that militate against the Law of God, and are worthy of eternal death. They arise from great sicknesses and from original sin, namely, from ignorance of God, and from the fact that the human will is turned away from God. When Paul says about these vices [Rom. 8:7]: '"The carnal mind is enmity against God,"' he is not describing a mild deformity, but a great and dreadful evil. Therefore it is certain that no one satisfies the Law of God except Christ, and that there remain in saints vices which fight against the Law. These sins are worthy of eternal death unless they are forgiven.
Since this is so, this question is constantly raised not only in the schools, but in the minds of the godly, and gives rise to more than ordinary dangers and disputes: whether imperfect and contaminated obedience is acceptable to God, and how it is acceptable. It is necessary that the godly be rightly instructed concerning this question on both sides. Hypocrites, as is the weakness of nature, are pleased with themselves, admire their virtues, make light of the infirmity of nature, and think that they are without sin, that they satisfy the Law of God, that they are worthy of eternal life, and that they deserve eternal life. Such are the thoughts not only of hypocrites, but of all persons who judge according to reason. So Plato and Cicero dispute about the immortality of the soul: Purer souls, which have less contamination from their
Commentary on Romans bodies (that is, who have lived more moderately) fly about in the upper air.
But lazier souls, which have more contamination from their bodies (that is, which have defiled themselves with pleasures of the body) wander about on the ground around graves. Don't the monks say the very same thing when they boast about their merits?
Although human reason by its own light judges no differently, the Word of God nevertheless testifies that no one satisfies the Law. It accuses men who trust in their own righteousness, and puts forward the Mediator, the Son of God. It is necessary to rebuke the arrogance and security of the hypocrites.
Again, worried consciences need true consolation; they should learn that it is not mistrust but faith which pleases God. Let them also learn in what way life, morals, or works please him, for these also need to please him. Peter in the boat, being terrified, says: '*'Depart from me Lord, because I am a sinner"'
[Luke 5:8]. Although in confusion he did not consider what he was saying, nevertheless, as happens in sudden impulses, he sincerely expressed what his mind felt. He fled from God, seeing his own unworthiness. Thus all persons, when they have seen their unworthiness, flee from God, and think they are acting rightly, because unworthy persons are unwilling to approach to God.
The voice of the Gospel rebukes this error, which is fixed in human minds.
It commands us to approach God although we are unworthy, but are trusting in the Mediator, the Son of God.
Although the new obedience is necessary, as has been said, and also the righteousness of a good conscience, nevertheless, the regenerate do not satisfy the Law, and the original sickness remains in them. This, as has often been said, is by no means to be considered a small evil, and this sickness spawns many evil passions. Since these are vices worthy of eternal death, the regenerate, also after conversion, are not righteous, that is, accepted by God to eternal life on account of their own virtues, but gratis, through mercy, by trust in the Mediator, Christ. Likewise they do not merit eternal life by their works or virtues, but must declare that they become heirs of eternal life on account of Christ, gratis, by faith; yet as has been said, the new obedience must always follow faith. The following statements testify that the saints do not satisfy the Law, and that sins remain in them:
Testimonies Where Sins Remain in the Saints 1. Ps. 142[143:2]: *'Enter not into judgment with your servant, because no man living will be justified in your sight."'
2. 1 John 1[:8]: "'If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves, and the truth is not in us."'
3. Rom. 7[:23]: ''I see in my members another law at war with the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin.'' There Paul often
Introduction 4] repeats the term sin, signifying that sickness is a vice which really wages war against the Law of God, and is worthy of eternal death unless it seeks forgiveness by faith. He is not talking about a light tickling of only the body, but of the sharpest movements of the mind, of doubting about the the will of God, of shrinking back from the cross, of not being raised up by trust and joy in the Lord, even as we are lifted up by joy, and rejoice when we see physical help. From this mistrust there arise many evil counsels, etc.
Paul used two very clear words: &vtTLOTpaTEvOLEVOV [warring against]; he says the sickness attacks in a hostile manner, that it wounds the mind through mistrust, terrors, pride, with trust in one's own wisdom and righteousness, carnal security, and that it kindles the flames of a variety of lusts.
And it does not appear as a despised foe. AilyoAwtiCovta [leading captive]: it oppresses weak minds and takes them prisoners, although the prisoners are set free by Christ even as Moses was taken prisoner when he was undecided at the rock and mistrusted. David was taken prisoner when by some human error he commanded that the people be numbered either because he was moved by the desire for glory, since he had enlarged his kingdom by his deeds, or for other reasons. But | omit examples: for the godly have many examples right at home. They experience how diligent the enemy is, and how he oppresses minds more often than we think. For the devil also attacks the godly.
4. | Cor. 4[:4]: "'l am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby acquitted." It is as if he said: Although the righteousness of a good conscience is necessary, nevertheless I am not righteous because of this, that is, accepted before God to eternal life, but by faith in Christ.
5. Christ commands the saints to pray for forgiveness of sins: *'And forgive us our debts'' [Matt. 6:12]. Likewise he says: *'Say, "we are unworthy
Servants gy oo .[bake, 17210):
6. Ps. 129[130:3]: ''If thou, O Lord, shouldst mark iniquities, Lord, who could stand?'' He acknowledges that he has sins, and nevertheless he declares that he is pleasing to God through mercy, and he expects salvation.
Therefore he adds [Ps. 130:5]: ''My soul sustained itself in his Word,"' that is, sustained by the divine promise | approach him. I expect salvation and in him I find rest, trusting that he will save me by his goodness.
7. Psalm 18[19:12j: ''Who can discern his errors? Clear thou me from hidden faults.'' It is clear that the prophet here, as also elsewhere, is speaking both about himself and about other saints. The very same persons whom he calls servants of God—sanctified through the Holy Spirit, adorned with excellent gifts, who walk in the exercises of faith and govern in great matters, such as Abraham, Joseph, Moses, Samuel, David, Isaiah—exclaim this with one voice: ''Who can discern his errors? Clear thou me from hidden faults."'
Therefore the arrogance of the hypocrites is to be detested, who boast that
Commentary on Romans they merit eternal life with their works, and indeed, as they themselves say, de condigno (worthily).
8. Psalm 31[32:5]: ''I said: I will confess my transgressions to the Lord; then thou didst forgive the guilt of my sin.'' Therefore let everyone who is godly offer prayer to you [God] at a time of distress. He testifies plainly that the saints ought to pray for forgiveness of present vices and errors.
9. Job 9[:20-21]: ''I am ashamed of all my works."'
10. Ex. 34[:7]: ''And an innocent man is not innocent before you," that is, although he cannot be accused according to human judgment, nevertheless he can be accused by you [God].
11. ''To you, Lord, belongs righteousness, to us however confusion of face,'' [Dan. 9:7] that is, I acknowledge that we have sins and that we are justly being punished by you. Thereafter he adds: To us confusion; however, to you mercy and propitiation [cf. Dan. 9:8, 9], that is, I acknowledge that we are sinners, but you, on account of the promised mercy, again hear us and set us free. He repeats the same thought somewhat later, and sets before us an example of faith and prayer [Dan. 9:18]: ""We do not present our supplications before you based on our righteousness, but based on your great mercy.'' These speeches are repeated with great consensus in the sacred books; our infirmity is constantly accused, and we are commanded to take refuge in mercy on account of the promised Mediator, the Son of God.
Thus also Paul does not accuse just some part of men, but simply declares that all persons outside of Christ are guilty before God. Likewise: *'He confined all men under sin, in order that he might take pity on all'' [Rom. 11:32].
Likewise: ''Whoever glories, let him glory in the Lord"' [1 Cor. 1:31]. The godly should set these statements before themselves in order that they may acknowledge that our infirmity is truly sin and they should be terrified with fear of the wrath of God against sin. In this way let repentance grow in us.
In the first sermon about the last judgment it is said in Genesis [cf. Gen.
4:7]: "'Sin lies quiet until it will be revealed.' Here is revealed the carnal security of the entire human race, which gives no heed to the judgment of God. Sin lies quiet, he says—that is, because God delays punishments, all men will be calm in their minds and will despise threats, but nevertheless finally sin will be brought to view. There it will not be quiet but will strike eternal terrors into the minds and will bring dreadful punishments. Carnal security is therefore fixed in the minds of all. This is the reason why all men make their infirmity small, and are not moved by the greatness of the evil, although the grievous lapses of the saints and the great calamities that befall humans have warned us that we should declare that God is truly angry at this fault, and we should be moved by the voice of the Holy Spirit who rebukes this sin.
Introduction
In order that the obedience which has been begun may be acceptable, these three things must come together: First it must be established that a person is acceptable to God gratis, through faith in Christ. Then we must acknowledge that our infirmity is truly sin, and we must truly grieve that we have these faults. But again we must raise ourselves up and believe that we are forgiven because of Christ after we have been made sons by faith, and that the obedience which has been begun is acceptable, not on account of our own purity or worthiness, but on account of Christ, the Mediator. Since he is our Priest, he now brings our prayers and worship to the Father. Thus Peter teaches [1 Pet. 2:5]: *'Offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ."' He adorns good works with an honorable name when he calls them sacrifices, for this term benefits proper worship of God. And indeed, he calls them spiritual sacrifices, that is, impulses excited in the heart by the Holy Spirit. Nevertheless, he says that these acts of worship are acceptable in no other way save through Jesus, the Redeemer and Priest, who diligently makes intercession for us. This is how the godly must be taught and incited to do good. God established the human race to be a society chiefly for this reason, that this might be known among men, and so that some might be able to teach the doctrine of God and of the Son of God to others, as Stigelius says rightly and beautifully:
In order that some might teach others about religion, Piety commanded to have houses near each other.
Therefore he also assigned various duties to men—the governance of the church, of the schools, marriage, the education of children, the government of the state, wars, and contracts. Besides these he subjected the church to very great afflictions. For what purpose was so great a variety of works instituted? For this, that faith might shine forth and grow amid these difficulties and dangers. Faith is to believe that God has not created us for perdition, but that he wants to receive and save us on account of Christ. Let faith invoke
God and declare that Christ is present as Leader. He represses the devil and helps us in private and public life.
Let the ruler of the church cry out: "'O Lord, open my lips, and my mouth will proclaim your praise'' [Ps 51:15]. Let the teacher of the youth consider how dreadfully Christ threatened those who stir up ruinous offenses for children. Let him pray that Christ may rule studies and morals. Let heads of households understand their dangers. Let good rulers consider that they ought to set up the churches rightly; rule the morals of the people; punish
Epicureans, unchaste people, thieves, and liars; and pronounce justice, in order that each person may keep what is his. However, the devil is chiefly concerned to disturb churches and governments. He arms tyrants against the
Commentary on Romans church. Therefore let an ardent faith be found in rulers, which believes that Christ will aid them and destroy the works of the devil. Finally, even as invocation [worship], so faith ought to light the way for all actions.
Virtues and the works of the godly do not merit forgiveness of sins or eternal life, nor are they the price of eternal life, since no one satisfies the Law. The merit of Christ ought not to be transferred to our works. The promise would become uncertain if it depended on the condition of our worthiness.
Nevertheless, the new obedience must of necessity follow faith, and it is indeed begun when we receive the Holy Spirit by faith. Faith and the Holy
Spirit are driven out when the new obedience is lost, when the commandments of God are violated contrary to the conscience. For faith and intentionally acting against the conscience cannot exist at the same time.
Here belong many statements about works: **'Man believes with his heart and so is justified, and he confesses with his lips and so is saved"' [Rom.
10:10]. All obedience should be a confession, serving to celebrate the glory of Christ and to spread the Gospel. Therefore, although we are righteous because of Christ and heirs of eternal life, nevertheless this obedience must be present, and it pleases, as has been said. and neither could faith be retained without this obedience.
Paul also says elsewhere: ''We shall put it on that we may not be found naked' [2 Cor. 5:3]. Eternal life is given on account of Christ, but it is given to the one who believes. In this faith eternal life is begun; this beginning is the new obedience. Our worthiness is excluded, and Christ must be given his honor, both in order that the promise may be certain and that we may have firm consolation against despair.
Therefore there was new obedience also in the thief who was converted on the cross. There was repentance. He bemoans the fact that he has sinned.
And a wonderful light of faith arose in this abject person. God showed by this example that he wonderfully preserves and restores the church in extreme difficulties. The scattered apostles were in doubt about the Master. They had seen the greatness of the calamity. Therefore they thought they had been deserted by God, but the thief is not deterred in this way from seeking salvation from him. He had heard him say a little earlier: *'Father, forgive them'' [Luke
23:34]. He had also heard certain things which had been done by him and a kind of confession. They saw things happening in nature, the sun obscured and the earth quaking, give a testimony concerning him. Therefore he invokes him with great vehemence, saying: "Remember me, Lord, when you enter into your kingdom'' [Luke 23:42].
How great was the light of this faith! He acknowledges that this companion in punishment, this dying man, is the Messiah who forgives sins and will give eternal life, who has abolished death and will reign after this life.
Introduction
Earlier, when things were favorable, the apostles had thought that he would be king after the Romans had been driven out. And this lone person proclaims that the dying man will reign after death. Therefore also Christ, in turn, testifies that he will reign, that he is the giver of eternal life, in order that he may kindle and strengthen his faith: 'Today you will be with me in paradise"'
[Luke 23:43]. Strengthened by these words the thief acknowledges that he has eternal life, not on account of his merits, but on account of this Lord.
And together with this faith and consolation, eternal life is begun in him, which is the new obedience before God.
Behold, | ask you, for here the man sent from God [Apostolus] hanging [on the cross] preaches from on high, not only to the crowd which was then present, but to the entire coming church. What an outstanding picture is set forth, in order that we may learn from it that we are saved gratis, by faith, on account of Christ, and nevertheless, repentance must be present and the other good fruits. In this thief there are seen repentance, faith, invocation, and confession or proclamation. It is certain that these are the foremost good works and the highest acts of worship of God.
He added also another noteworthy work which is necessary chiefly when Christ is being cursed. He sternly castigates the curser and defends the glory of Christ. So also we should, with true ardor of mind, take to task godless teachers, tyrants and their associates, who blampheme Christ. It has often occurred to me that this preacher is significant particularly to the church in the last times. Therefore, let us listen to him diligently, and attentively consider his example and imitate it.
Although eternal life is given gratis on account of Christ, afterward, if the new obedience, as I have said, is found pleasing, God also rewards our labors, actions, and troubles. Therefore Christ says: "'Your reward is great in heaven'' [Luke 6:23]. And although they do not merit eternal life, they do merit their physical and spiritual rewards which come to them in part in this life, in part after this life. For since God wants to preserve the church among men, he bestows many bodily benefits. There is need of food, of peace in the state, and of other comforts of life. There is need also for spiritual benefits: wisdom, learning, fortitude, and successes in one's vocation.
Therefore Christ says: ''Seek first the kingdom of God, and the rest of the things will be added to you'' [Mt. 6:33]. And Paul: "*Godliness has promises of the present and of the future life'' [1 Tim. 4:8]. And Mark 10[:30]:
''He will receive an hundredfold, but with persecution.'' And the fourth commandment says: ''That you may live long on the earth'' [Deut. 5:16].
And Christ: ''Give, and it will be given to you"' [Luke 6:38]. And Matthew 10[:42]: ''
Whoever gives a drink of water to one of the least of these, because of the doctrine, will not lose his reward."'
Commentary on Romans Finally there are found here and there in the sermons of the prophets promises about bodily and spiritual benefits, as Is. 33[:16-17] says about the godly: ''Bread will be given him .
. and his eyes will see the king in his beauty,'' that is, they will have food, calm states, etc.
The widow of Zarephath received Elijah the prophet as a guest when the provisions were very short. Here see first the faith of the woman, then the work, and finally wonderful rewards. The prophet commands that what little food was left be given to him, and adds the promise, as a reading of the story shows. The woman obeys his word, although she saw that nothing was left save these remnants. The woman would not have exercised this generosity if she had not been raised up by faith, if she had not thought that God must be obeyed, the prophet helped, and a benefit in turn expected from God. Therefore she receives the reward of her faith and alms. Her family is divinely fed until the scarcity is made easier. Also her dead son is restored to her. The faith of the mother is strengthened even more by this miracle, and the young man is called to piety. Indeed, Epiphanius writes that he was the prophet
Jonah, who later preached to the Assyrian King in Nineveh and propagated the Word of God widely and with success.
The saints have at all times received not only spiritual benefits, but also many bodily benefits for the preservation of the church, and some were presented with other gifts, as seemed good to God. He preserved Paul unharmed as long as he wanted him to serve in the ministry, and meanwhile provided him with lodging and the other comforts of life. Thus also Paul writes to the Corinthians about a pestilence, that they were being chastened by this punishment on account of their vices. If they would repent, the punishments would cease. Thus also Zechariah [1:3] says: ''Return to me, and I will return to you,'' that is, I will mitigate the calamities and punishments if you will repent. He is not speaking of one work only, but of true conversion and its fruits. From these sayings one can sufficiently understand both that the obedience which has been begun pleases God, and that it has rewards.
There are many things which should kindle zeal for doing good: the command of God, the fact that faith is extinguished when obedience is lost, and that both the loss of faith and the other faults are punished by present and eternal punishments. Likewise misdeeds are frequently punished by blindness and by more sins. Again, it is not only the promise that invites men to believe and to retain faith, but also the command of God. For it teaches that we should believe the Son. It invites us to exercise our faith, for unless it is exercised faith does not increase, as the parable of the talent shows [cf. Mt.
21:33-46]. And Augustine rightly says: ''Love merits an increase of love,"' for he is not speaking about imputation but about gifts.
Gifts increase through use, and merit increases. The greatness of the
Introduction
mercy of God also invites us. It nevertheless approves of this poor, beggarly, thoroughly contaminated obedience, and judges that honor is shown him through it. Other rewards necessary for life and for the church also invite, which should be prayed for in their place, and which are set forth for the exercise of faith, such as food; peace; good successes in one's calling, in studies, in the governance of church and state; godliness of children; virtue, and happiness.
These are great rewards, but so great is the blindness of the world that it is only lightly affected, not only by the command of God and by mention of eternal punishments and eternal salvation, but it also does not sufficiently understand how great is the need of corporeal benefits, and how important it is that they be used rightly. Therefore let us pray to God for the sake of our
Lord Jesus Christ, who intercedes for us, that he may arouse us to true piety, teach us, and govern us by giving us his Holy Spirit, even as he has promised that he will give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him.
About the fourth question, the distinction between sins: When we say that remnants of sin remain in the regenerate, and that at the same time there is faith, it is necessary that sins be distinguished, lest anyone think that adultery and similar gross sins can exist together with faith. In my Loci Communes I have spoken at somewhat more length about the distinction between mortal and venial sin. Therefore I shall here remind the reader in a few words.
When we have been justified by faith, the righteousness of a good conscience must follow in the regenerate. The doctrine of Christ makes this distinction openly and frequently, e.g. 1 Tim. 1[:15]: "'The sum of the commandment is love out of a pure heart, and a good conscience, and unfeigned faith.' And again in the same chapter [1:18, 19]: "'Wage the good warfare, holding faith and a good conscience."' And 2 Cor. 1[:12]: "'Our boast is this, the testimony of our conscience.'? And | John 3[:21]: "'If our hearts do not condemn us we have confidence before God.'' For he teaches that those who harbor the purpose of violating the commandments of God against their conscience cannot invoke God. And 2 Pet. 3: [1 Pet. 3: 15—16]: ''With meekness and fear, having a good conscience."' Therefore it is said in Gal. 5[:19]:
'*Now the works of the flesh are obvious: immorality, impurity, licentiousness, idolatry, etc
. those who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.'' He calls them obvious because he is condemning deeds which they knowingly do against their conscience.
Paul also distinguishes among sins in Rom. 8[:13]: "'If you live according to the flesh, you will die. If by the Spirit you mortify the works of the flesh, you will live.' There are in the saints actions of the flesh, that is, vile affections. When they fight against this with the Spirit, that is, not hypocritically, the vile affections will be coerced with true fear of God and true
Commentary on Romans faith, and the saints remain in grace and retain the Holy Spirit and faith.
These things are not done without a great struggle in the minds. The lures of the world are of various kinds. There are turbulent attacks in our flesh. And the devil intently seeks occasions through which he can drive minds. Therefore we have need for watchfulness, faith, and prayer. For the victory belongs to Christ when we overcome the devil. But our discipline must nevertheless come to it, and aid must be sought in faith, as Peter says [1 Pet. 5:8]: ""Be watchful, for the devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour.'' And about discipline: ''I pommel my body and subdue it"' [1 Cor.
9:27]. The fear of God fights against the evil lusts and wiles: Faith seeks aid and forgiveness for the infirmity, and collects arguments which show the greatness and the punishments of sin, eternal and present.
Thus Joseph, when he was solicited by the lures of his mistress [cf. Gen.
39], did not resist the fury of the woman and the tricks of the devil without a struggle. He sees that the devil is doing this first in order that he may draw him, polluted by crime, away from God, rob him of the gift of prophecy and other divine adornments, and stir up scandal to defame the doctrine which Joseph professed, so that evil might be spoken of God and true religion, which had recently begun to shine forth, might be extinguished. This one voluptuous act would have brought such great ruin in its train. For the devil takes great care and hides from us the webs from which afterward one cannot escape, as David found out, and as many godly persons find out. Gathering all these arguments together, Joseph raised himself up by faith against the lures and dangers, and as he coerced himself with discipline, so he also sought heavenly aid. Thus our leader, the Son of God, overcame and broke the attempt of the devil through Joseph. When pious persons in this way fight against their infirmity, and in faith seek aid and forgiveness, they do not lose grace, the Holy Spirit, and faith. And people everywhere call such an infirmity in the saints a venial sin.
Other lapses are sins against the conscience, which the Greeks call ''murderous sins."' And Paul says [Gal. 5:19]: "'Manifest are the works of the flesh,' namely, when someone violates the commandments of God contrary to his conscience, or indulges in a depraved desire and does not fight against it (as Saul hated David) or adds an outward shameful deed (as David seized another man's wife). People who commit such transgressions lose grace, grieve and drive out the Holy Spirit, and cast off faith. Unless they repent and return again to faith, they will be cast into eternal torments when they die. There is no need to bring up here the disputes about predestination. We need to make prouncements about our deeds and about the will and judgment of God according to the express Word of God. If David had not done better, he would have been cast into eternal torments like Saul. Carnal security is
Introduction
deeply fixed in the minds of men, particularly the idle. Therefore we must beware lest we indulge in this evil, which is strengthened by various pretexts.
Let us set the Word of God before ourselves, according to the passage: ''Your Word is a lamp to my feet'' [Ps. 119:105]. The Word testifies that grace is lost and the Holy Spirit driven out through such lapses:
Rom. 8[:13]: "'If you live according to the flesh, you will die."'
Matt. 12[:45], about the devil returning to those from whom he had been cast out: "'He goes and takes seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and entering in, they dwell there, and the latter things become worse than the former."'
Matt. 13[:22]: about the seed which is choked by worldly lures.
1 Cor. 6[:9]: *'Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolators, nor adulterers, nor thieves will inherit the kingdom of God.'' And he testifies that he is speaking to those who had previously received the benefits of Christ.
He commands that they should be careful lest they lose them.
Likewise | Cor. 10[:8]: ''Do not become idolators nor engage in immorality, as some of them did, and in one day 23,000 perished."'
Gal. 5[:22]: "'Those who do these things will not enter into the kingdom of God.' And thereafter [Gal. 6:8]: ''He who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption; but he who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life.""
1 Tim. 5[:8]: ''If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his own family, he has disowned the faith and 1s worse than an unbeliever."'
Heb. 13[:4]: ''God will judge the immoral and adulterous."
2 Pet. 2[:20]: "'If, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overpowered, the last state has become worse for them than the first."
Matt. 10[:33]: '"'Whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven."'
Matt. 24[:13]: ''He who endures to the end will be saved."'
Matt. 25[:41]: ''Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire, for I was hungry and you gave me no food,"' etc.
1 Cor. #3[:2]: ''If I have all faith ..
. but have not love, I am nothing.''
Although we are not righteous on account of our virtues or works, that is, accepted by God, it is nevertheless necessary that there be present in us a beginning obedience, according to the statement [Rom. 8:14]: "Those who are led by the Spirit are sons of God."'
1 John 3{:10]: ''By this it may be seen who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: Whoever does not do right is not of God.
... He who does not love his brother remains in death .
. Little
Commentary on Romans children, let no one deceive you. He who does right is righteous
. He who commits sin is of the devil.'' Human security belittles the magnitude of our lapses, but see how dreadful are these threats. What more dreadful a thing could be said than this: Whoever commits sin is of the devil [cf. John 8:44;
1 John 3:10], that is, he is a captive of the devil, he is moved and driven by him, bereft of the Holy Spirit, cast off from God. The results also testify to this.
How many crimes and calamities one fall of David brought forth. After his desire gained the victory over him, and he had seized the wife of another, he commands her husband to be killed, and together with him many citizens, holy and brave men, perished, and disgrace is brought upon the name of God.
Afterward his son stirs up an insurrection, and the wives of the father are seized to be violated by the son—a vicious and more than tragic crime—and many thousands of citizens are killed. Finally, sedition cannot fail to bring forth innumerable scandals and crimes. What evils arose from the idolatry of Solomon! The kingdom of Israel was cut in two, and constant idolatry and wars between brethren followed. What evils the fall of Adam brought forth!
This is what the devil does in order that he may create such a web of troubles when he notices that we regard our sins as small. He cozies up to us to loosen the reign on our lusts; thus faith is extinguished. For faith, which seeks remission of sins, cannot exist in those who knowingly delight in sin and are without repentance, according to this saying: '*Where will God dwell?
In a contrite spirit that trembles at my Word' [Is. 66:2]. For those who knowingly delight in sin are not willing to be set free from it. Therefore the dictum of John should recall to our memory whence sin arises, how great an enemy we have, and what he is after, in order that we may exercise our faith so Christ in us may overcome this enemy.
Until now I have set forth the sum of the doctrine of the Gospel, about justification, as it is called, or about grace, about reconciliation, about faith, and about good works. This concept is plain and clear, since there is in it nothing absurd, dark, or sophistic. It speaks about impulses which are well known to pious minds in the church, and does not argue about idle subtleties.
It shows the glory of Christ since it reveals the greatness of human infirmity.
Finally, it agrees perfectly with the perpetual consensus of the entire Scripture of the Old and the New Testaments. All the godly of all times in the church experience that this consolation is true and necessary. It is strange in the case of our adversaries that there is such great darkness, and such fury and that they do not cease to fight against it with every evil means.
But the devil pours out errors on human minds in many ways, in order that he may obscure the glory of Christ. Therefore the godly should pray that Christ may preserve his Gospel and not permit it to be destroyed everywhere,
Introduction Syl and that he may govern us by his light, and show his truth to as many as possible, driving away the fogs which the devil pours out. Also, let our diligence invite Christ. Let the learned labor to set forth this whole matter diligently and clearly so that it is transmitted to those who come after us without sophistry. We also should not shun the responsibilities or labor involved in learning and teaching, or the struggles in confessing the faith. For this matter cannot be explained sufficiently clearly without learning. And there is need for a certain greatness of mind for enduring the hatreds of the mighty and wise, who disapprove of these disputations, some for one reason, others for another. But it is necessary for the godly to share in fighting for the Gospel, as Christ says: "'By this my heavenly Father is glorified: if you will be my disciples and bring forth abundant fruit'? [John 15:8]. Therefore let us set forth the do¢trine in good faith, simply and correctly, and let us pray that God may add his Holy Spirit, that he may, as Paul says, grant a rich increase.
An Explanation of Arguments from Scripture Which the Adversaries Oppose I shall however add a few arguments with which the adversaries attempt to sbake our understanding.
1. The chief one is the statement in James [2:14]: not by faith only, but by works.
The answer is quite easy: James calls the knowledge of history faith, for he says that the demons believe. But what Paul calls faith is something very different, namely, trust in the mercy promised because of Christ. Therefore he is rebuking the error of those who think they are righteous because of their profession of the history. That is indeed a necessary work like the other good works, but it is not that confidence by which we accept the forgiveness of sins, as is evident.
Thereafter, when he says that he was justified by works, the expression must be observed. He does not want to say that Abraham was reconciled on account of works, but that the works of the reconciled one afterward pleased
God. For in the reconciled works do please, as has been said, and some of them are righteousness of the Law, but they do not merit the forgiveness of sins or acceptance to life eternal. Therefore he says that Abraham was also justified by works, that is, also his works were pronounced righteous [cf.
James 2:23-24]. This is true of the person who has been justified and believes.
And it is indeed necessary, as I have said, that works should follow in which faith lives and is exercised. Let us act openly, without sophistry. James is not treating the same matter as Paul, but is speaking in passing about a faith
a2 Commentary on Romans which is only knowledge of history. Therefore his pronouncements must be set in opposition to Paul, or to the other prophetic Scriptures.
2. [Our adversaries also cite,] 'If you want to enter into life, keep the commandment [cf. Deut. 6:2; Ez. 20:11]. Therefore eternal life is given on account of works, it is not given [gratis] to the believer.'' There is a clear, perpetual answer to such sayings. The statements about the Law and about the Gospel must be distinguished. Here the voice of the Law is put forward, which must be interpreted on the basis of the Gospel. For no one would be saved if judgment had to be made according to the Law. Whoever keeps the commandments will enter into life, for no one keeps the Law, and no one is without sin. Therefore add the Gospel to that statement: If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments, namely, according to the clemency of the Gospel, which promises forgiveness of sins because of Christ.Afterward he begins the new obedience, and he approves it, although it is imperfect, and is not the purchase-price of eternal life.
True, it is necessary that the commandments be kept, and it is necessary that the Law be proclaimed in order that repentance and faith may increase in us. However, what must be taught is not the Law only, but the promise of the Gospel must be added, without which the Law is only a ministry of wrath and of eternal death. And it is certain that Christ is the end of the Law
[Rom. 10:4]. Therefore one must not stop with the Law, but when we hear the Law and are terrified, let us think that we are being accused, not in order that we may perish, but that we may seek the Mediator, the Son of God. We should know that he was given to us in order that through him we might be set free from sin, from the tyranny of the devil and from death. Therefore when eternal life is begun in us, we obey the Law, and the commandments are kept as was said: "'I shall pour out the Spirit of grace and prayer on the house of David'' [Zech 12:10].
3. [Our adversaries also cite] 1 Cor. 13[:2]: "'If I have all faith .
. but have not love, I am nothing.'' The answer is the same: I confess that love is necessary, but love for God can neither exist nor can it please unless we have first accepted remission of sins and the imputation of righteousness. It is easy for idle persons to imagine that they love God, but these need to be led back to true sorrow in their minds, and to true impulses in invocation, in dangers.
Here some doubt whether God is concerned about human affairs, whether indeed favorable and adverse things happen by chance. Others, feeling the wrath of God, like Saul, succumb in afflictions and rage against the judgment of God. The heavenly voice preaches about these immense storms of the mind, and amid these waves it lifts up the minds by the promise of the Gospel.
When the mind sustains itself by faith and acknowledges mercy, there love follows. Therefore it is necessary that faith should come first, which accepts
Introduction
the remission of sins. And this faith cannot rest in our worthiness. Although love follows, it nevertheless declares that we are righteous not on account of our love, but on account of Christ. People in general interpret.love as love for God and the neighbor. Therefore I have responded concerning the love to God. However, Paul is here speaking particularly about love for the neighbor; it is even more certain that it does not merit the forgiveness of sins.
4. [Our adversaries also cite Luke 6:37:] ''Forgive, and it will be forgiven you,"' [and they say,] *'Therefore by our forgiving, we also merit justification for ourselves.'' The answer is plain. This is preaching of repentance, of which there are many examples in the Prophets, as Is. 1[{:16-17]:
"Cease to do evil, learn to do good; Then your sins will be wiped away,"' etc. The first part teaches about our repentance; the other contains a promise.
Christ does not say you will be forgiven on account of your forgiving, but only commands that we should forgive; thereafter he reminds about remission which depends on something else, not on the worthiness of our work. How great would be the future consternation of consciences if one had to think that divine forgiveness depended on the purity and worthiness of our forgiving toward those with whom we had a quarrel? For in reconciled minds there also remain scars, as a certain famous person says. Therefore it is necessary to seek another cause of forgiveness. The statement of the Gospel about gratuitous forgiveness must be held fast.
This is what is said in Daniel [4:27]. Part is preaching of repentance:
Love justice and do good to the poor who are unjustly oppressed. Defend the church against tyrants, for that is what Daniel wanted. The other part is a promise: And there will be a healing of your transgressions. There must be repentance, and nevertheless forgiveness is gratuitous and to be accepted by faith. For if the promise depended on the condition of our worthiness, it would be void, as is said in Rom. 4.
5. [Our adversaries also say that] love is the greatest of virtues, and therefore we are accounted righteous on account of love. I deny the conclusion, and the reason is clear, for this would follow more correctly: Love is the greatest, but since we show hardly any love, there is no way we can be righteous on account of this virtue. If we possessed the virtues which the Law of God demands and were without sin, we would rightly be said to be righteous on account of our love and other virtues. But because human nature is far removed from the perfection of the Law and is not ardent in love, the Gospel sets before us another righteousness. It teaches that we are accounted righteous not on account of our virtues, but on account of something else, outside of us—the Mediator, the Son of God. We declare that we have a gracious God on account of him, by faith. Therefore we are righteous by imputation, not on account of our virtues, although these also must be begun in us.
Commentary on Romans As for the rest, if someone demands a distinction of virtues: Faith, at the present time, accepts the forgiveness of sins. Hope is an expectation of a future event, or of coming liberation. Faith is assent, by which the will wants and accepts the promise, and finds peace on account of the Mediator, the Son of God. And when the will thus acquiesces, the heart becomes calm and finds consolation and joy, which is the beginning of the new life. Hope and love follow these impulses. Because faith is certain that God is gracious to us, it dares to ask and expect the other benefits. And love springs up because now we know that God is not idle, as reason imagines. Neither is
God an enemy, such as the Law shows, but he is a Father who is touched by the greatness of our calamity and desires to set us free. He swears: "*As I live, I do not desire the death of the sinner,
'' [Ez. 33:11]. In this way, when we acknowledge that we are received into grace and are heard by God, we on our part submit ourselves to him, and a certain reverence is kindled, or a certain desire by which we prefer God above other things. Such is love in this life—not burning as it should be, but weak.
6. They hold up against us also the [Latin] term merces [reward] and say that since eternal life is called a reward, good works must merit eternal life. I shall not seek shrewd interpretations of the term: let the sources of the matter be examined. The Psalm [143:2] says: "'Enter not into judgment with your servant, for in your sight no man living shall be justified."' Likewise:
'"Who understands his errors?'' [Ps. 19:12]. Therefore we are not able to declare that we merit eternal life with our virtues, or that our virtues are the purchase price of eternal life. Above I have collected many testimonies which show that sin remains in the regenerate which here must be regarded by the mind. And let everyone ask his own conscience whether he prefers that eternal life should be given him because of Christ or indeed that he should be forgiven for the sake of his merits. You may say the zeal for doing right is weak if eternal life is given gratis. No—despair debilitates the zeal for doing right even more. For those who imagine that eternal life is given for merits must despair.
The more prudent fathers saw this danger. Augustine and Bernard clearly say eternal life is given to a believer gratis, on account of Christ. Also Paul says, "The gift of God is eternal life through our Lord Jesus Christ'? [Rom.
6:23]. Neither is the gift uncertain. But God instructs us to believe that we shall certainly receive eternal life on account of Christ, according to what is written John 6[:40]: **This is the will of the Father, that everyone who believes in the Son should have eternal life.'" However, this faith does not exist without repentance, and faith regards both voices, namely: ''As I live, I do not want the death of the sinner, but that he may be converted and live'' [Ez. 33:11].
In what way? Through the Son, even as he says: 'This is the will of my
Introduction
Father, that everyone who believes in the Son should have eternal life'' [John 6:40]. Although repentance must be present, the condition of our worthiness must not be attached to it. Yes, repentance fights against trust in merit, as the saying reminds us: **Whoever glories, let him glory in the Lord"' [1 Cor.
Sie Why then is it called a reward? I answer: Although eternal life is given because of Christ, it also rewards our labors and troubles. This is sufficient so far as the nature of the word is concerned, as an inheritance also compensates the labors of the heir, although he receives it for a different reason.
But another answer is simpler and truer. The expressions of the Law are: ''He will give to everyone according to his works"' [Matt. 16:27]. Likewise: ''Great will be your reward in heaven'' [Luke 6:23]. For the Scripture speaks of righteousness after the*manner of the Law, as though about our worthiness, and about faith as though about our virtue, and says that a reward is given to our virtues. Meanwhile it must be known from the Gospel that we are righteous not by our virtue, but by imputation, and that the benefits of Christ are accepted by faith, not on account of the worthiness of this virtue, but because it rests upon the merit of another, namely, Christ. This is a quick and true answer, and it is without sophistry.
An Explanation of the Scholastics' Esteemed Objections I shall add also certain scholastic objections which, when they are explained, add much light to this disputation, and meanwhile vex the prattlers.
1. [The Scholastics say] righteousness is obedience to the whole Law, good works are obedience to the whole Law, and therefore we are justified by good works. I answer: First of all the minor premise must be denied. For good works are not perfect obedience to the Law, because human nature fights against the Law of God. Then I answer the major premise. The major premise is true of the righteousness of the Law. For the righteousness of the Law is obedience to the whole Law. But because we do not fulfill this, the Gospel offers gratuitous imputation of righteousness, as also Paul reminds us with respect to the word imputation.
This objection is very useful, for it shows the distinction between the righteousness of the Law and that of the Gospel. It shows that the term righteousness is used in a different sense in different connections. This deceived the Sententiarii?: When they had read in Aristotle that righteousness signifies general obedience, they dreamed that it means the same thing everywhere in the Apostles and Prophets. The Psalm [89:16] says: ""They shall
2 A Sententiarius was an advanced theological student who was trained to lecture on Peter
Lombard's Four Books of Sentences.
Commentary on Romans exult in your righteousness.'' Here it does not signify Aristotelian virtues, but relationally, 'tin your righteousness,'' i.e., in the imputation of righteousness by which you account us righteous through mercy, that is, accepted.
The righteousness of the law signifies obedience, as when it is said, **I have done justice and righteousness'' [Ps. 119:121]. But the righteousness about which the Gospel specifically speaks signifies relationally, the imputation of righteousness, that is, gratuitous acceptance to eternal life, although joined to it is the gift of the Holy Spirit. So when you hear the word justified, you should think about the Hebrew phrase which signifies "'to be accounted or pronounced righteous,'' or that the accused person is absolved. And righteous signifies ''accepted by God to eternal life.' 2 Cor. 5[:21]: **He made him to be sin for us who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God,'' that is, Christ was made guilty for us so that we might become accepted because of him. This is the simple grammatical and true explanation of the words. In different passages the word is used in a different sense. Sometimes it is used for the righteousness of the Law; at other times of imputation. It is necessary to observe this distinction.
2. [The Scholastics also say,] ''Works against the Law of God are sins, so good works are righteousness. The conclusion is valid from the nature of things that are contrary to each other. It follows also that men are justified by good works, since these constitute justice.'' I answer: The conclusion would be valid if good works were perfect obedience, but since they fall far short of perfect obedience it can easily be understood that the argument is not valid because it is not a case of true contraries. Things that are faulty are entirely faulty. A great many faults are mixed in with good works, by which they also are contaminated. Pomponius Atticus was a kind-hearted man, righteous in the eyes of the citizens. But he doubts whether God is concerned about human affairs. He is without fear of God. The greatness of those inner defects is not perceived. Therefore the argument deceives those who are not warned. The conclusion must be denied because there is not a true antithesis.
I answer the same to the following argument.
3. [The Scholastics also say,] "'evil works damn. Therefore good works save.'" I deny the conclusion, and the reason is there is no true antithesis.
Evils are bad throughout. Much evil is mixed in with the good works, and although David has good works, he nevertheless has many evil impulses; he had doubts about God. And this darkness draws in its train a great mass of vices, carnal security, and trust in one's own wisdom and righteousness. The heart does not burn with fear or love of God, nor with faith as it should be.
I know that there have been some who said that our understanding was powerfully shaken by this argument, but even a moderately attentive reader can easily judge how foolish and futile it is.
Introduction
4. [The Scholastics also say,] ''Sin is hatred of God, so love is righteousness.'" I know that Eck celebrated great triumphs when he tried to use this argument to show that men are not justified by faith alone. However the answer is easy: It is agreed that perfect love is the righteousness which the Law demands, but as was said above, we are not righteous by the Law. For there can be no love unless we are first reconciled by faith. Afterward there follows a certain beginning, and yet there remains a great infirmity which fights against the Law of God, angry and raging against the judgment of God, as the Psalm [4:4] shows: **Be angry, but do not sin
'? Therefore there is need for another righteousness, namely, by gratuitous imputation.
5. [The Scholastics also say,] "'righteousness is located in the will, and faith is in the intellect, so faith is not righteousness."' I answer: The major premise is true with respect to the righteousness of the Law, which signifies the virtues and qualities in our will. But when Paul speaks about the righteousness of faith, righteousness signifies the imputation of righteousness.
For he teaches that men are accounted righteous, that is, accepted, not on account of their own quality, but on account of something outside of ourselves, namely, through mercy on account of the Mediator, the Son of God. It is necessary that this mercy be accepted by faith. Faith is not only knowledge, but assent, for which also the impulse of the will is required, as learned people know. It is to want and to accept the promise, and to find rest in it. This faith is conceived when we assent to the Gospel promise. When a terrified mind sustains itself with this, the Holy Spirit at the same time moves the hearts through the Word to believe.
6. [The Scholastics also say,] "'we are righteous by faith, and faith is a work, so we are righteous by works.'' To the major premise the response should be that the argument, rightly understood, could be explained and solved. We are justified by faith, not because it is a work or quality or virtue in us, but insofar as it takes hold of mercy and rests on Christ. In order that the matter may become clearer, the saying must be transformed into its correlative: We are justified by faith, that is, we are righteous through mercy because of Christ, but faith must also declare that this mercy pertains to us.
The minor premise is true: Faith is a work, like other virtues—love, patience, and chastity..But as the other virtues are imperfect, so also faith is weak.
Therefore we are not righteous on account of the worthiness of the virtue, but because it takes hold of the mercy. For it is necessary, if I may express it this way, that there be some instrument by which mercy is grasped. It is necessary that we look upon Christ, and declare that he forgives us. Therefore the answer to the major premise must be: Faith is a work, but we are not righteous on account of the worthiness of the work, but because it takes hold of the mercy. It cannot follow that we are righteous because of our works.
Commentary on Romans This also can be learnedly said: there is more in the conclusion than in the premises, for the conclusion wants men to be righteous on account of works.
That does not follow from these premises.
7. [The Scholastics also say,] ''we are righteous by grace. Grace is love infused in the minds, so we are righteous through love.'' I respond to the minor premise: Relationally, grace chiefly signifies favor, mercy, or gratuitous acceptance because of Christ. A fitting interpretation of the term must be retained. Moreover, with this acceptance there is connected the gift of the Holy Spirit. But [the Scholastics] explain those terms in this way: We are righteous by grace, that is, we are righteous on account of infused virtues.
Here they imagine an explanation that is diametrically opposed to Paul, and which wholly removes from sight the true consolations of pious minds. If, when we pray, we had to look at ourselves and imagine that we would have access to God only when we have been sufficiently adorned with these virtues, then we could hope for eternal life only when we could see this new purity in ourselves. People would lose heart and despair of help and salvation.
The more fear-filled minds are, the more fully they see the uncleanness and infirmity of our nature. For this very reason—because we see that we cannot bring to God merits and worthiness—Paul expounds grace, that is, the gratuitous forgiveness and acceptance because of Christ. Although you do not bring worthiness to God, come before him with trust in Christ, the Mediator, as he says: '"'Having this high priest, let us approach the throne of grace'' [Heb. 4:14, 16].
I have added these refutations so that I might satisfy (as best I could) the learned who argue about the real meaning of the language. We wish to say what is true and right, and avoid improper phrases, in order that we might instruct learners so they may refute scholastic sophistries with greater skill.
And I hope that these examples will be useful—first to make clear, and also to sharpen the care with which students learn. For these refutations show that there is need for learning and for a certain amount of practice for those who are attempting to explain such controversies skillfully. Students should not think that those are undertaking a light burden who want to defend an explanation of the Christian doctrine are undertaking a light burden. I pray that God may guide the studies of the godly, and not permit the light of the Gospel and the true knowledge of Christ to be extinguished in the church.
Chapter | la. Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, a called apostle An inscription, such as is customary in letters, is placed at the beginning, in a manner most useful for the church, in order that it may be known for certain that the doctrine has been divinely received, preaching not about everyday matters which reason judges, but about the will of God. Thus the fathers, in order that they might know whence the doctrine had been handed down, said expressly: *'The God of Abraham, the God of Israel,'' in order that that Word might be understood and those acts of worship embraced which God taught to Abraham, etc. There the very first authors must be considered through whom the true knowledge of God and the promise of the Gospel has been propagated, lest one rashly think that the profession rose by chance, as sO many superstitions in the world either arose by chance or were excited by the devil in order to obscure true religion.
Now this is the sum and substance of the inscription: The Apostle Paul wishes grace and peace for the Romans. But there is inserted a somewhat longer description of the office of Paul and a description of the Gospel. And there is an important reason why he mentions his office—so the church may know that the teaching of Paul must be believed as the voice of God sounding from heaven. Just as Moses prefaced his teaching [cf. Ex. 20:1] ''The Lord our God spoke all these words'' so the people would know that it was not a human doctrine that was being set forth but one surely and expressly taught by God. Thus Paul says by way of preface that he is an apostle not chosen by human judgment, but by the voice of Christ, and that he is bringing a Gospel that is divinely taught, and that this teaching which he sets forth— about the Law, the promises, sin, grace, and faith—is not a human invention, but was divinely revealed and commended to him so that he would teach it to the church. Therefore it is not in vain that he here and elsewhere continues to mention his office and emphasizes his titles. We must be reminded of these in order that we may read Paul not as we read Ambrose or Augustine (only as a learned interpreter of the prophetic Scripture) but as one who certainly brings the heavenly doctrine to which it is necessary to assent. Here moreover the call of an apostle must be clearly distinguished from the call of the bishop.
An apostle has been immediately called by Christ to teach the Gospel, and he has a sure testimony with respect to his doctrine—that it is divine—
Commentary on Romans and it is certain that he has the Holy Spirit, that he does not err in doctrine, and that he is able to teach everywhere in all churches.
A bishop, however, has been called by men to teach the Gospel in a certain place, and he can err; neither is it necessary that one be certain that he has the Holy Spirit.
From these descriptions many things can be judged. For as the prophets in the people of Israel were far superior to the priests, and did many heroic things which the Law did not permit to the other priests, so the apostles have a call that is far superior to that of other bishops. They abrogate law. They call Gentiles into the fellowship of the people of God; they explain obscure articles about the Messiah—that he is the Son of God, that his kingdom will not be a political one. They expressly impart remission of sins, which the Levitical priests had by no means done. They explain the article about the righteousness of faith, which few among the people of the law had previously heard. Bishops must accept the sayings of the apostles, not introduce a new or different kind of doctrine. In order that Paul might remind all about the authority of his doctrine, he mentions his call when he says: "*A servant of Jesus Christ, a called apostle.'' Origen here ineptly orates about liberation from ceremonies and about the slavery of Paul, by which he was bound to ceremonies before his conversion. Such declamations don't belong to this passage. Paul here is not speaking of private servitude, but of his office. He calls himself a servant, that is, a minister performing an office pertaining to the kingdom of Christ.
1b. Called!
This can be understood better from the Epistle to the Galatians [1:1], where he adds that he had not been called by men or through men, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father. He indicates this here when he calls himself not an ordinary preacher, but a called apostle. At this time these statements must be opposed to the Papists, whose impudence is so great that they dare to say openly that one is not to believe Paul any more than the Roman pontiff or the bishops. They imagine Paul to be some beggar or vagabond who wanders about without authority and stubbornly quarrels about religion. However, having heard that he is called an apostle, we should think that he is preaching with prophetic authority and receive what he says as the voice of God sounding from heaven. If we think in this way, his statements will greatly strengthen us.
' Our 1540 edition has Vocatus Apostolus, "Called Apostle."'
Romans |
lc. Separated for the gospel of God He expressly names the kind of business which was commanded to him.
He says that he had been chosen for propagating the Gospel. The reader should remember already here that there is a very great difference between these two, between the Law and the Gospel. We have both spoken above in the preface about this distinction, and will have to speak of it below in the third chapter. He also adds a description of the Gospel. The Gospel is a promise, divinely made, handed down in Holy Scripture, about the Son of God, Jesus, born of the seed of David according to the flesh, but declared to be the Son of God, empowered through the sanctifying Spirit, raised from the dead, who is the Messiah or King, through whom liberation is made from sin and eternal death.
_ This definition will become clearer if an antithesis of Law and Gospel is established. The Law is the doctrine which teaches what manner of persons we ought to be and what we must do, requiring perfect obedience, not promising remission of sins gratis, not liberating us from sin and death, but rather giving sin weapons when it accuses us and oppressing us with deadly terrors.
But the Gospel is a promise, which promises us remission of sins gratis, and liberation from sin and death through the Son of God, born of the descendants of David, according to the promises, and sanctifying us with divine power by means of eternal life. These parts will be explained more fully below.
However Paul in the beginning at once sets forth the definition, in order that we might know what is being taught, and might diligently distinguish the Law from the Gospel, as though he were saying: Paul, divinely called for teaching the Gospel about Christ, not for teaching the law or philosophy.
2. Through the prophets in the Holy Scriptures He inserts this in order that he may meet an unspoken objection. When a new kind of doctrine is being professed, Pharisees will undoubtedly speak against it. Since there has always been from the beginning of the world a church of God, it must have held the doctrine necessary for salvation. Therefore the Pharisees asked whether it held the doctrine of the apostles. If it did not hold it, the Pharisees shout, it is new and an invention.
Paul answers yes—it is one and the same Gospel about the Messiah, the Gospel promised to the fathers, shown to the prophets, and now proclaimed.
We are not bringing a doctrine that was unknown to the fathers and prophets (but now buried by you through human opinions about righteousness of the Law), about a political reign of the Messiah. You revile this doctrine as new and invented because you do not understand what kind of liberation the patriarchs and the prophets preached. You imagine that you are righteous through
Commentary on Romans the Law, that the Messiah will come to occupy a kingdom of this world, that he will give you provinces to rule, and that you may abound in riches and pleasures. That is the liberation which you intoxicated people dream about.
But they expected a Messiah who would abolish sin and death with divine power, who would destroy the reign of the devil. That was the intention of the promise in which the Seed is promised who will crush the head of the serpent.
In the same way the Papists now oppose to us the church. They shout that we are bringing a doctrine that is unknown to the church. We deny that loudly and testify that our doctrine shone forth in the church of the patriarchs, the prophets, the apostles, and from then on among the godly. We quote the testimonies of the church, namely, the prophets, the apostles, and other godly men. Fer no kind of doctrine ought to be received which was always unknown to the true church of Christ. But now for many centuries the understanding of the true church has been obscured. Popes, priests, and monks scattered false and Pharisaical opinions in the church about righteousness through works. They contrived superstitious observances, heaped up heathenish superstitions, invocation of the dead, clear idol-mania, and profaned the Lord's
Supper with horrible impiety.
These things were contrived partly through superstition, partly for the sake of gain, and partly for the sake of strengthening tyranny. This assembly of godless popes and monks is not the church of Christ. They unjustly arrogate this most honorable title to themselves when they oppose to us their invented authority, not the authority of the true church. Therefore Paul admonishes us in this passage lest dogmas be received without testimonies of the divine
Scripture. He also admonishes us that we should demand the statements of the true church, and that we distinguish the true church from the false.
3. Concerning His Son He opposes also this little expression to the common persuasions of the Jews. The Jews expected a Messiah who would not be by nature the Son of God but only a man, similar to the other prophets in that he surpasses the common people in wisdom, justice, and success in managing affairs, so that he would easily occupy the rule of the world. However, the patriarchs and the prophets knew that the Messiah is the Son of God who would also govern and help them. Jacob says: *'The Angel who delivered me from all evils bless these boys'' [Gen. 48:16]. There he shows that he is speaking about the liberator, whom he knew was promised. For the office of this person is to deliver from all evils. In addition to Jacob, Moses and Daniel saw Him. To testify that the Messiah is the Son of God and that He was always present with the fathers, John says [cf. John 1:1 ff.]: ''In the beginning was the Word;
Romans |
all things were made by him .
*' indicating that all the glorious victories of Noah, Abraham, Joseph, Moses, Samuel, David, Isaiah, and Jeremiah were won by our leader and champion against the devil.
Paul is also preaching here about the two natures in the Messiah. He calls him the Son of God to censure the error of the Jews, even as Christ himself censured it in John 5 and frequently elsewhere. Paul is speaking of the person, and fittingly applies the term Son of God to the person. This term is to be applied not only to the divine nature, but to the person of Christ.
This, he testifies, is composed of two natures; he says that the Son of God, according to the flesh, is born of the seed of David. Therefore he declares that there is in Christ a human nature. This passage refutes the Manichaeans and many others who took away the human nature from Christ or denied that it had been received from the blood of the virgin mother. Afterward he preaches about the divine nature when he says: *'Who had been declared to be the Son of God, powerful through the sanctifying Spirit, by the resurrection from the dead'' [1:4].
4. There is particular emphasis in the word OptoG€evtoc (declared), which the Greeks explain by the word Gmoderxy8EVTOG (pointed out). The meaning is that this person was certainly acknowledged to be the Son of God through these testimonies: that he rose from the dead; that he showed his boundless power by many miracles, as when he resurrected Lazarus; that he now gives to the church the Holy Spirit, who strengthens the minds against the devil and performs many great miracles. Paul, too, revived a dead hearer, and all things were then full of miracles done by the apostles, who asked these gifts from the Son of God. Therefore Paul is speaking of the testimony with respect to us. On account of these testimonies it is declared with certainty and established that this Jesus is the Son of God by nature, since he has divine and immeasurable power. That is what the word opiCeo@an signifies: to be declared with certainty.
He opposes all these things to Jewish opinions. They expected an outstanding Messiah who still was a man, having only a human nature and being glorious through his heroic victories, who would give wealth, not a new nature and eternal life. But Paul says that this Messiah will be powerful, both to give the sanctifying Spirit, through whom there will be begun in the believers a new light, righteousness, and life eternal, and to overcome the devil. This, he says, is the true liberation which the fathers both understood and experienced in the exercises of faith as they fought against the devil, against death, and in various dangers. It is a far greater liberation than the one expected by you who think the Messiah will partition out provinces, as Alexander dis-
Commentary on Romans tributed kingdoms to comrades in war. Paul censures these errors in this brief description.
When he calls this person the Christ, he lets us look in our mind at all the old promises in the Prophets in order that we may see that they truly agree with this proclamation of the Gospel, so we may kindle in ourselves faith through consideration of the benefits of Christ, and so we may call upon him.
Unless faith is exercised in invocation, the kingdom and presence of Christ cannot be understood.
It would take a long time to explain these great things as their greatness demands. Since there must be a certain limit to comments, I shall not dwell longer on this inscription, particularly because the same things recur frequently. The pious reader, informed about the plan of the author and about the sum and substance of the content, will contemplate the greatness of the matters with diligent meditation and will learn how this knowledge of Christ should shine forth in life, in invocation, in dangers, and in every act. By doing so the Son of God may be powerful also for us, a liberator from sin, from death, and from the devil. He will be our high priest, making intercession for us with God. He will be our leader who will help us in our calamities, even as he promises aid to the weak when he says: '""Come to me all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest'? [Mt. 11:28].
The simple syntax of the words should be diligently observed. Such observation brings much light to the sentence. The apostle Paul was called as a teacher of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, who was born from the offspring of David's second flesh and was declared to be the Son of God through the resurrection and the gift of the Holy Spirit. Paul desires the salvation of the Romans.
5-6. Through whom we have received grace Although above, when he calls himself an apostle, he says that he had been separated or chosen for the task of teaching the Gospel, he had not said he had been expressly called by Christ. Here he adds this expressly: '*Through whom we have received grace,'' that is, reconciliation with God, and ''the office of an apostle for obedience of faith,' that is, that the faith might be obeyed, or of preaching the Gospel about faith. **Among all Gentiles''—he adds this in order that he might testify in passing that the Gentiles are to be called to the Gospel. Furthermore, I have said above thatthe authority of his mandate for his office is defended in order that we may know that this preaching of Paul must be believed. If you read Paul, you should not think that you are reading a human disputation, but that you are hearing God himself speaking with you.
Romans |
7. Grace to you and peace First he wishes for them grace, that is, reconciliation and the gift of the Holy Spirit. Thereafter peace, that is, the other good things for which there is need. For peace generally signifies, after the Hebrew custom, favorable and joyous things. The church also has need of many gifts: purity of doctrine, increase of virtues, harmony, constancy, food, and hospitality. All these are embraced in the word peace. He links together God the Father and the Lord
Jesus Christ, first to remind us that grace and the other things are given to us by God on account of His Son, the Mediator. He does this also so that we may know how these things can possibly concern us, namely, if we pray on account of the Son. Thirdly, it signifies that Christ is by nature God, reigning with equal power together with the Father, aiding us with divine power, as is promised 'in the Psalm: God raises up all who are cast down, and lifts up all who are crushed [cf. Ps. 113:7].
8—16. The introduction The part of a speech must be diligently distinguished, for some things are treated in one place, others in another. Here he prepares the minds of the readers, as is done in introductions. He is not yet concerned with the main issue. But he sets forth certain rhetorical matters. He congratulates them on their knowledge of the Gospel. He shows his good will toward them. He says he wants to aid their zeal. Then he adds causes taken from the function of an apostle.
The learned know that such a reminder of our good will is customary in introductions, and it is not difficult to combine the parts of an introduction with everyday precepts. It consists of four parts: I congratulate you on your knowledge of the Gospel, and I wish that this knowledge may increase in you. Thereafter the proposition of the introduction follows: I desire to instruct you face to face. To this he immediately adds the adversative: But until now the churches in these regions held me back so that I could not come to you.
In the third place there follows the reason for his purpose—why he desires to teach them in person: Because, he says, I must aid the study of the Gospel with all, the learned and the unlearned. All these things belong to the matter of gaining good will.
The other cause gains the attention of the reader, being taken from the dignity of the Gospel: *'I am not ashamed of the Gospel" [Rom. 1:16]. This word he opposes to the judgment of all the ungodly. For the Epicureans in the world, of whom there is a great multitude, despise the Gospel, and think it is a fraud and a dumb invention. Most governing persons of the state also cruelly hate this kind of teaching, by which they think the calm of the citizens
Commentary on Romans and of the ungodly is disturbed. They desire to extinguish it as a torch kindling seditions and discords among citizens. In addition to them the hypocrites, fascinated by superstitions, and then the Jews, and at this time the monks and persons similar to them hate the Gospel much more intensely, because they think that it brings disgrace on God, since it scolds superstitious acts of worship which those persons admire as the highest piety and ceremonies of the angels.
And the devil, burning with intense hatred for Christ, increases and strengthens these furies in the ungodly, looking for opportunities by which he is able to irritate, impel, and inflame the minds of everyone. He holds them captive and incites them, throwing various opportunities before them, as the power of the devil is seen in idol-mania and other horrendous lapses.
Lucian tells of a certain person who violently loved the statue of Venus and was accustomed to embrace it, crying and kissing it. And many things could be told from the histories which are dreadful to hear. Since they are alien from the common custom of nature, it is quite clear that they have really sprung from the devil. When we read these things, let us consider that the devil does not have an idle sovereignty, but dreadfully impels the ungodly to wicked crimes. Therefore we are not surprised that he is able to kindle hatred and savagery in hypocrites and tyrants.
The Pharisees saw that the ceremonies of the Law and their traditions had been abolished. Therefore they raged and complained that disgrace was being done to God, that works that please God were being forbidden, and that permission to sin was being granted. Then they saw that, with the Law abolished, their civil power was changed, the distinction between priest and people confused, the foremost ornament of the state taken away, namely the honored priestly function. Such a change is very painful to the wise. The devil increased these flames; he inflamed the authorities to cruelty, to the killing of the apostles.
So also at this time we are most proudly being ridiculed by the Epicureans because we do not consider the Gospel an invention, because we seriously think that it should be obeyed. Kings and rulers angrily assert that the dissimilarity in doctrine disturbs the tranquility of states. Popes are unwilling for idolatry to be repudiated, lest their authority be shaken. The monks fear for their profits. A few, fascinated by superstition, contend that good works are being forbidden. From so many causes there is immense hatred for the Gospel. But we, on the other hand, declare with great conviction that the profession of the Gospel must not be cast off. We are not ashamed of this doctrine. For it is not a foolish fable nor is it a barbarous superstition. It is the statement of God, divinely revealed, by which he wants to impart to humans eternal salvation.
P Romans |
God is the Founder of all things, and of the human race. He did not want the human race simply to perish, since he had founded it so that the knowledge of God might shine forth in it. Therefore he revealed himself from the beginning to the patriarchs with sure testimonies, and taught them the Gospel. Neither is there any other doctrine which had been received on sure authority, or confirmed with true heavenly testimonies except this doctrine of the Gospel. Therefore we do not reject it, but obey it, and we know that God will truly give what he promises here. Therefore let us firmly fix this
Statement of Paul in our mind: *'I am not ashamed of the Gospel'? [Rom.
1:16], in order that it may uphold us against the judgments of the ungodly.
Although Paul is not yet arguing in this introduction, nevertheless these ethical teachings contain five useful subjects.
The first is about Spiritual worship. He says he serves God in his spirit, through the task of preaching. This, he teaches, is the foremost act of worship: to teach and learn the Gospel. Studenis and the godly ought to remember this in order that they may offer these acts of worship to God with greater concern.
The second is about mutual strengthening. Paul desires to teach and strengthen them, and in turn to be encouraged by them. Concerning this mutual strengthening, Christ says to Peter: ''And you, when you are converted, strengthen your brethren'' [Lk 22:32]. It is good for the godly to hear the testimonies of the godly and experienced about the doctrine.
The third is about the apostolic office. | am a debtor, he says, to the wise and to the unwise. Surely, these words seem boastful. The apostle dares to say that he can teach even the wise. To the foremost Romans, what arrogance this was that a wandering Jew should promise that he was a teacher even of the wise! Of all those who are outstanding in intelligence and learning and who have convinced themselves that they are holy, the Romans in particular admire themselves excessively and demand that divine honors be shown them. I have seen some like that. Such look down on Paul with scorn and ridicule these words in which he says that he is a teacher of the wise. But we remember that he is an apostle who brings not a human doctrine, but a heavenly one. As Elijah, Elisha, and Isaiah were teachers and guides of kings and high priests, so let us also hear Paul. Wise men should not be ashamed to hear from God, since we experience so often how shamefully human wisdom hallucinates and goes far astray, as all wise men complain. And God says [1 Cor. 1:19]: ''I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,"' as the histories of all times show, and daily life testifies.
It belongs to the office of an apostle to teach both the wise and the unwise. He must also adjust to a weak understanding, as Paul says in | Cor.
3[:1-2]: ''I addressed you as men of the flesh, as infants in Christ; I fed you with milk.'' Teachers and rulers of churches should set forth what is useful
Commentary on Romans and adjust themselves to the capacity of the learners. When inexperienced and unlearned persons do not hear things clearly explained, they conceive false persuasions, as I have often noticed.
Now let popes and monks be compared with the picture Paul paints. Paul says that he must teach; he has been obligated to this task by a command of God. But popes do not even want to teach, but only preserve their rule in a tyrannical manner. In the church they have strengthened idolatry (which has its origin in the devil) namely, profanation of the Lord's Supper, invocation of idols, monkery, and similar things. They have strengthened lusts by the wicked law of celibacy. Now, admonished, they resolutely hold fast to vile errors and shame, and do not even use doctrine as a pretext. They confess that they err, but they say wealth, power, and authority must be fought for.
Therefore they defend their crimes with cruel punishments, even as Nebuchadnezzar commanded all who would not worship his statue to be cast into the fiery furnace [cf. Dan. 3:6]. In truth, there is as great a difference between an apostle and a tyrant as between the good angels and the devils. For good teachers are also called angels of God in Malachi [2:7], and a tyrant is truly an instrument of the devil in the world.
Therefore let us diligently weigh these words of Paul, which testify that popes who are adversaries of the Gospel are not to be considered as bishops or successors of the apostles, but to be avoided as tyrants and cast out of the true church. A bishop is a debtor to the conscience of his subject, so he ought not to impose a law on him, such as the law of celibacy, which cannot be obeyed without crimes and offense against God.
Moreover, what about the servants of the tyrants, the writers and monks whom they teach? They propose childish traditions to the wise about dress, about foods, and about the pomp of ceremonies. They adorn these and now are beginning to picture them eloquently, even as now certain ones invent allegories of gestures in the church to excuse the superstition. What good does this teaching do for the wise? They are being called back to a childish discipline and to the poor elements of the world, whereas they ought to hear a doctrine unknown to reason about inner vices, doubting, mistrust, carnal security, admiration of our own wisdom and righteousness, and weakness seeking human aid contrary to the commandments of God, as the kings of Judah sought refuge—now with the Assyrians, now with the Egyptians— when they mistrusted God. They needed to be raised up again by true, spiritual comforts, lest they fall prostrate when human counsels and human errors deceived them. This is the doctrine of the wise, in which the knowledge of God grows.
How do they teach the ignorant? Two kinds of teaching are dominant among our adversaries: Labyrinths of questions in the Lombard, which not
A Romans |
even the professors understand, and excerpted summaries from canon law, which gather sins against human traditions. Each of these is endless, full of errors and perplexity. Before these times many good men wished for emendation of the church's doctrine. What matters is that there are as many idolatries as there are futile arguments in one-fourth of the sentences: whether a mouse, gnawing on a part of the sacrament, gnaws the body of the Lord? I shudder to report this. There they ought to have reminded people that the sacraments are actions, not shows foreign to the instituted use of the sacrament. I could cite many examples of idle questions, but there are books available which show sufficiently that there was need for emendation of the doctrine. The little verse of Ovid is well-known:
"No one can teach what he does not sufficiently know."'
The first concern of one who teaches the Gospel must be that he himself rightly holds the sum of the Christian doctrine. Then he will be able to choose what is useful for teaching—both for instructing the unlearned and for admonishing and correcting the wise, as Paul corrected Peter, Isaiah corrected
Hezekiah, etc.
The fourth subject is consolation. He confirms this by his own example when he says: "'I am not ashamed of the Gospel'' [Rom. 1:16], lest we be deterred from the Gospel by the judgments of the world. Although Epicureans ridicule us as insane because we do not think that the Gospel is a foolish fable, and although tyrants and hypocrites attempt to destroy the name of Christ with the great severity of punishments, we nevertheless do not permit ourselves to be drawn away from this kind of doctrine, and we know that this profession is glorious for us in the sight of God, his Son, the good angels, and the entire church. Let us look upon these judgments, and let us know that through this doctrine there are offered to us the promised benefits, namely, reconciliation and eternal life.
The fifth subject is an important and memorable saying about the ministry of the Word, namely, that remission of sins, the Holy Spirit, and the beginning of eternal life are given through the Word of the Gospel when it is heard, read, or pondered. When minds are sustained in the midst of fears by the voice of the Gospel, the Holy Spirit at the same time is at work, as is said below: ''Faith comes by hearing'? [Rom 10:17]. This word means the same when he says: ''The Gospel is the power of God for salvation for everyone who believes'' [Rom. 1:16], that is, it is the instrument through which God works and gives the Holy Spirit—not as the Pharisees imagine, ex opere operato [from the fact that a work has been performed] without cogitation of the mind—but God commands the Gospel to be accepted by faith. And when the mind accepts it, it fights against fears and mistrust. Therefore it is said
Commentary on Romans to the. Galatians [3:14]: "In order that we may receive the promise of the Spirit through faith." He adds a summary of the Gospel, which is the purpose of the whole disputation which follows: "The righteousness of God is revealed in it from faith to faith" [Rom. 1:17]. This is the sum of all the benefits of Christ.
For God is present with the reconciled; he gives them new light and eternal life, and hears and defends them in all calamities. Therefore, when he mentions the righteousness of God, he embraces all the benefits of Christ.
Moreover, let the nature of the speech be observed. The righteousness of God, that is, divine acceptance by which God receives and approves of us, is revealed in the Gospel. Also the antithesis must be noted, as if he said:
Formerly you had the Law, in which the righteousness of the Law is revealed, but on account of the Law you did not yet have the righteousness of God; that is, you were not yet accepted by God. But in the Gospel there is revealed the righteousness of God, that is, acceptance by which God is now certainly propitious toward you, forgives your sins, and accounts you righteous. Therefore there follows: He revealed it from faith to faith [Rom. 1:17]. This also is opposed to the righteousness of the Law, as if he said: The Law teaches that righteousness is to satisfy the Law: but now there is revealed the righteousness by faith, that is, righteousness imputed through mercy. For whenever we read the word faith, there comes immediately to mind the correlative, namely, by the promised mercy. The speech of Paul smells of the Hebrew way of speaking, for Cicero speaks differently when he says of Caesar: "Your right hand, outstanding in faith (faithfulness)." The way of speaking in Paul must be observed, where faith signifies confidence in the mercy promised because of Christ. When he mentions the righteousness of faith, he understands a righteousness which is imputed through mercy. He opposes this to the righteousness of the Law, which had to be perfect obedience according to the Law. Since no one could furnish this, because this poor nature of man is a slave to sin, there is revealed in the Gospel a new righteousness, namely, a righteousness imputed through mercy.
But this must be accepted by faith, that is, by knowledge of and confidence in Christ, as Isaiah [53:11] says: "The knowledge of Christ will justify many." It is as if he said: Since men are not righteous or accepted by God through the Law, but have sins, God wants to forgive them their sins and to be propitious, if they acknowledge that he wants to impart these benefits because of His Son, who is the sacrificial victim and the appeaser. This is the simple and natural explanation.
He says [Rom. 1:17]: "From faith to faith," that is, from an imperfect faith to one more perfect. Mercy is indeed revealed, but it does not come to all because God wants it to be accepted by faith. Since many are unwilling to accept it and spurn this unspeakable goodness, they perish. Faith is not idle knowledge, but needs to grow through constant battle, through calling
; Romans | Wil on God, in all pursuits and dangers. May this always shine in our hearts— that God is propitious to us on account of Christ, the Mediator, and that he will help. And let us call upon him in this faith and ask him to guide us in all undertakings and dangers. In this way, faith and true knowledge of God will increase in the hearts of the godly. He adds a testimony to show that what he set forth is the true meaning, namely, that men are justified by faith, so the hearer may know that the Pauline proclamations truly agree with the prophetic proclamations and that the apostles are restoring the doctrine of the prophets.
17. The rightous man lives by faith There is a clear antithesis in Galatians, where he says [Gal. 3:1 1-12]:
'That no one is justified by the Law is clear, because the righteous shall live by faith. The Law is not of faith, but whoever does these things will live through them." Here he clearly says that the righteousness of the Law is to do the Law, that is, to render perfect obedience to the Law. But no one renders this. Therefore another righteousness is set forth, namely, righteousness imputed through mercy to the believer, who seeks refuge in mercy. When the prophet says [Hab. 2:4]: *'The just shall live by faith,'' he teaches that we shall be just not when we look to the Law, not when we set out virtues and deeds before God, but when we declare that God is propitious to us by faith, that is, by confidence in mercy, that he hears us, wants to save us, and that we expect salvation. These things are on the basis of the prophetic pronouncement.
You will observe, however, that two very great praises are given to faith, namely, that we are both justified and made alive by faith. For God gave his
Son for us for this purpose, and he became propitious to us for this purpose, that we may not perish, as he swears: "*As I live, I do not want the death of the sinner, but that he may be converted and live'? [Ez. 33:11]. When a terrified mind states by faith that sins have been forgiven him, it is set free at the same time from fears and receives true consolation, which is the beginning of eternal life in us, as Christ says: *'This is life eternal, that they know you as the true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent'' [John
17:3]. Therefore we should know that to remission of sins and reconciliation there is joined the gift of the Holy Spirit. We should know that the rule of Christ in the church, that is, for the righteous, is not an idle thing, but that the Son of God is truly present with us, that he truly destroys the works of the devil, that he fights for the believers and helps and preserves them. All these things are embraced in the words of the prophet when he promises life, that is, joy, victory, and eternal salvation to the believer.
But certain deceivers slander the statements quoted by Paul and say they
G2 Commentary on Romans have been badly distorted to the Pauline cause. This, they say, was what Paul was driving at, that people are reconciled to God through faith in Christ, but the prophet is not speaking about Christ in that passage. Likewise, when he elsewhere cites a statement about the faith of Abraham: Abraham believed that he would have descendants propagated from him [cf. Rom. 4:18]. What, they say, has this faith to do with the cause of Paul? I answer: The rule must be held fast, that also when faith has to do with corporeal objects or benefits, faith in the believer always comes before expectation of corporeal benefits.
This faith is faith in mercy, and accepts the forgiveness of sins. Jacob expects defense against enemies, David expects victory, but they expect it because they believe they have a propitious God. For the conscience is not able to ask and to expect other benefits from God if it feels that he is angry with us, and that he will not hear us. Therefore it is necessary that confidence in mercy always come beforehand. And the sayings about faith in general always embrace the article about the remission of sins. Thus in our daily prayer, when we pray for daily bread, we should remember that our petition is heard if God is propitious to us, and that he is propitious on account of Christ. There follows at once: ''And forgive us our debts"" [Mt. 6:12].
If someone asks, '"'Whence did the fathers know this doctrine about confidence in mercy and about the forgiveness of sins?" | answer: The prophets fought about this article with the teachers of the Law. Therefore all the Psalms, all the pronouncements of the prophets proclaim with a loud voice that men are not just by the law, and inculcate proclamations about mercy.
And Isaiah [53:5, 10] says expressly that the Messiah will be the sacrificial victim for sin. Therefore they repeated the promise first given to Adam, afterward to Abraham, about the liberator who would come. They understood that God had promised reconcilation on account of this liberator and bringer of blessing concerning whom it was said [Gen. 3:15]: He will crush the serpent's head. They looked upon this promise and knew that the promise had to be believed; on its account they expected all other benefits.
To this promise about the coming liberator they referred the other promises. The prophets foretold that the people would return from Babylon because they knew that the Messiah must be born of Judah and proclaim the Gospel publicly in Zion. They look to this foremost promise when they promise other benefits, as now also we must believe that God will preserve the ministry of the Gospel, so he will preserve some ministers and provide a defense for them and other commodities necessary for life. Thus we shall include the other commodities in the promise of grace. Since God is propitious on account of Christ, we ask for the other benefits. For the church has need of the life of ministers, food, and civil peace.
This I answer in general to the statements in which mention is made of
Romans |
faith. As for the rest of the statements which Paul cites, they also preach expressly about the promised liberator. Habakkuk [3:18] speaks about the liberator who was expected, who had been promised to the fathers, as the text shows. And Abraham believed not only that he would have freedom, but that he would have seed by whom all nations were to be blessed. I know that many sophistries can be thought out by sly persons for eluding and destroying these testimonies. Human wisdom, which does not know the righteousness of faith, does not rightly accept the sayings of the prophets, but twists them in various ways. But the godly, when they look upon the consensus of the entire Scripture and the true exercises of faith, will easily understand that these sayings are rightly applied by Paul to the present cause about the remission of sins. ad 18a. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven
Dreadful is the beginning and the lightning with which he begins the disputation, similar to the beginnings in the preaching of the prophets, as in Isaiah 1[:2 ff]: "'Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth; woe to the sinful generation.
'' For the form of the prophetic and the apostolic preaching is one and the same. Christ embraced it in these words [cf. Luke 24:47]:
''Go, preaching repentance and remission of sins in my name."'
When Paul makes a very fitting examination of the Christian doctrine, he sets down the first theme which is the doctrine of repentance or accusing sins. For above he has taken care of the introduction; now he begins to explain the dispute. And he sets forth two propositions, of which the one clarifies the approach to the other.
The first proposition is: The Gospel accuses all men, and declares that all are under sin, that is, guilty of sin and of eternal death, and that they cannot be freed from sin and from eternal wrath by their own righteousness.
In this proposition he is detained by two chief points. He wants to call all to repentance. He wants us truly to fear the judgment of God in order that we may seek salvation and acknowledge the liberator, through whom reconciliation and salvation has been promised.
There follows in the third chapter the chief proposition, that people receive remission of sins and are accounted righteous and are freed from eternal death not on account of our own righteousness, but by mercy, on account of Christ, gratis. And this comes about by faith, when we believe that the Father has been placated and is propitious on account of the Son of God. That is the chief proposition of this epistle, and the point at issue in this disputation, and the sum of the Gospel.
But before he arrives at this proposition, he first treats the other, for comfort cannot be given unless sins have first been rebuked. And God de-
Commentary on Romans mands repentance, as both John and Christ begin their sermons [cf. Mt. 3:2;
4:17]: '*Repent.''? And Christ says: ''The Holy Spirit will convict the world of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment'' [John 16:8]. And Isaiah [66:2]:
''Where will the Lord dwell? In the person who is of a contrite spirit, and that trembles at my Word.'' And Paul uses stern words when he says that the wrath of God is revealed from heaven. He threatens eternal punishments to all who are not terrified and do not flee to the Son of God. Therefore you see that the statements of Paul agree, and that the order in teaching agrees with the preaching of the prophets and of Christ.
The Gospel rebukes not only outward transgressions which even reason can judge, but also the uncleanness of heart in all persons. Therefore he says
[Rom. 1:18]: The wrath of God is so revealed from heaven, that is, it 1s preached in the Gospel, which is divinely taught, against all impiety and righteousness of men. It is a Hebraism when the little word omnem (all, every) is transposed, since the meaning is: Over the ungodliness and unrighteousness of all men. For later he will say clearly and expressly that he is accusing all men.
Ungodliness (impietas) properly signifies the vices that militate against the first table: ignorance of God; to be without fear, love, and trust in God; to harbor carnal security and contempt of God; anger and raging against God in afflictions; confidence in one's own wisdom, righteousness, or wealth; to seek human aid contrary to the command of God; to place our fortunes, pleasures, reputation, glory, or life ahead of the commandments of God, as those who place these things ahead flee from the dangers of confession; to play with false, invented opinions about God; to delight in Epicurean and philosophical errors, and not truly to assent to the Word of God. Finally, there is a great mass of vices that fight against the first table, which are all embraced in the term ungodliness. Unrighteousness (iniusticia) is a general term, embracing all sins against God and men, for it signifies universal disobedience as such.
18b. They hold back the truth in unrighteousness They call the knowledge of God, or the natural law, truth. For when sins are rebuked in the preaching of repentance, the Law is being cited, as Paul says [Rom. 3:20]: "By the Law is the knowledge of sin.' He is quoting the natural law. He says all men have some knowledge of God. Through this he accuses and condemns all. Because we know the law and nevertheless do not obey it, the Law, which is the judgment of God, condemns all.
Students must first of all be admonished to distinguish Law and Gospel diligently. Some knowledge of the Law is born with us, although in the present ruined state of human nature it is darkened; nevertheless it has not been wholly
Romans | WS) . wiped out. The following are elements of the knowledge of God: there is one
God, of immeasurable power, wise, just, good; the founder and preserver of nature; punishing the unjust and criminal; hearing and saving—not gratis, not those guilty of sin—but the righteous and pure; that God must be obeyed: that he commands what is honorable, and prohibits shameful deeds; that he implanted in our minds the distinction between what is honorable and what is shameful. These are things known by nature, which we constantly hear speaking to us in our conscience. Natural reason does not know gratuitous forgiveness or reconciliation because of Christ, but has knowledge of the Law which requires the condition of our obedience. It judges that only those who are without sin please God. This is the natural voice of the conscience.
The Gospel promises gratuitous forgiveness and reconciliation because of the Son of God. Thrs knowledge is not born with us, but has been divinely revealed, as John [1:18] says: **The Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he had told us."' And because it disagrees with the natural voice of conscience and with the handwriting written against us in our minds, it is difficult to assent to the promise of gratuitous reconciliation. The reader should remember this at the very start, that the natural knowledge of God is a certain knowledge of the Law, lest he hastily confuse Law and Gospel.
Paul's preaching is wonderful and far superior to the thinking of the philosophers. He says that there is in us knowledge which he calls truth. But the Epicureans and Academicians bury this knowledge. Being liars, they also fight with the nature of man itself. For there inheres in us some knowledge of God, as has been said.
Paul adds that this knowledge is held back in unrighteousness, that is, the will or heart of man does not assent to this knowledge or obey it. It looks into the human mind much more inwardly than do the philosophers. Here it finds very great vices. The mind says there is some kind of God, but because it sees that the wicked prosper and harshly oppress the good and that the good are even cruelly killed by criminals and tyrants, it begins to doubt whether
God is concerned about human affairs, whether he punishes criminals or rewards the good. It judges that God either is not concerned about human affairs, or that he is cruel because he has burdened so weak a nature with such great calamities. From this doubi and darkness spring many vices. The heart is devoid of fear, trust, and love of God, and since it is without a rein, it obeys desires which are contrary to natural knowledge. Although Paris knows that it is unjust to snatch the wife of another, he nevertheless follows the custom of his desire, scorning God.
Paul learnedly describes human weakness, grants man a certain amount of knowledge, and nevertheless testifies that man does not assent to that knowledge, and that his will or heart does not obey it because it is turned
Commentary on Romans away from God, without divine impulses. It loves itself, not God. Therefore it is carried along by varied wrong impulses against the commandment of God. Paul indicates all these things when he says that the truth is held back like a prisoner in unrighteousness, that is, by perversion of will or heart, which is, as is said below, enmity against God.
19-20. For to the extent that God can be known, he is known to them The explanation of the above proposition is as follows: Here he appeals to the natural law and tells expressly what that truth is in the minds of men which rebukes and accuses us. It is, he says, knowledge about God, and other items of knowledge, which are called the natural law. The connection of the words must be observed: ''The invisible things of him, namely his eternal power and divinity, are clearly seen from the creation of the world, being known from his works'' [Rom. 1:20]. His divinity and eternal power means that he is God, eternal, powerful, wise, just, good, punishing the unjust, hearing and aiding the just. These things, I say, the mind acknowledges when it looks upon the creation of the world. For it concludes these things about God from the many traces in the creation. It would not conclude these things if there were not implanted in the mind a certain knowledge or preconception about God. Therefore he says earlier: God had showed it to them [cf. Rom.
1:19]. But the mind, admonished by the sight of the world and the order of the work, thinks that these things cannot have come into existence or have originated by chance, but that they have without doubt been founded and arranged by some eternal mind.
There is no doubt that humans were created chiefly so that the knowledge of God might shine forth in them. God wanted to reveal himself and be known and honored by the human race. There shines in the human mind a wonderful and clear light and noteworthy knowledge about God, implanted in him at his creation. And if there had not come to it a darkness through original sin, the human mind would have been like a mirror, showing (to express it in this way) the image, that is, many clear facts of the knowledge about God. This is why it is written that the mind is a certain image of God.
Neither is there any doubt that the whole world was created so that it might give testimony about God. The order of the works shows clearly that these things could not have originated by chance. And if human naturé had remained whole, philosophy would be occupied chiefly with this. It would have pondered the footprints of the Deity in nature, and would have proclaimed the wisdom and goodness of the architect. But since darkness entered the minds on account of original sin, the image does not shine forth. Natural knowledge is exceedingly obscure, and the heart or will, on account of its
Romans | Tah . being turned away from God, does not sufficiently assent to this knowledge, nor fight for it constantly. It easily allows also the true knowledge of God to be driven out of itself, since other persuasions are opposed to it: This is why there has been and remains so great a disagreement about God among men.
All the philosophers were in doubt about providence, for although some were moved by nature to declare that there is a God, they doubted whether he was concerned about human affairs when they saw the prosperity of the wicked and the righteous oppressed by criminals. Troubled by this stumbling block, minds fell even more, and the devil, meanwhile, pours out even greater fogs.
Many atheists at all times have simply denied that there is a God or any eternal deity, as the Cyclops in Homer and Euripides did. But these are fighting against their own minds, and know that they are lying.
Since there is such a great darkness and levity of the human mind that even true arguments are easily driven out from us, let it be our foremost concern that we may strengthen ourselves by means of the Word of God. For also the divine Law was promulgated for this—that the knowledge of God might be renewed. Because the natural knowledge has not been completely wiped out in our minds, let us stir it up and let us notice the footprints of God in the nature of things.
In the Book of Acts it is written that God is so near to us that it is almost possible to touch him with our hands [cf. Acts 17:27]. And it is not in vain that so many footprints of God are imprinted on nature. God wants to remind us through these marks. He wants them to be considered, and the author acknowledged. Therefore let students seek out these vestiges, but in such a way that they hold fast the rule, namely, the Word of God. Surely it is useful for strengthening good opinions to hold fast to the true reasonings fixed in the mind, which testify that God is the founder and preserver of things. And a learned student of nature will be able aptly to learn many things. The philosophers who treated physical science skillfully thought more honorably about God, as for instance Galen. On the contrary, the Epicureans, even as they confused physical matters, did not want to look upon the footprints of God in nature and therefore wildly professed those Cyclopean ideas about God. Therefore I shall briefly recite nine arguments from nature which testify that God is the founder and preserver of things.
1. The most outstanding testimonies about God are the human mind, and the distinction between what is honorable and what is shameful which is impressed on the mind. From this is taken the argument: Man has a mind; man originated from elsewhere; therefore it is necessary that he have sprung from some eternal mind, because it is impossible that the mind should have originated from unreasoning nature. Of this argument also the Psalm [94:9] reminds us: ''He that made the eye, shall he not see...
Commentary on Romans 2. The distinction between things that are honorable and things that are shameful is naturally known to the human mind. This cannot have come into existence by chance or have flowed forth from unreasoning nature. Therefore it is necessary to confess that God is the originator. This argument no one can shake, even if Cyclopeans, Giants, Epicureans, Academicians, or followers of Mezentius come together and attempt to make war against heaven with combined powers. They must confess that the distinction between honorable and shameful things did not come into existence by chance, but was ordained by some mind.
3. When atrocious crimes are committed, all men naturally are afraid and judge that there is a God, and that he punishes transgressions. Therefore both concepts are implanted in the human mind, both that there is a God, and that he punishes crimes. No matter how much Mezentius rages, he must often be terrified by the consciousness of his crimes. There is a shout in his mind—even if he fights against it—that there is a God who avenges crimes.
Otherwise, why does not the mind truly rejoice after an atrocious crime, even as it truly rejoices when it remembers what was rightly done?
4. From the order of things in all nature, we see how sure are the laws that govern the movements of the heavenly bodies, how certain the number of species, and that like propagates like, not some promiscuously from others.
We see the ultimate causes of things. All things are born for some use. Also there is a wonderful agreement of superior and inferior bodies. The movements of the heavenly bodies bring about sure alternations between summer and winter for the good of the living. Why are springs and streams ever-flowing?
Why the distribution of the individual parts in the human body? Why the recognition of the number and order? Do they not testify clearly that nature did not come into existence by chance, but that they had their origin in some eternal mind? It is impossible that these things always came about as a result of chance. It is impossible that the concepts of number and order originated by chance, or from material things. O, how blind are the minds of men which are not moved by such clear arguments—by such definite footprints of divinity—to think better about God and to revere him!
5. To the consideration of order belongs also a consideration of political order. In this also there shines forth the wisdom and goodness of God, for human nature has been created for society, because it is bound together by many bonds, contracts, pacts, judgments, powers, and punishments. This whole order bears witness that the human race did not come into being by chance.
6. From the punishments of murderers and the preservation and overturning of governments, it is clear that murderers are subject to penalties, not through human diligence but divinely, in order that a society of life may be
> Romans |
preserved. Thus it is manifest that governments were established not by human powers, but by a divine being, and that they are again overturned on account of tyrannies and lusts, because God punishes heinous crimes in the civil society. For example, Tarquin was driven out, and the Lacedemonians were conquered when they had forcibly violated the daughters of a stranger and afterward killed them.
7. From the indications of future things. There are many certain indications in nature, either of the stars or of inferior bodies, and most certain and perpetual experience testifies that a coming together of wet stars in wet signs signifies rains and storms. Likewise, many signs appear without definite regularity but nevertheless signify something. Also there are true prophecies, such as those of Daniel about the sequence of kingdoms. These significations cannot have proceeded save from some eternal mind.
8. Heroic impulses are impulses that transcend human nature, and happen to men because of some great thing, as for instance from the founding of governments, or for illustrating skills useful for life. Therefore they arise from some superior nature and intelligence.
9. From the chain of causes. Causes are ordered in nature, so that it is necessary to go back to one first cause which is not set in motion from elsewhere, but moves the others. If it is the first, it is necessary that it have the power to move itself; therefore it is of infinite power. And it is necessary that there be a first one, for otherwise there would be no succession of causes if they were scattered endlessly. This argument is treated at length in physics and is sufficiently established. But the earlier arguments are superior. They are taken from the nature of the mind, from the distinction between honorable and shameful things, and from order in nature and in society. These indeed testify not only that God is the creator, but also the avenger, and they invite us to fear God. Therefore let young people make up their minds with such considerations. But the more diligently we consider these arguments, the more we agree with them, as Plato says and as we ourselves experience.
Students should know that all these arguments are laws of nature which teach that we should acknowledge God to be the founder of all things, and that we owe him obedience. And that is how Paul makes use of this subject.
Although above in the proposition he accuses all men, he now makes a distinction. First he preaches to the Gentiles, and then afterward to the Jews.
He says that the Gentiles are under sin because although they knew God, they did not glorify him as God nor give him thanks.
21. They did not honor him as God To honor God as God is to give God, the eternal Creator of things, this honor: that he is God, that is, eternal, of immeasurable power, the creator
Commentary on Romans and preserver of things, wise, just, punishing the unjust, hearing and aiding the just, and to obey him, also truly to fear his judgment, truly to believe him, and to ask and expect good things from him. We all ought to give to God this honor, and that is what he says here: honor him as God.
To give thanks is to believe that God is the creator of things, that he is concerned about us, that we receive life and all good things from him, ask and expect help and defense from him, and therefore acknowledge him as Lord and obey him (lest we be ungrateful and scorn the Lord), and glorify and proclaim his name, power, goodness, and justice.
These are the necessary works of the First and Second Commandments for which we were chiefly created. But the world does not render these things.
Therefore the voice of the Gospel at all times accuses the ungodliness of the world. For some men are atheists, others are idolaters. In these two ways men sin against the First Table of the divine Law. Atheists, as the Cyclopeans and the Epicureans, simply deny that there is a God or that he is concerned about human affairs. It is quite clear that these do not honor God, that they do not fear him, do not believe in him, and do not invoke him. They consider his name to be empty; even though they give him some honor, power, goodness, or justice. The crowd of such Cyclopeans is not small, and it is strange that the innate knowledge can thus be destroyed. But the devil, who holds the minds of men captive, pours out greater errors on a nature that is already weak. And now, indeed, some writers, particularly at Rome, consider it wisdom to take pleasure in these Cyclopic opinions.
Idolaters err in yet another way: they transfer the honor which is owed to God to other things. For it is idolatry to ascribe divinity to something which is not God, to invoke something which is not God, to give to someone other than Christ the honor of redemption to put confidence which was owed to God in our works; to tie God to certain acts of worship and to statues, contrary to his commandment; also to fear and love something other than God. This is what idolatry, as the common people call it, really embraces and signifies.
From this one can easily know that the world is full of idol-madness.
Concerning this worship, the saying of the poet is true: *'Fear first made gods in the world.'' Cyclopeans are generally carnally secure. Others who seek
God in dangers (as reason shows that God is the helper) are worried and do not seek God rightly. For since they hold opinions of the Law and think that God hears the righteous, his worshipers, who think they are well-deserving, indeed call upon him, but without the promise of grace, without knowledge of the mediator. Therefore they either doubt that they will be heard or regarded, or they adorn themselves with a foolish trust in their acts of worship, as a priest says in Homer: *'O Phoebe if I have slaughtered victims that are pleasing to you, then hear me.
Romans |
The first act of impiety is that they are either doubtful that they will be heard by God, or that they put confidence in their own righteousness and do not know the mediator. When this error has gained entrance, many crimes follow. Confidence in their own acts of worship moves people to heap up ceremonies and to think out new acts of worship and new gods. For instance, when rural people thought that good weather was achieved by ceremonies, they instituted an act of worship and they brought certain sacrifices before the statue of Jupiter the thunderer. When soldiers thought that they could get victories from God by means of ceremonies, they instituted an act of worship and brought certain sacrifices before the statue of Mars. Thus human daring devised new acts of worship through confidence in works without a commandment trom God, yes, against the commandment of God. Going even farther astray, minds also attributed a certain divinity to statues and thereafter some attributed divinity to other things, wherever the devil impelled them or where some other affection drew them. Divinity was attributed to statues, and to cattle.
Neither should examples be sought only of Gentiles. What is being done now? People invoke the dead, precisely as the Gentiles in ancient times invoked Hercules or Romulus. And different people have different divinities:
Soldiers invoke George, sailors Nicolaus, the greedy Anna. People run to statues after the manner of the Gentiles, and divinity is either attributed to the statues themselves, or God is bound to the statues with the opinion that he is more favorable at this statue, although God is not willing to be bound to anything at which he does not command—with an express command—that he should be invoked. There is manifest idolatry in the world, and popes and kings approve and defend it. At Paris they allowed a wooden statue of Mary, perhaps in order to restrain the superstition of the people. It was replaced by another one of silver, with the result that idol-madness was strengthened.
Then there is manifold idolatry in various acts of worship. They give to the mass and to vows the honor owed to Christ, saying that they make satisfaction for sins and that they merit forgiveness of sins.
Since ungodliness remains, namely, Epicurean security and superstition of every kind, let us repent. Let us seek the Word of God, and let us learn rightly to worship and invoke God in true faith. Let faith and works be governed by the Word of God, according to the passage [Ps. 119:105]: "Your
Word is a lamp to my feet.'' For when one departs from this lamp, immediately endless errors rush in. Let us embrace the Word of God, and let us pray that God would set us free from all errors and ungodliness through his Son, since he gave us his Son that he might destroy the works of the devil.
Also the greatness of the punishments admonishes us to repentance.
Contempt of God and superstition are also rewarded in this life with blindness
Commentary on Romans and insanity. Men forsaken by God rush into every kind of crime, and the devil provides opportunities for minds inflamed with some lust, either love or hate. What shameful things are read in the histories; these I do not want to recite. How foul was Alexander, who saw that he had been gifted with so great a kingdom. He was boastful because he had been adorned with such an outstanding intellect. Nevertheless, while he was drunk, he killed his friends and afterward raged against the most highly deserving rulers. Finally, when he was invited to a banquet by his lover, he meted out punishments when he had fallen into a lethal sickness through his intemperance.
22-28. These and similar things, that is, the greater part of the history of the world, Paul embraces when he says: **When they boasted that they were wise, they became foolish and vain.'' For the madness of Alexander can be seen sufficiently in this great turpitude, although there was hardly any other intellect more excellent than his.
With this in mind, let us also look at the older histories and at the vices of the present times, and let us consider that they are punishments either for Cyclopean contempt of God or for idol-madness. Paul reminds us of this when he repeats a number of times that men are given over to the desires of their hearts because they did not glorify God.
Moreover, here we think of the more unlearned ones regarding the phrase:
''He gave them over to their desires,' that is, He permitted them to rush ahead. This phrase is customary among the Hebrews: "'Lead us not into temptation,'' that is, do not permit us to be led into it. These things must be understood of permission. For God is by no means the cause of sin, but the devil is, as it is written: "'Whoever commits sin is of the devil.'' [I John 3:8]
And he is truly the effective cause and instigator of these acts of madness which are here described.
29-31. Filled with all unrighteousness He adds a great heaping up and mound of sins, in order that he may also rebuke other vices. 'Adtkta (unrighteousness) is a general term, signifying all disobedience against the First and Second Tables of the divine Law, as righteousness of the Law signifies all obedience.
Tovnpta (wickedness) really signifies the desire to do harm. Kaxta (depravity) includes sins of omission, as they are called. For the Latins, turpitude is generally the opposite of virtue, so for the Greeks KaKia is the opposite of Gpety (goodness, excellence). Mark Antony is KaK6c, a spendthrift, negligent. But Domitian is tovnpoc, desiring to do harm and taking pleasure in harming others. KaKonOera really is malevolence, which is found in envious people who know how to twist skillfully what has been said simply
Romans |
and straight-forwardly. Kakonec Ln Kabapov [malicious and impure] really is the opposite of candor, for Plutarch opposes these to each other,
Malevolence is a savage illness and is often destructive to the state, since malevolent natures stir up other moderate persons, or even persons of good merit, with so much sickness of the mind,? so that Cato was not favorably inclined toward the praise of Cicero.
For this also generally comes to KOKON|GELA—the vice is covered over by a simulation of gratuity. There are verses by Menanderin in which certain kinds of men are described. These are verses in which powerful person chiefly delight:
Life delights most of all in the wicked, The flatterer achieves best of all, Second the slanderer, The malevolent person third, Who is a terrible, crafty planner of wicked things.
He gives the first place to the flatterer, for he is the sweetest. The second is the informer or tale-bearer who earns favor by carrying about and inventing tales and constructing slanders. The kaKon@N¢ holds the third place. He knows how to play on the emotions of his master, and can put a different interpretation on things honestly done and knows how to kindle hatreds.
Oeootvyetc is taken either actively or passively. It signifies persons who are openly scornful toward God, as Sennacherib and the Rabskakeh are described in the history of Isaiah, or Mezentius in Vergil, or Antiochus in the history of the Maccabees. And that age has examples of very many tyrants who openly confess that they are enemies of God.*
'Aovvetot (senseless persons) are mad persons who against the judgment of common sense blindly rush headlong into all crimes and to their end,
2 What follows is different in our 1540 edition from that of the Corpus Reformatorum.
The Latin is: ... ut Scripionis res gestas carpehat Lentulus. Item, ut Aeschines accusarit
Demosthenem, nulla lusta causa motus, sed naturae perversitate et malevolentia.
"* ... as Lentulus slandered the exploits of Scipio. Likewise, as Aeschines accused Demosthenes of rebellion without just cause, but out of a perverse nature and malice."
3 Our 1540 edition adds this paragraph:
EOEVPETUS KAKOV (inventors of evil): Greek scholia teach that with the compound epi those people are*indicated who, in addition to old evil schemes and old evil vices, think up new techniques and are the authors of new disgrace, as skillful merchants with depraved characters devise new burdens by changing just prices of coinage. Courtiers invent new pretexts of unjust plunderings, or princes with amazing techniques join or separate property, or contrive reasons for occupying the property of another. Lawyers find new deceptions in judgments, or the erudite find excuses of shame, as many with a false and sophisticated pretext of that which is at hand excuse or confirm usury in order to satisfy usurers. There are inventors of evil from whom disgraceful examples arise, as, for example, those who established contests of naked bodies in the Palestra (wrestling school) in Greece. Likewise, the first Lamech departed from the true institution of marriage, had many wives at the same time, and introduced this disgraceful custom into the world.
Commentary on Romans as Catiline and Thomas Muenzer, who madly took up arms to destroy all rulers in order to set up a plan where all things were held in common. Likewise, the good-for-nothing Monasteriensis, who called himself king of the temple of God. The prophets often say that this madness is a punishment of ungodliness. Thus Pharaoh, Saul, and others brought about their own end. They lack both a good conscience and moderate counsel.
'AovvOetot (faithless) are those not keeping agreements. LvvOnKaL are agreements in contracts and alliances.
"Aotopyot are those who cast off natural feelings toward parents, children, brethren, or people who have merited well. For otopyn signifies good affections divinely implanted in the nature of men, although now, on account of the original sickness, they go astray somewhat. But God nevertheless approves of them and wants them rightly ruled. He commands us to love our spouses, parents, and children. He commands us to be thankful. These are otopyat (natural affections). Therefore Paul condemns those hard men who cast off natural affections, as did Atreus and Thyestes in the tragedies.
"Aonovoot [found in the textus receptus of v. 31] are implacable persons, as Saul could not be placated by any service to return to grace with David. In the end Paul again appeals to the natural law and calls it the Law of God. Therefore students should remember the rule: whatever violates the natural law is a violation of the divine Law and truly a mortal sin. In the Loci
I have compared the natural law with the Decalogue which is indeed the way of teaching and sum total of the natural laws, if one understands the Decalogue rightly.
32. That those who do these things Surely, it is a strange statement which says that men know by nature that those who violate the laws of nature are worthy of death. It is easy to understand that crimes which disturb the common peace should be severely punished, like murder and theft. For a civil society could not be preserved if it were permitted with impunity to snatch other people's possessions or to kill innocent persons. Here the common good reminds rulers to establish penalties.
But why does Paul say about all vices in general that both those who do shameful things and those who consent to them are worthy of death? Should an envious person be punished with capital punishment? I answer: Paul is here not speaking of the judgment of magistrates or about punishments which are inflicted on thieves and highway robbers in behalf of peace and common welfare, but he is speaking about the private judgment of the conscience in any and all men. He looks far more deeply into the minds than either the Epicureans or the hypocrites, who, being secure and drunk with pleasures,
A Romans |
have not experienced true terrors of conscience. Saul does not judge himself to be worthy of death when, contrary to the command of Samuel, he spares the captive king. But the conscience acknowledges that a sin is worthy of death when true terrors are struck into the mind, when it sees that God has not been obeyed. This sin, as will be said below, becomes especially guilty and damned.
When Adam had tasted the apple contrary to the command, he thought the deed was not a matter of great moment. He had not yet experienced those dreadful terrors of conscience which bring death. Afterward, however, when he had been rebuked by God, he acknowledged that sin is contempt of God.
He felt that God was angry. He was terrified and would have died from the magnitude of grief if he had not been recalled from death by the divine promise. The Law, says Paul, is the power of sin [1 Cor. 15:56]. Thus the natural law in the minds of men judges and condemns sin, and shows that God is angry with every and all sin when it is truly recognized, as happens in these terrors.
Paul is here speaking of this true judgment of the conscience, and he condemns not only outward crimes but also the universal internal uncleanness, ignorance and contempt of God, and all evil lusts. Although, different passions break out more in different people—some indulge more in hatreds, others in lusts, others in avarice—nevertheless, the hearts of all wicked persons are without fear of God, without trust. They delight in wicked opinions and errors, in any and all obscene pleasures, although some are more diligent than others in reigning in these inclinations. For example, Pomponius Atticus does not commit murder, but his will is nevertheless turned away from God. He takes pleasure in the opinions of the Epicureans or of the Platonists about God, wants to live softly, and seeks tranquility without recognition of God. Finally, he has many impulses that stray away from God. That is what Paul is after when he condemns not only those who do evil but also those who approve of it, oovevdoKovvtac. Therefore, he is not speaking only of those who aid the crimes of others, as they interpret consent in court, but about all who take pleasure in such things. That really is the meaning of ovvevdoketv. He now elaborates on this statement.