Commentary on Romans, Biblical exegesis 1 · Chapter 4 · Section 5

Commentary on Romans · Biblical exegesis 1 · Chapter 4 · Section 5

p. 2215. Places of controversie.

Controv. 1. That the Apostle excludeth all kind of workes from iustification.

v. 2. If Abraham be iustified by workes: The Romanists are here of opinion, that the Apostle onelyonly excludeth such workes as were done onelyonly by the strength of nature without faith in the Mediator: so Staplet. Antid. pag. 46. who vrgeth this reason among other to confirme his opinion: the Apostle onelyonly excludeth such workes, which expect not an eternall reward with God: but the workes done in faith doe expect an eternall reward: therefore such workes he excludeth not.

Contra. 1. But the contrarie is euident that the Apostle shutteth out all workes whatsoeuer from the matter of iustification: 1. he speaketh of the workes of Abraham, now a faithfull man not an vnbeleeuer: 2. he mentioneth workes in generall without any distinction, denying iustification vntounto them, and ascribing it vntounto faith. 3. euerie thing which is rewarded ex debito, of due debt, is excluded from iustification, but to euerie worke is the wages due of debt, as vers. 4. To him that worketh the wages is counted by debt, therefore euerie worke is excluded.

2. Concerning his reason: if he vnderstand the reward which is due of debt, and not giuen by fauour, then euen the workes of faithfull men cannot expect such a reward: if he meane a reward giuen by fauour, then as well the workes which are so rewarded, as those which shall not, are excluded.

3. And as the workes of faith are excluded together with workes done before and without faith: so also not onelyonly doth the Apostle speaking of workes meane the rewardes onelyonly, but euen the workes of the morall law also: for the Apostle nameth workes in generall: and he directly afterward speaketh of the morall law, v. 15. The law causeth wrath, and where no law is, there is no transgression: which though it be true of eueryevery law in generall, yet this generally is seene in the morall law.

Controv. 2. Whether blessednesse consist onelyonly in the conuersion of sinners. v. 7.

The Romanists here obiect, that as the Apostle out of the Psalmes ascribeth beatitude to the remission and forgiuenesse of sinnes, so elswhere in Scripture it is giuen vntounto innocencie of life and to other vertues, as Psal. 119. Blessed are the vndefiled in heart, and Matth. 5. Blessed are the mercifull, blessed are the pure in heart, &c.

1. Peter Martyr answeareth here by a distinction of beatitude, which is either inchoata, begunne onelyonly, and that is in our iustification, or perfecta, it is perfect and absolute in the kingdome of God: so he will hauehave the Apostle here to speake of the blessednesse which is begunne in our iustification: but in the other places the blessednesse in the next life is promised.

2. Calvin saith that all these beatitudes which are pronounced doe presuppose the happinesse, which is in beeing iustified by faith, without the which, all the other promises are in vaine.

3. But the more full answear is, that the Apostle here sheweth the cause and manner of our iustification, which is by faith in Christ: but in the other places it is onelyonly declared, to whom this iustification belongeth: and who they are that shall be blessed, namely, the p. 222mercifull and vndefiled in heart: but the Apostle sheweth, why they are blessed, because they beleeue in Christ, Pareus. dub. 5.

Controv. 3. Whether sinne is wholly purged and taken away in the iustification of the faithfull.

The Romanists are of opinion that not onelyonly the guilt of sinne is taken away in iustification, but sinne it selfe is altogether purged: and so for sinnes to be couered, idem plane valet at que esse sublata & nulla prorsus relicta, is all one, as to be taken away, and not to remaine at all, Perer. disput. 3. numer. 11. Tolet. annot. 10. and they impute this opinion to the Protestants, peccata non auferri, &c. that sinnes are not taken away in iustification, but remaine the same they were, onelyonly they are not imputed after iustification: their reasons are these.

1. It was the opinion of the Pelagians confuted by Augustine, that in baptisme there is not giuen remission of all sinnes: nec auferre crimina, sed radere, and that it doth not take away sinne, but onelyonly prone it as it were, and pare it: the roote remaineth still: August. lib. 1. contra 2. epist. Pelagian. c. 13. like vntounto this error they make the opinion of Protestants, Perer. ibid.

2. It were no iustice in God, if sinne remained still, not to impute it, not to impute sinne vntounto the sinner, seemeth not to stand with the rule of equitie, Tolet. ibid.

3. The Scripture so speaketh of the remission of sinnes, as though they were wholly remooued, as Isaiah 44. I hauehave taken away thine iniquitie as a cloud, 1. Cor. 6. but ye are washed, ye are sanctified, Iob. 1. Behold the lambe of God that taketh away the sinnes of the world: Isaiah 1. If your sinnes were as redde as scarlet, they should be made white as snowe: Hes. 14.3. Take away all iniquitie, and receiue vsus graciously: Coloss. 2.14. Putting out the handwriting of ordinances, that was against vsus: these and the like places are produced by Tolet, and Pererius, in the foresaid places, to prooue the full remoouing and abolishing of all sinne in our iustification.

4. Otherwise Christs merit should be of lesse force and efficacie then the sinne of Adam, if it should not wholly remooue and take away sinne brought in by Adam, Tolet.

5. Pererius inferreth as much out of the Apostles words here: if our sinnes be hid and couered, then are they not seene of God: si non videntur à Deo, nulla vti que sunt, if they are not seene, then are they none at all: for if sinne still remained in the faithfull, which God hateth, then he should finde somewhat in them worthie of hatred, and so what he hateth consequently he punisheth, Perer. numer. 11.

Contra. 1. Our aduersaries doe not truely propound the state of this question betweene them and the Protestants: for we affirme not that the same sinnes remaine before iustification and after: there is great difference between peccatum inhabitants & regnans, sinne dwelling in vsus, and raigning in vsus: before iustification it both dwelleth in the faithfull and raigneth, but after it dwelleth but raigneth not: againe, before the righteous are iustified by faith, there is no sanctitie in them, but vponupon their iustification presently followeth sanctification, whereby they are become holy and full of good workes, though some reliques of sinne remaine. There are three things then specially here to be considered in sinne, macula, culpa, poena, the blot of sinne, the fault or offence, and the punishment: now after we are iustified by faith, the fault is remitted, the punishment acquired, but some blot and blemish remaineth: Now that in the iustified and regenerate remaineth some seede and reliques of sinne, it thus is manifest. 1. The Apostle confesseth that there was sinne dwelling in him, Rom. 7.20. 2. Dauid when he thus spake, Psal. 32. Blessed is he, whose wickednesse is forgiuen, had now many yeares beene the seruant of God: and yet he confesseth he had sinnes which had neede of forgiuenesse, Bucer. 3. the verie word it selfe of not imputing of sinne, presupposeth a being of sinne: for that which is not at all, cannot be said not to be imputed; for of that which is not, there can be neither action nor passion, Faius: and that which is couered appeareth not, not because it is not, but because it is couered.

2. Now for answear vntounto the arguments obiected. 1. the error of the Pelagians rather cleaueth vntounto the Romanists, then the Protestants, who affirme that in baptisme there is sealed remission of all sinnes as well going before baptisme as following after, whereas the Papists extend the vertue of baptisme vntounto the sinnes onelyonly before going: neither doe we say that the sprigges onelyonly of sinne are pruned, the roote remayning still, but that the very roote thereof is killed, though some sprigges doe sprout still, yet they shall neuer branch out to beare the like bitter fruit as before: And as we are free herein from the error of the p. 223Pelagians, so let them take heede, that the error of Origen be not here worthily fastened vponupon them: who vponupon this place of the Apostle writeth to this effect; that when the soule of a sinner leaueth and forsaketh sinne, then his iniquities are said to be remitted: and when it beginneth to doe well, then it hideth and couereth sinne, bonis recentibus, with newe good things: But when it is come to perfection, vt nullum in ea vestigium inveniri possit nequitiae, that not a footesteppe of sinne can be found in it, &c. then the Lord is said not to impute sinne, &c. Here Origen concurreth with the Romanists, or they rather with him, that there remaineth no relique of sinne in the faithfull after iustification, and that they couer and hide their sinnes by their good workes: which doth quite ouerthrowe and peruert the Apostles sense: who alleadgeth these testimonies out of the Psalmes to prooue that righteousnesse is imputed without workes: which were no proofe at all, if sinnes were couered and hid by good workes, Beza annot.

2. Not to impute sinne vntounto a sinner continuing and remaining still in the strength of his sinne, were indeede no iustice; but to a sinner that repenteth of his sinne, and amendeth, it is iust with God not to impute sinne for the worthinesse of Christ.

3. All these testimonies produced of the taking and washing away sinne are vnderstood, of remitting the fault and offence, and acquitting the punishment: it followeth not, but that there remaineth some blot and blemish still.

4. Christs merit is as effectuall to take away sinne, as Adam was to bring it in: and in the ende Christ shall vtterly abolish the verie relikes and remainder of sinne: which though Christ by his infinite power could effect all at once, yet it pleaseth him to worke it by degrees, to beginne our iustification here, and to finish it in his kingdome.

5. How our sinne is couered in Gods sight, and how the Lord is said not to see it, Augustine sheweth well, si texit peccata Deus, noluit advertere, si noluit advertere, noluit animadvertere, si noluit animadvertere, noluit punire, &c. if God hauehave hid our sinne, he would not marke it, if he would not marke it, neither would he chastice it, if not chastice it, then not punish it, neither must ye so vnderstand, that the Prophet said, our sinnes are hid, quasi ibi sunt, &c. vivunt, as though they be there, and are aliue, &c. to this purpose Augustine, who by the hiding, and Gods not seeing of our sinnes, vnderstandeth his not seeing them vntounto punishment.

And although sinne in it selfe be hated and detested of God, yet it followeth not that the faithfull should be hated for sinne, dwelling in them, because they hate it, and iudge it in themselues; sinne then is to be considered two wayes, in it selfe, and as it cleaueth and adheareth to the person; yet seeing the person of the faithfull, wherein it is found, is not addicted and wholly enclined vntounto it, but likewise hateth and abhorreth it; the Lord loueth their person accepted in Christ, though he hate that which is euill in them, as they themselues also doe.

Controv. 4. Against workes of satisfaction.

v. 8. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne. The opinion of the Romanists is here confuted, that after remission of the offence in sinne, and the guilt of eternall death, there remaineth yet some temporall punishment to be satisfied for: and yet there is full remission of sinne: for the temporall punishment is extra substantiam peccati, &c. is not of, or belonging to the substance of sinne, but as an adiunct, and a thing annexed to it, Perer. disput. 3. numer. 13.

Contra. 1. It followeth necessarily, that where sinne is punished it is imputed, and laid vntounto the sinners charge: But vntounto them that are iustified nothing is laid vntounto their charge: as the Apostle saith, Rom. 8.33. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods chosen? it is God that iustifieth: therefore where sinne is not imputed and remembred no more, there it is not thought of to be punished; for how should it stand with equitie for God to punish the sinne which is remitted.

2. No punishment is properly of the nature and substance of sinne, but necessarie consequents and effects thereof: euerlasting punishment it selfe, is not belonging to the substance of sinne: as Pererius confesseth, that inest peccato secundum substantiam, it belongeth to sinne in respect of the substance thereof, for God hath appointed and decreed eternall death, as the iust punishment of sinne, but no substantiall part of sinne hath God ordained, for then be should ordaine that which is euill: If then one part of the punishment of sinne p. 224be discharged, then the other also: or else there should not be a full remission of sinne.

Controv. 5. Of imputatiue iustice against inherent righteousnesse.

v. 8. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne: This is an euident place, for imputatiue righteousnesse: that our iustice before God consisteth in the not imputing vntounto vsus the sinnes which we had done, and in imputing vntounto vsus the righteousnesse of Christ, which we had not done or performed in our selues: But against this imputation of Christs righteousnesse, for inherent iustice thus it will be obiected.

1. Obiect. The Apostle saith, 1. Ioh. 3.2. We knowe, that when he appeareth we shall be like him, but God is iust by a iustice inherent in himselfe, we shall be like him, therefore we also are iust by such an infused and inherent iustice.

Answ. 1. We are like vntounto God who is iust, because he reputeth vsus for iust in Christ: 2. and then we shall be like him in holinesse and purenes, when all corruption shall be taken away in his kingdome. 3. this likenesse is vnderstood of the fruition of that great glorie, which the faithfull shall hauehave, as it followeth in the same place, We shall see him, as he is.

2. Obiect. As our iustification is, such is our happines, if then iustification be by imputation onelyonly, then so shall our happinesse be imputatiue also, not verily and in deede.

Answ. 1. The proposition is not true, for it followeth not that because iustification is by imputation, that our blessednesse should be so also: the blessednes promised is the reward, and must really be performed: imputatiue iustice is the condition required: like as a creditor may forgiue his debter, though his debt be payed by another: here he enioyeth his true and reall libertie, though he did not really in his owne person pay the debt: so though our iustice be by imputation: yet Christs iustice and obedience, which is by faith imputed, was really and actually performed, Faius.

Controv. 6. That the Sacraments doe not conferre grace by the externall participation onelyonly.

v. 11. The seale of the righteousnesse of faith: Hence it euidently appeareth that the Sacraments are not effectuall without faith, and that the verie receiuing of them. ex opere operato, by the worke wrought, doth not conferre grace, as the Romanists hold: for Abraham was iustified by faith beeing yet vncircumcised: circumcision then did not conferre vponupon him that grace, which he had not, but did confirme and establish him in the grace and faith receiued: the sacraments then, non instituta sunt iustificandis sed iustificatis, are not instituted for those which are to be iustified, but for them which are alreadie iustified. Pareus.

Here then two errors are to be taken heede of, one that we ascribe not too much to the outward signe in the sacrament: as to attribute vntounto it remission of sinnes, collation of grace, and such other spirituall benefits: for this were not farre from Idolatrie: If sometime the Scriptures and the auncient writers doe seeme to speake of the Sacraments, we must vnderstand that to be spoken of the signe, which indeede belongeth to the thing signified. An other error is, if any doe extenuate the Sacraments, making them but bare signes, as the Anabaptists onelyonly take baptisme and the Lords supper to be signes of our Christian profession: for then they should be no more then badges and cognisances, whereby families, and seruants are one distinguished from another: but the Sacraments doe not onelyonly represent, but exhibite also the thing signified, not by any vertue annexed to thy signe, but by the grace of the spirit concurring in the Sacrament, and offring it selfe to the faith of the receiuer, Martyr.

Controv. 7. That there is the same substance and efficacie of the Sacraments of the old and newe Testament.

An other error of the Romanists is, that the Sacraments of the old Testament did not exhibite the graces of the newe Testament, as our Sacraments nowe doe, but were meere shadowes obscurely representing them, so that their opinion is, that there is not the same substance of the old and newe sacraments, nor the same spirituall graces exhibited.

But the contrarie is euident. 1. out of this place: the Apostle calleth circumcision the seale of the righteousnesse of faith, and so are our Sacraments: 2. the Apostle saith, they did all eat the same spirituall meate, and drinke the same spirituall drinke, as there the Apostle saith, and so is he ours. 3. this also appeareth in that the Apostle giueth vntounto their Sacraments the same names: he saith they were all baptized in the cloud, and in the Sea, 1. p. 225Cor. 10.2. the Apostle doubteth not to call it baptisme, which it could not be, if there were not the same spirituall substance of their baptisme and ours: And as the Apostle doubteth not to giuegive the names of the Sacraments of the newe Testament to the old, so also he calleth the newe Sacraments of the gospel by the names of the old: as baptisme he calleth circumcision made without hands, Coloss. 2.11.

But it will be thus on the contrarie side obiected. 1. Ob. The Sacraments of the old Testament, were but shadowes of that truth which is exhibited in the newe: therefore there was not the same substance in them: but they differ as much as the bodie and the shadow.

Answer. It followeth not, because they were but shadowes of things to come, that they had not in some part the things themselues: But like as, when a picture is first drawne with lines and shadowes, therein is shadowed forth the same thing, though darkely and obscurely, that afterward is expressed in colours: so the same truth and substance is more obscurely shadowed forth in the Sacraments of the old Testament, which is more clearly manifested in the newe: the difference then is not in the substance, but in dispensationis modo, in the manner of dispensation, Faius.

2. Obiect. The Apostle saith, Heb. 8.13. In that he saith the newe, he hath abrogate the old, for that which is disanulled, and waxed old, is readie to vanish. If the old Testament then be abrogated, how can there be the same substance of the old and newe Testament?

Answ. This abolishing and abrogating of the old Testament, must be vnderstood onelyonly of the changing of the ceremonies, which as shadowes were to giuegive place to the bodie: as the Apostle saith, which are a shadowe of things to come, but the bodie is in Christ: but the substance of the old Testament is not abolished: as the Apostle saith, c. 13.8. Iesus Christ yesterday and to day, and the same also is for euer.

3. Obiect. But Augustine saith, that the old Sacraments, promisisse servatorem, did but promise the Sauiour, nostra exhibere, and ours doe exhibite him, in Psal. 73.

Answ. Augustine saith not, that their Sacraments shewed one thing and ours another: but that they did both demonstrate Christ, yet after a diuerse manner: for the old Sacraments did shadow Christ then to come, ours doe exhibite Christ alreadie come, Mart. see more hereof Synops. Centur. 2. err. 97.

Controv. 8. That circumcision was not onelyonly a signe signifying or distinguishing, but a seale confirming the promise of God.

Pererius taketh vponupon him here to confute the Protestants opinion, that the sacraments are seales to assure vsus of Gods promises made in Christ, and that they serue for the strengthning and confirmation of our faith: his best reason is this, qualis obsecro fides est, quae vacillat, &c. what manner of faith is that I pray you, which wauereth and had neede to be confirmed: if by faith we are assured of Gods promises, what vse is then of the Sacraments to assure vsus of that, whereof we are by faith assured alreadie? Perer. disput. 4. numer. 22. to the same purpose Staplet. Antid. pag. 225.

Contra. 1. The truth of our opinion, that the Sacraments are seales to assure vsus, and meanes to confirme our faith is euident both by the Apostles words, who calleth circumcision not onelyonly foreign, a signe, but foreign, a seale, which is more then a signe: for a seale is added for confirmation: secondly, the same is prooued by the nature of signes, giuen in couenants, which is to assure the parties of the truth and constancie of the couenant made: now circumcision was a signe of the couenant betweene God and his people, and therefore a signe of assurance and certaintie.

2. And although it be the speciall office of faith to assure vsus of Gods promises, which on Gods behalfe are most sure, and neede no ratification, yet because our faith is here weake and imperfect, it hath neede of proppes to confirme and strengthen it, Mart.

Controv. 9. Whether circumcision were auayleable for the remission of sinnes.

1. Diuerse of the auncient and learned fathers are of opinion, that circumcision had no spirituall vse, but onelyonly serued as a marke of distinction to discerne Abrahams posteritie from other nations, and to be a signe vntounto them, what faith Abraham was of, whom they should imitate: and of this opinion these reasons are yeelded.

1. Iustinus Martyr dialog. cum Tryphon: and Epiphanius haeres. 30. doe giuegive this reason, why circumcision was not giuen, ad iustificationem, for iustification, or sanctificationis gratiâ, p. 226for sanctification: because it was a signe giuen onelyonly vntounto the men, and not to the women, quicquid ad iustitiam & virtutem pertinet, &c. whatsoeuer belongeth vntounto iustice and vertue, was giuen vntounto women, as well as men, Iustine.

2. Tertullian saith, that circumcision was giuen as a signe for those times, non in salutis praerogativum, not to be a prerogatiue of saluation, because Abraham ante placuerat Deo, quam circumcideretur, had pleased God before he was circumcised, lib. aduers. Iudaeos.

3. Chrysostome prooueth, quod circumcisio nihil ad animae virtutem conduceret, that circumcision did nothing avayle for any vertue of the minde, by this reason, because it was appointed to be ministred vntounto infants vponupon the eight day: that it might thereby appeare, that it did nihil animae conducere, nothing profit the soule, hom. 39. in Genes.

4. Theodoret saith, corporalis circumcisio solius obtinet locum signaculi, corporall circumcision is onelyonly in stead of a seale: his reason is, that circumcision is called carnall, and it was a corporall thing; and therefore had no such spirituall vse.

5. VntoUnto these reasons may be added, that the Israelites were not circumcised for the space of 40. yeares in the wildernesse, which sheweth, that it was no spirituall remedie, for then they should not hauehave beene suffered to want it so long.

6. Beside Iosephus and Philo, who hauehave written most diligently of the ceremonies of the Iewes, and the signification thereof: neither of them make mention of remission of sinnes signified thereby.

Contr. But these reasons are easily answeared. 1. Though the women were not circumcised, yet were they not therefore excluded from the couenant: Pererius thinketh that there might be some other meanes prouided for the women: but if there had beene any such thing prescribed to women, such as circumcision was for men, the Scripture would not hauehave beene silent therein: Peter Martyr answeareth better, that although circumcision were only enioyned vntounto the men, yet the vse and fruit thereof also was extended to the women, because they were numbred and counted with the men, the virgins belonged to their fathers, and the married women to their husbands.

2. True it is, that Abraham pleased God, and was iustified before he receiued circumcision: this prooueth that Abraham indeede was not iustified by circumcision: not that thereby was not sealed the remission of sinnes.

3. And the circumcision ministred vntounto infants vponupon the 8. day doth not take away the spirituall vse thereof, for then neither should baptisme hauehave any spirituall vse concerning the cleansing of the soule, because infants which hauehave yet no discretion, are baptized: The Sacrament of circumcision then, and of baptisme now, is giuen vntounto infants to consecrate them vntounto God, that thereby they may be put in minde of their profession, when they come to yeares of discretion.

4. And whereas S. Paul calleth it circumcision in the flesh: he there speaketh of circumcision as separate from faith, as it is onelyonly vntounto carnall men: whereas the right circumcision, beeing receiued according to the institution, consisteth both of the carnall and externall circumcision of the flesh, and of the internall and spirituall circumcision of the heart.

5. The omitting of circumcision 40. yeares in the wildernesse sheweth, that iustification and remission of sinnes was not tied to the signe: that it was no signe of spirituall grace in the remission of sinnes, it prooueth not: for them, which died in the wildernes vncircumcised, it may be affirmed, that they were in like case with those which died before circumcision was instituted, or with children, which died before the eight day of circumcision: the want of the signe in these cases was not preiudiciall vntounto them.

6. Iosephus and Philo might conceale this secret, that circumcision was a seale of remission of sinnes, least the Gentiles, into whose hands they knew their writings should come, might thereby hauehave taken occasion to hauehave scorned and derided the mysteries, which they vnderstood not.

2. A second opinion is of the Romanists, who make this difference betweene circumcision, and other Sacraments of the old Testament, and baptisme in the newe: that in baptisme grace is conferred; but in the other there was onelyonly significatio gratiae, non effectio, a signifying onelyonly not an effecting of grace: so Pererius out of Thomas, disputat. 6. numer. 32.

Contra. But beside that we shewed before, controv. 7. that there was the same spirituall effect of the Sacraments of the old and newe Testament, they differed onelyonly in respect… p. 227of the more cleare light and liuely representation in the newe Sacraments, then in the olde: there was more then a bare signification onelyonly of spirituall grace in circumcision, for it is called a seale not a signe onelyonly.

3. Yet some other of the Romanists, as diuerse of their Schoolemen, as Alexander, Gabriel, Bonaventure, Scotus, as they are cited by Bellarmine lib. 2. de effect. Sacramentor. c. 13. are of opinion, circumcisionem ex opere operato contulisse iustificationem, that circumcision by the very worke wrought did conferre iustification: But this is euidently contrarie to the Apostle in this place, who directly noteth, that Abraham was iustified by faith, when as yet he was vncircumcised: and vponupon this Iustinus Martyr inferreth, that Abraham had not receiued circumcision ad iustificationem, for his iustification, because he was iustified before by faith, whereby he beleeued God, dialog. cum Tryphon. And Ireneus vrgeth the same argument, advers. haeres. lib. 4. c. 30. that Abraham was not iustified by circumcision, because sine circumcisione placuit Deo. he pleased God without circumcision.

4. As these doe ascribe too much vntounto circumcision, so Ambrose seemeth to detract too much from it, inferring thus, that because Abraham receiued circumcision as a signe of the righteousnesse of faith, non ergo habet circumcisio aliquid dignitatis, sed signum est tantum, therefore circumcision hath no dignitie at all, but is onelyonly a signe: to this purpose Ambrose in his commentarie here.

5. Wherefore the best opinion is, that circumcision, though it did not conferre remission of sinnes, yet it was more then a bare signifying signe: it was a seale and pleadge, whereby the promises of God were ratified and confirmed, and specially concerning remission of sinnes in Christ: And therefore the Apostle saith, it was not onelyonly a signe, but a seale, which serueth to confirme and ratifie: see before of this controv. 8.

And herein we mislike not the opinion of Thomas and other schoolemen, that in circumcision there was conferred grace, non virtute circumcisionis, sed fidei passionis Christi, not by vertue of circumcision, but of faith in the passion of Christ, whereof circumcision was a signe: Perer. disput. 6. numer. 2. saving that they thinke that in the newe Sacraments there is an actuall collation of grace by the verie externall participation of the Sacrament.

But that circumcision was as much an instrument of grace, not by the vertue of the Sacrament but of faith, whereof it was a seale as baptisme is, Augustine directly testifieth, writing to this purpose; that circumcision, which was then a seale of the righteousnesse of faith, ad significationem purgationis valebat, &c. sicut & baptismus, &c. was avayleable for the purgation of sinne, as baptisme was availeable vntounto regeneration, after it was instituted, &c. to this purpose Augustine de Nupt. & concupiscent. c. 11. Likewise Gregorie, quod apud nos valet gratia baptismatis, hoc agit apud veteres, &c. that which the grace of baptisme is avayleable vntounto amongst vsus, to the same ende serued in the old Testament, either faith alone for children, or for the elder sort the vertue of sacrifices, for those which came of Abrahams stocke, the mysterie of circumcision, Gregor. lib. 4. Iob.

Controv. 10. Of the presumptuous titles of the Pope calling himselfe the father and head of the faithfull.

Abraham is called the father of those which beleeue, because he gaue them an example both of the true iustifying faith, and of holy obedience: If the Pope would be the father of the Church and of beleeuers, he must goe before them in puritie of faith and manners: and yet if he did so, he should thinke it his greatest honour to be counted the child of faithfull Abraham: he must not arrogate vntounto him the title, which the Scripture giueth vntounto Abraham, to be the father of the faithfull: But seeing they which are Abrahams children, must walke in the steppes of Abrahams faith, which is to be iustified without workes: the Pope holding iustification by the merit of workes, cannot be so much as the child of faithfull and beleeuing Abraham.

Controv. 11. Against the Chiliastes or Millenaries that hold that Christ should raigne a 1000. yeares in the earth.

v. 13. The promise that Abraham should be the heire of the world: The Chiliastes whose opinion was, that Christ after the resurrection should raigne in the earth in all externall happinesse and pleasure for a thousand yeares, doe apply this place to their owne conceit, that this should be the inheritance of the world promised to Abraham: As likewise they vrge that place, Luk. 22.30. of eating and drinking with Christ in his kingdome, and that p. 228Apocal. 20.4. how the Saints should raigne with Christ a 1000. yeares in the earth: of this opinion were Papius, Ireneus, Tertullian, Lactantius, with others: Lactantius dreameth, that in those thousand yeares, the rockes shall droppe honie, and the riuers runne with wine and milke.

Contra. But these are mens dreames and fansies. 1. the Apostle saith that the kingdome of God, is not meate and drinke, Rom. 14.17. therefore we must not imagine that Christ shall raigne with his Saints in any such carnall pleasure. 2. whereas the Scripture speaketh of eating and drinking in the kingdome of heauen, thereby Ambrose vponupon Luke well vnderstandeth communicationem aeterna falicitatis, the communicating and participating of euerlasting felicitie and happinesse: as the Scripture vseth by such phrases taken from temporall and earthly delights to expresse spirituall ioyes. 3. by the thousand yeares mentioned Apocal. 20. Augustine vnderstandeth all the time of the flourishing of the Gospell here in earth: during which time Sathan is bound, and his kingdome destroyed by the preaching of the Gospell: so also Pet. Martyr thinketh that a certaine time is there taken for an indefinite and vncertaine: But because all such propheticall predictions doe note a certaine limitation of time and yeares, I subscribe rather vntounto their opinion, who thinke, that a thousand yeares precisely are spoken of, wherein Sathan should be bound: which Iunius will hauehave to ende at the time of Hildebrande: but they rather ende some 300. yeares after: for otherwise Sathan should be held to be bound, in the 300. yeares of persecution, vnderunder the Pagan Emperours, which is not to be admitted.

Controv. 12. Of the certaintie of faith, v. 16. That the promise might be sure.

1. This is an euident place against that Popish vncertaintie of remission of sinnes: for they hold it a presumption for a man to be sure of Gods fauour, and of their iustification by faith in Christ: but this is contrarie to the Scriptures, the Apostle saith, Rom. 8.16. The spirit beareth witnesse with our spirit, that we are the children of God: but nothing is more certaine, then the testimonie of the spirit: Againe, the same Apostle saith, Beeing iustified by faith, we are at peace with God: but the conscience cannot be at peace, and setled, if it were not sure of the remission of sinnes in Christ: S. Paul also himselfe is perswaded that nothing could separate him from the louelove of God in Christ, Rom. 8.38. which perswasion was not peculiar to the Apostle by any speciall reuelation, but wrought in him by faith, as it is in others, as he sheweth, 2. Timoth. 4.8.

2. This certaintie of our assurance is builded vponupon these two grounds. 1. the firmener and stablenesse of the word and promise of God, which cannot faile. 2. the nature of faith which is to giuegive an vnfained and vndoubted assent, vntounto the promises of God, Mart. Origen giueth this reason: those things are said to be firmer, which are by grace, then those things which are by the law: quia illa extra nos sunt, haec intra nos, &c. because those things are without vsus written in tables of stone, these are within vsus, vero spiritu Dei inscripta, beeing written by the verie spirit of God.

3. But it will be thus obiected against this assurance and certaintie.

1. Obiect. Gods promises as likewise his menasings are conditionall, as that of Ionah, that Nineveh should be destroyed within fortie dayes: and that pronounced by Isay to king Hezekiah, that he should die.

2. No man is sure of perseuerance, and continuance to the ende.

3. Vnlesse a man were sure to be without sinne, which is impossible in this life, he cannot be certaine of his saluation.

4. There is not the perfectest man, but sometime he feeleth his mind to be full of doubting.

Contra. 1. Some promises and threatnings of God are conditionall, and they hold not, the condition not beeing kept: such are these giuen in instance, but some are without condition of our obedience, but are of Gods meere grace, which require nothing but a liuely faith to apprehend it.

2. The faithfull doe pray for perseuerance in all their prayers: but prayer as S. Iames sheweth, must be made without hesitation, or doubting: therefore the faithfull may be in time, and in the ende are assured of their perseuerance to the ende.

3. Not the assurance to be without sinne, but that our sinnes are forgiuen vsus is required: for then neither S. Paul, who was not without sinne, could hauehave beene assured of Gods fauour in Christ, as he was.

p. 2294. There may rise doubts in the minds of the faithfull, from the weaknes and infirmitie of the flesh, and yet they may notwithstanding hauehave a perswasion: for these doe arise and spring of diuers causes, and beginnings: the infirmitie of the flesh may cause one sometime to doubt, and yet the spirit of grace, may worke assurance in the minde, which in the ende preuaileth and ouercommeth all doubts: Like as reason doth tell a man that the Sunne is bigger then the whole earth, and yet his sense may cause him to doubt of it: Martyr. Origen in this purpose vponupon these words, v. 19. and he not weake in faith, &c. inferreth, that there may be then an infirmitie, and weaknes in faith, quod si est infirmitas, est sine dubio & ibi sanitas, and if there be infirmitie, there is also health and sanitie.

Now this doubting, which riseth in the minde, proceedeth not from the nature of faith, but from man's infirmitie: like as there is nothing more certaine in any science, then the principles and axiomes in the Mathematicks, yet one may doubt thereof, not of any defect in the art, but thorough his owne vnskilfulnes: so a faithfull man may doubt, not because in faith, there is any vncertentie, but it is raised by his owne infirmitie: which infirmitie is of two sorts, either when one is perswaded of that which he knoweth, but there remaine yet other things to be knowne, which he comprehendeth not, or when he knoweth and beleeueth the things which are set before him, but thorough his weaknes can not giuegive full assent vntounto them: the first of these is a fayling in his vnderstanding, the second in his heart and affection: But the spirit of God subdueth at the last all these defects and doubting and worketh a full perswasion in the heart: The argument then followeth not, a faithfull man may sometime cast doubts in his minde, therefore by faith he can not be assured: for neither doth a faithfull man doubt totaliten, wholly, dubitatio proficiscitur ex infirmitate, his doubting proceedeth of his infirmitie, certitudo ex fide, but his assurance is of faith: not yet finaliter, this his doubting is not finall, at length by faith he ouercommeth all such infirmities Martyr.

13. Controv. Whether faith be an act of the vnderstanding onelyonly.

Bellarmine vponupon these words, v. 19. not considering his owne bodie, and v. 21. plenissime scitus, fully knowing, inferreth, that faith is not a certaine fidence, confidence, or assurance, but onelyonly an act of the vnderstanding: for to consider, belongeth to the vnderstanding, and so doth a full and firme knowledge. Bellarm. lib. 1. de iustificat. c. 6.

Contra. 1. In that Abraham considered not his bodie, it sheweth that his faith ouercame all impediments, yea it euen preuailed against his naturall reason: this maketh rather against Bellarmine, for here an act of the vnderstanding, which is to hauehave considered the weaknesse of his bodie, is denied, he considered not: and yet if this prooued any thing, it sheweth onelyonly that faith ioyned with the consideration, and vnderstanding of the minde, not that it consisteth onelyonly of it.

2. Concerning the other word foreign, it is better translated, beeing fully assured and perswaded, then fully knowing: perswasion is not onelyonly a certaine knowledge and apprehension of the minde, but a full assent also of the will grounded vponupon the firme and resolute iudgement of the vnderstanding: and in this sense doth the Apostle vse the word foreign, certentie, full perswasion, 1. Thess. 1.5. where he saith, our Gospel was not vntounto you in word onelyonly, &c. but in the holy Ghost, and much assurance: as he deliuered vntounto them the most euident and certaine doctrine of the Gospel, so it wrought in them a steadfast and setled assurance of their saluation.

3. And that this perswasion which Abraham had was ioyned with a confidence and assurance, the words euidently shew, v. 20. Neither did he doubt of the promise through vnbeleefe: which the Latine translator readeth, non haesitavit, he staggered or stucke not: And that faith hath alwaies assurance and confidence ioyned with it, Saint Iames also testifieth, chap. 1.6. Let him aske in faith, and wauer not: see more hereof Synops. Centur. 4. nr. …. 45

14. Controv. That iustifying faith is not a generall apprehension or beleeuing of the Articles of faith, but an assurance of the remission and forgiuenes of sinnes in Christ.

Bellarmine further collecteth vponupon this place, v. 20. Beeing fully perswaded, that he which had promised, was able to doe it, &c. that this faith, whereby Abraham was iustified, was p. 230not any assurance of the remission of sinnes, but fides dogmatica vel historica, a dogmaticall or historicall faith, a beleefe of the omnipotencie of God: Bellar. lib. 1. de iustif. c. 11. to the same purpose the Rhemists giuegive here the like note, that Abrahams faith was a beleefe of an article reuealed vntounto him from God: and so inferre that it shall be sufficient for vsus to beleeue the articles of Christs death and resurrection, without any scuh confidence, which they call a found faith.

Contra. 1. That Abrahams faith was not onelyonly a generall beleefe or assent that Gods speach was true, and that he was able to effect, that which he promised, but that he had also a particular confidence of his acceptance with God, and remission of his sinnes in the Messiah promised, doth euidently appeare by these two arguments. 1. The Apostle saith, that Abraham was partaker by faith of that blessednesse, which the Prophet Dauid speaketh of, v. 7. Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen, then it followeth, ver. 9. Came the blessednesse vponupon the circumcision or vponupon the vncircumcision? 2. the like faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnesse, which is imputed to vsus, v. 23. but our faith is to beleeue that Christ was put to death for our sinnes and rose for our iustification, v. 25. therefore Abrahams faith, was an assurance of remission of his sinnes in Christ.

Controv. 15. That faith doth not iustifie by the merit or act thereof, but onelyonly instrumentally, as it applyeth and apprehendeth the righteousnesse of Christ.

Bellarmine hath an other sophisticall collection vponupon these words, v. 22. therefore it was imputed to him for righteousnesse: here saith at, the Apostle rendreth the reason, why faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnesse, because he in beleeuing gaue glorie vntounto god: therefore he was iustified merito fidei, by the merit or worthinesse of faith, which notwithstanding was his grace and gift, Bellar. lib. 1. de iustif. c. 17.

Contra. 1. Abraham was not iustified because he in beleeuing gaue glorie vntounto God: that indeede was an act and fruit of his faith: but it was his faith onelyonly, for the which he was iustified: as the Apostle saith afterward v. 24. it shall be likewise imputed to vsus for righteousnes, which beleeue, &c. 2. the Apostle saith, to him that worketh not, but beleeueth, &c. faith is counted for righteousnesse: then it will followe, that where faith is counted or imputed for righteousnesse, there is no worke: faith then iustifieth not as a worke by the act of beleeuing: for then faith should not iustifie without works, which is the scope of all the Apostles discourse, that by faith righteousnes is imputed without workes, v. 6. faith then doth not iustifie actiuely, as it is a worke, but passiuely, as it apprehendeth the righteousnesse of Christ. 3. If faith be the gift of God, as Bellarmine confesseth, then can it not merit, for he that meriteth must merit of his owne: where there is grace and fauour as in the bestowing of gifts freely, there is no merit, v. 4. 4. I will here oppose against Bellarmine the iudgement of Tolet, and so set one Iesuite against an other, and a Cardinall against his fellowe: he thus ingeniously writeth vponupon these words, non existimes Paulum merito fiderascribere iustitium, &c. thinke not that Paul ascribeth righteousnesse to the merit of faith, as though because he beleeued he was worthie of the righteousnesse of God, but he signifieth, Deum ex gratia acceptare fidem nostram in iustitiam, that God of grace and fauour accepteth our faith for righteousnesse.

Controv. 16. The people are not to be denied the reading of the Scriptures.

v. 23. Now it is not written for him onelyonly, but for vsus, &c. Hence it is euident that the Romanists offer great wrong vntounto the people of God, in barring them from the reading of the Scriptures: for they are to be admitted to the reading of the Scriptures, for whom they are written: but they are written for all that beleeue in Christ: the reading then of the Scripture serueth to cōfirme our faith, therfore they belong generally vntounto the faithfull, Par.

But it will be obiected, that the vnlearned doe not vnderstand the Scriptures, and therefore they are to depend vponupon the fathers of the Church for the vnderstanding of them, and not to venture vponupon them themselues.

Answ. 1. Nay the sense of the Scripture is most safely taken from the Scripture, which is the best interpreter of it selfe. 2. the Fathers and expossitors are to be heard, and consulted with, so farre forth as they agree with the Scriptures: but the sense of the Scripture … not depend vponupon their fancies, which hauehave no warrant by Scripture: as Hierome vponupon the… 23. chap. of Mathew, giueth instance of a certaine interpretation of one of the Father… p. 231that Zacharias the sonne of Barachias mentioned there v. 35. to hauehave beene slaine betweene the Temple and the Altar, was Zacharie the father of Iohn Baptist: And Hierome searching out, which of the Fathers had made this interpretation, found that it was Basil: and then he concludeth this, seeing it hath no warrant out of the Scriptures, eadem facilitate contemnitur, qua probatur, is as easily reiected, as it is affirmed: See further of the vulgar reading of Scripture, and of the manner of interpreting the same. Synops. Centur. 1. err. 3. and err. 9.

Controv. 17. Against the heretikes, which condemned the old Testament, and God the author thereof.

v. 24. Which beleeued in him, that raised vp Iesus &c. Origen very well inferreth vponupon these wordes, that seeing the God, whom Abraham beleeued was able to quicken the dead, was the same, that raised Iesus from the dead, non erat alius Deus legis, alius Domini nostri Iesu Christ. &c. there was not then one God of the law, and another of our Lord Iesus Christ: &c. But there was the same God of the old and new Testament: which is obserued by Origen against the wicked Marcionites, and Manichies, who condemned the old Testament, and the author thereof.

So also, whereas the same heretickes vrged these wordes of the Apostle. v. 15. where no law is, there is no transgression: and thereupon inferring the contrarie, where there is a law, there is transgression, would thereby conclude that the law is the cause of transgression, and so condemne the law: Origen doth thus returne this their collection vponupon themselues: that as where the law is, there is transgression of the law, so where faith is, there is transgression against faith: but as faith is not the cause, vt quis praeuaricetur à fide, that one transgresse against faith: neither shall the law be the cause of transgression against the law.

Controv. 18. Whether iustification consist onelyonly in the remission of sinnes.

v. 25. Who was deliuered to death, for our sinnes, and is risen againe for our iustification: Pererius taketh occasion here to inuergh against Protestants, thus affirming of vsus: qui …em vim iustificationis ponunt in sola remissione peccatorum, donationem vero iustitiae, &c. which doe place all the force of iustification onelyonly in the remission of sinnes, but the donation of iustice whereby the minde is rectified, and newenesse of life wrought in vsus, they do reiect and abandon, Perer. disput. 10. err. 49. and to the same purpose Bellar. lib. 2. de iustif. c. 6. and the Rhemists take vponupon them to confute the Protestants, because they hold iustification, to be onelyonly remission of sinnes, and no grace inherent in vsus, annot. in 4. ad Rom. Sect. 6.

Contra. 1. It is a false imputation, that we place iustification onelyonly in the remission of sinnes: for we hold also with S. Paul the imputation of Christs righteousnesse by faith: as S. Paul saith Philip. 3.9. That I may be found in him, not hauing mine owne righteousnesse, which is by the lawe, but that which is of the faith of Christ, &c. 2. But though we graunt as well an imputation of righteousnes as a not imputation of sinne concurring vntounto iustification, yet we denie, that any inherent iustice or renouation of life, is any part of this iustification: neither doth the Apostle meane any such iustification here: Christ rose for our iustification, not thereby onelyonly to giuegive vsus an example of newenesse of life, as Bellarmine, and Pererius expound it, wherein Tolet his owne fellowe Iesuite and Cardinall, is against him, as is before shewed, qu. 42. but Christs resurrection is the cause and ground of our iustification, which is imputed by faith: as Ambrose expoundeth, resurrexit, &c. vt nos gratia iustificationis donaret, he rose againe to endue vsus with the grace of iustification: vt iustitiam credentium confirmaret, to confirme the iustice of those which beleeue, saith Hierome: ista resurrectio credita nos iustificat, this resurrection beeing beleeued, doth iustifie vsus, saith Augustine. 3. an inherent iustice we confesse, which is our sanctification, the fruit and effect of our iustification by faith, but because it is imperfect in vsus, and not able to satisfie the iustice of God, we denie, that we are thereby iustified in his sight.

Controv. 19. Against Socinus corrupt interpretation of these words, v. 25. Was deliuered vp for our sinnes.

Socinus will not hauehave this phrase to signifie any satisfactiō made by Christ for our sinnes, but onelyonly to betoken the cause or occasion of Christs death: as the Lord is said to giuegive Isra…l vp for the sinnes of Ieroboam, who sinned and caused Israel to sinne, 1. king. 14.16. thus …icked Socinus de Seruat. part. 2. p. 108.

p. 232Contra. 1. Though sometime this phrase signifie the cause, yet it is false that it so onelyonly signifieth: for the Scripture speaketh euidently, that Christ was our reconciliation, and that we hauehave redemption in him, Rom. 3.24, 25. our sinnes then onelyonly were not the cause or occasion of his death, but he so died for our sinnes, as that he by his blood satisfied for them. 2. It was the Pelagian blasphemie, that Christ died for our sinnes, to be an example onelyonly vntounto vsus to die vntounto sinne: for thus the power and force of Christs death is extenuated, which indeede causeth vsus to die vntounto sinne, it doth not teach vsus onelyonly, and shew vsus the way: this were to extoll the power of mans corrupt will against the grace of God. 3. The instance of Ieroboam is altogether impertinent: Israel was deliuered vp for Ieroboams sinnes, which they imitated and followed: if Christ were so deliuered vp for our sinnes, then they must make him also to be a sinner with vsus, and to be polluted with our sinnes. ex Perer dub. 8.

20. Controv. Piscators opinion examined, that our sinnes are remitted onelyonly by Christs death, not for the obedience and merit of his life.

These are Piscators words in his annotation vponupon the 25. v. Omnia nostra pectata expiat… sunt per solam mortem Christi, all our sinnes are expiated onelyonly by the death of Christ: and therefore neither originall sinne is purged by his holy conception, nor the sinnes of omission by his holy life, but by Christs death onelyonly: to this purpose many places of Scripture are cited, and alleadged by him: as, Matth. 20.28. The Sonne of man came to giuegive his life a ransome for many: Matth. 26.28. Which (namely, blood) is shed for many for the remission of sinnes: Act. 20.28. Christ hath purchased his Church by his blood.

Likewise he affirmeth, that by Christs obedience in his death, and vponupon the crosse, part… esse nobis vitam ae…ernam, euerlasting life is obtained for vsus: as Hebr. 10.19. By the blood of Iesus we may be hold to enter into the holy place: and other places are cited to the same effect.

Contra. 1. It is true, that Christ onelyonly by his death, and other his holy sufferings, paied the ransome, and bare the punishment due vntounto our sinne: but seeing Christs blood had beene of no value, if he had not beene most perfectly righteous, his obedience and righteousnes must as well concurre vntounto the remission of sinnes, as his death: and this is that which S. Peter saith, 1. Pet. 1.19. We are redeemed with the pretious blood of Christ, as of a L…e vndefiled, and without spot: and, c. 3.18. Christ hath once suffered for sinnes, the iust for the vniust: the innocencie then and integritie of Christ must be ioyned with Christs blood, to make it an acceptable sacrifice.

2. Whereas there are two parts of our iustification, the remission and not imputing of sinnes, and the imputation of Christs righteousness: which two are not separated, neither can the one stand without the other, neither can there be any remission of sinnes, vnlesse Christs righteousnes be imputed: as S. Paul saith, 1. Cor. 5.21. He hath made him to be sinne …, that knew no sinne, that we should be made the righteousnes of God in him: the merit of Christs obedience and righteousnes must needes concurre in the remission of sinnes: yea Piscator in his annotation vponupon the 4. v. confesseth that these words, blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen, idem valere, to be as much in effect, as to say, blessed are they to whom iustice is imputed.

3. But that seemeth to be a more straunge assertion, to denie, that possessio vitae eternat tanquam effectum adscribitur obedientiae Christi, the possession of eternall life is ascribed, as an effect to Christs obedience: which is directly affirmed by the Apostle, Hebr. 7.26. Such an high Priest it became vsus to hauehave, which is holy, harmelesse, vndefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher then the heauens: what hath made Christ higher then the heauens, but his holines, perfection, integritie? and therefore he is able perfectly to saue them, that come vntounto God, v. 25.

4. And further, that we are iustified by Christs obedience, the Apostle sheweth, Rom. 5.13. As by one mans disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous: here the Apostle saith directly, that we are made righteous by the obedience of Christ. Piscator here answereth, that by Christs obedience here is vnderstood his obedience in submitting himselfe willingly vntounto death, in which it was his fathers will he should suffer for vsus. Contra. Our iustification consisteth of two parts, of the remission of our sinnes, and the making of vsus iust before God: the one is procured by Christs death, p. 233the other is purchased by his obedience and righteousnes: and that the Apostle speaketh not onelyonly of Christs obedience vntounto death, but generally of his whole course of righteousnes, both in life and death, is euident, because he calleth it the gift of righteousnes, v. 17. and the raigning of grace by righteousnes, thorough Iesus Christ, v. 21. And further this is yet more euident, where the Apostle saith, Rom. 4.25. Christ was deliuered to death for our sinnes, and is risen againe for our iustification: whence it is gathered, that iustification is more then remission of sinnes onelyonly: which as it was wrought by his death, so the other was compassed by all other his holy actions: Piscator answereth, that iustification is here affirmed of the resurrection, because it is an euident demonstration of our iustification which was obtained by the death of Christ. But I preferre rather Augustines interpretation, lib. 10. cont. Faust. c. 10. Ista resurrectio credita nos iustificat, &c. this resurrection of Christ beeing beleeued doth iustifie vsus, non quod reliqua opera & merita Christi excluduntur, &c. not that the rest of his merits and works are excluded, sed omnia consummantur, &c. but because all was perfected and finished in his death and resurrection: here Augustine affirmeth two things, both that all Christs merits and works concurre in our iustification, as also that the beleeuing of Christs resurrection is as verily a cause of our iustification (not a demonstration onelyonly) as his death was of the remission of our sinnes. See before this place more fully expounded, quest. 42. and Piscators exposition refuted. artic. 5.

So then to finish this matter, if Christs death onelyonly effected and wrought our iustification, then should the rest of his workes and actions be superfluous: whereas, whatsoeuer he did, in life or death, was wrought for vsus: as Thomas in his commentarie vponupon this place alleadgeth out of Damascen: omnes passiones & actiones illius humanitatis fuerunt nobis salutifera vtpote ex virtute divinitatis prouenientes, all the passions and actions of his humanitie did tend vntounto our saluation, as proceeding from the vertue of his Diuinitie.