Commentary on Galatians, Commentary · Chapter 2

Commentary on Galatians · Commentary · Chapter 2

p. 22¶ The ſeconde Chapter.

1 Fourteene yeares after that I went vp againe to Ieruſalē together with Barnabas, taking Titus alſo with me.

2 And I went vp according to reuelation, and I conferred with them the Goſpell which I preache among the Gentils, but priuately with thē, which were in price, leaſt by any meanes I ſhould or had run in vaine.

3 But neither Titus which was with me, being a Greeke was compelled to be circumſiſed.

4 For becauſe of falſe bretheren being entred in, whiche came in to ſpie out our libertie which wee hauehave in Chriſt Ieſu: that they might bring vsus into bondage.

5 VntoUnto whom, no not for an hower gaue we place by ſubiection, that the truth of the Goſpell might remain in you.

FOurteene yeres after.) Scarſlye can any man affirme for a certaintie whether he meane that going vp which Luke mentioneth Act. 15.2. nay rather the order of the Hiſtory leadeth vsus to the contrarye parte: for there it is ſhewed that Paule came foure times to Ieruſalem, of his firſt comming is already ſayde: his ſeconde comming was when he and Barnabas broughte the almes collected in the Congregations of Graecia, and Aſia, as it is reade Act. 12.25. of the which that I ſhould rather vnderſtande this preſent place, many reaſons moue me, or elſe it muſt needes bee that the one of them muſt tell an vntruth. Moreouer the coniecture doth more moue me that Peter was reprehended at Antiochia what time as Paule did abide there, and that was before he was ſent to Ieruſalem of the Churches, to diſpatche y^e diſſētion ariſen about ceremonies. Beſide that it is not agreeable to reaſon, that Peter would hauehave vſed ſuch ſimulation, if that controuerſie had bene ended, and the decree of the Apoſtles publiſhed. Paule in this place writeth that he came to Ieruſalem: & after he addeth that Peters ſimulation was reproued by him: which [ſimulation] he would neuer hauehave vſed but in doubtfull things:That is Paule. furthermore he would ſcant at any time hauehave enterpriſed that p. 23voyage taken by the common conſent of the faythfull, letting paſſe the cauſe, and ſuppreſſing ſo memorable an ende. And it appeareth not ſufficiently at what time this Epiſtle was written: but that the Greekes do coniecture it to be ſent frō Rome: and the Latines from Epheſus. But I ſuppoſe that it was not only written before y^t Paule ſaw Rome: but alſo before y^e counſell was held where the Apoſtles gaue ſentence as touching the vſe of ceremonies. For where as the aduerſaries did falſly pretend y^e name of the Apoſtles, & did leane chiefly thervpō to burdē Paule withal: what great negligēce had it ben to paſſe ouer the decree eueryevery where publiſhed & among all men, wherwith they were confoūded? Surely this one word wold hauehave ſtopped their mouth, ye obiect to me y^e Apoſtles: but all men know what they hauehave iudged: therefore I holde you conuict of a ſhameleſſe lie. You put vponupon the Gentils necks neceſſitie of keeping y^e law, as though ye did ſo by their commaundement, but their writing is extant, whereby they ſet the conſciences at liberty frō it. Moreouer this is to be added, y^t in the beginning he did check y^e Galathians, in y^t they fell ſo ſoone from the goſpel which he deliuered them. And a man may readily gather that ſome ſpace there was from that time which they were brought vntounto the goſpel, before that controuerſie of ceremonies was moued. Finally I take the foureteene yeares, not from the one iorney to the other: but that the account may begin alwayes from Paules conuerſion. So were there xi. yeres betweene his two iorneyes.

2 I went vp according to reuelation.) Here he doth approue his Apoſtleſhip and doctrine, not only by workes, but alſo by diuine oracle. For whereas God did gouerne that iorney, y^e cauſe whereof was the confirmation of his doctrine: it is not nowe by the conſent of men confirmed only, but alſo by the authoritie of god, which ought aboūdantly to breake their obſtinacie who did burdē Paule by obiecting y^e Apoſtles names, for although afore ther were ſome ſhadow of cōtēding, yet thā whē gods iudgemēt ſetteth in foote, al quarrelling hath an end. I cōferred with thē. Firſt ye muſt note this word Conferre, for they do not preſcribe vntounto him what he ought to teache, but he ſheweth what he hath t…ught, y^t they may preſcribe vntounto him, and giuegive their cōſent, becauſe his aduerſaries might ſlaunderouſly talk, by diſſembling many things craftily, y^t he wēt about to get y^e Apoſtles fauour: p. 24he doth namely expreſſe that he cōferred the Goſpell, as he preached it among the Gentiles, whereby he turneth away all ſuſpition of deceite, and ouerthwarting. We ſhall ſee what followeth at laſt, for the Apoſtles did not thinke it blame worthye, in that he had begun without their commaundement: but without controuerſie or quarelling, they ratified that which he had done, and that by the inſtinction of the ſame ſpirite, who being guide, Paule came vntounto them. He was not therefore made of them an Apoſtle, but ſo acknowledged: but theſe thinges ſhall be mentioned afterwarde. Leaſt by any meanes. What then? ſhall the truth of God fall, except it be ſtayde by the teſtimony of men? but although the whole world be faithleſſe, yet for all that the truth of God remayneth ſure and vncorrupted, neyther doe they loſe their labour which by the commaundement of God do teach the Goſpell, although they bring forth no fruite by their labor, neither doe the words of Paule tende to this ende: but for that, as touching men, the miniſterie of the worde is vnprofitable to doubtfull and wauering conſciences. To runne in vaine, is taken to labour without profite, whē as that edifiing which ought (to follow) doth not enſue. Farthermore here was a ſtrong engine to ſhake weake conſciences, when as the deceauers did falſely ſay that the Doctrine which Paule did preach, was contrary to the doctrine of the Apoſtles: in ſo much that many did fall. The certaintie of faith dependeth not vponupon the conſent of men: but rather ſo muſt we reſt in the naked truth of God, that neither men, neither all the Aungels ſhould remoue vsus from it. Notwithſtanding to the rude, and thoſe which hauehave ſcarſely yet a ſmall taſte of ſounde doctrine, and hauehave not vtterlye dronke in the ſame in their harte and marow, this temptation can ſcant be born when they heare the principal teachers to be at ods among themſelues. Nay rather ſometimes Sathan by his ſubtiltie prouoketh and ſtirreth thoſe that be ſtrong, when as he layeth before them the contentions and diſſentions of them, whome it moſte became to thinke and ſpeake one thing. It can hardlye be tolde, how many that vnlucky contention as touching the**He meaneth the ſacrament of the body of Chriſt. body of Chriſt, ſtopped from the Goſpell, how many mens fayth it ſhaked: for that they ſaw men of principall authoritie ſo enuiouſly to ſtriue about the greateſt queſtion, againe it is no ſmall p. 25helpe to eſtabliſh fayth when all teachers conſent in one. Therfore whereas Sathan went about with ſuch ſubteltie to let the paſſage of the goſpell, Paule would ſtoppe him. for after that it appeared that he agreede well with all the Apoſtles, this lette was vtterly taken away, the mindes of the vnlearned were not toſſed any more with ſhifting and chaunging whom they ſhould follow. This is then that which he ſpeaketh, Leaſte my paynes which before I tooke had bene loſt, and finallye leaſt I ſhoulde goe forwarde without commoditie: I tooke away that doubte that troubled many: whether they might beleeue me or Peter. for with one conſent hauehave we (both) embraced that which I had alwayes taught. And if ſo be it were ſo great pleaſure to many at theſe dayes to edifie as it was to Paule, they woulde be touched with greater care to agree among themſelues.

3 But neither Titus.) He proueth by another reaſon, that the Apoſtles are not of contrary iudgemēt vntounto him: for he brought vntounto thē a man vncircumciſed, whō they doubted not to acknowledge as a brother. He addeth a cauſe why he was not circumciſed:Res media. for wheras circumciſion was a meane thing or a thing indifferēt, it might be either omitted or vſed as it ſerued to edifie. We muſt alwaye holde faſt that rule, If all thinges are lawful vntounto vsus, that we ſee what is expedient. Therefore did hee circumciſe Timothie, leaſt his vncircumſion might be an offēce vntounto the weake, for at that time he was conuerſante among the weake, whome he ought to fauour. And he would gladlye hauehave done the ſame in Titus: ſo neuer wearied was hee in bearing with the weake: but the reaſon was contrary: for certain falſe bretheren were ready to take occaſion to ſlaunder his doctrine, which ſtraight waye would hauehave ſpread abroade (this) reporte, Beholde this ſo bolde a defender of libertye, as ſoone as he commeth into the Apoſtles ſight, he layeth downe that manlye courage & fierceneſſe wherewith he is puffed (vp) among y^e vnlearned. As it is meete for vsus to temper our ſelues toward y^e weake, ſo muſt we ſtoutly reſiſt the malignaunt, & thoſe that of ſet purpoſe do lay to entrap our libertie, neither ought the dueties of Charitie hinder the offices of Fayth. Charitie than in the vſe of thinges that are indifferent or meane, ſhall be a verye good moderator, if only firſt you hauehave reſpect of fayth.

p. 264 For becauſe of falſe bretheren.) The ſence hereof maye be two wais taken. (1) that he was not circūciſed, whē as notwithſtanding y^e falſe bretheren did importunately require it, & would hauehave cōpelled him: (2) or elſe y^t of ſet purpoſe Paule circūciſed him not, becauſe he ſaw y^t it would ſtraight ways come to paſſe that they would take occaſion thereof to ſlaunder. For, for this purpoſe they did thruſt themſelues into Paules company, y^t they might catch the one or the other of theſe two things: That is, if he did freely contemne ceremonies, that they mighte bring him therby into hatred with the Iewes: but if he did wholy abſtaine from libertie, they would by and by triumphe ouer him among the Gentils: as though being aſhamed he had recanted his doctrine. This ſecond ſence liketh me. that Paule, vnderſtanding their laying in waight, would not circumciſe Titus. He ſayth that he was not compelled, that the readers may perceaue that Circumciſion of it ſelf was not condemned, as though it were a thing euil: but that they contend about the neceſſitie of keping it. as though he ſhould ſay. I woulde hauehave bene readye to hauehave circumciſed him, had it not bene that there had bene a greater matter in it. For they would hauehave laid the Law vntounto vsus: but to ſuch compulſion I might not giuegive place.

5 VntoUnto whome no not for an hower.) This conſtancie was a zeale of Paules doctrine For whereas the falſe bretheren were earneſt vponupon him, & deſired nothing elſe but to accuſe him, and againe that he ſtoode ſtoutly in it, hee tooke awaye all doubt thereafter to come. Neither can he now be accuſed that he deceaued the Apoſtles. he doth deny therefore that euen for a ſpace he gaue place to them by ſubiection: that is to ſaye, after the maner of ſubiection, ſo that, that deede ſhoulde be as it were a document of libertie oppreſſed: otherwiſe with gentleneſſe and ſufferaunce he was alwaye ready, euen vntounto hys lyues ende to giuegive place to all men. That the truth of the Goſpell.) There was no danger, leaſt y^e Paule ſhould be robbed of his libertie, yea euen w^t ſubmitting himſelf vntounto other, but y^e example would hauehave hurt other. He did therfore wiſely conſider what was expedient. We ſee than both how farre offences are to be auoided, and alſo what is alwaye to bee conſidered in thinges indifferent: that is to ſay Edification. The ſum is this, that we p. 27be ſeruants of our brethren: but yet to this ende, that wee all may together ſerue the Lorde, and that the libertie of our conſciences maye remayne ſafe and ſound. for in that the falſe brethren would hauehave brought the godly into bondage, they were not to be obeyed. The truthe of the goſpell, is to be taken for the naturall purytie therof, or els which is the very ſame, for the pure and ſound doctrine therof. for the falſe Apoſtels did not vtterly aboliſhe the Goſpell, but they did falſifie it with their expoſitions. ſo that now it began to be feigned and viſarded, as alwaies it is when as we bowe, but euen a little from the ſimplycitie of Chriſte. With what face than will the papiſtes boaſt that they hauehave the true Goſpel? whiche is not onelyonly corrupted with many figments, but more than counterfeit with many wicked doctrines. Let vsus remember than that it is not ynough to hold the name of the goſpell, and a kind of ſinne therof, except the purity of it remayne firme and vnſpotted. Where are them that would with painted moderations reconcile vsus to the papiſts, as though it were lawfull to cut of ought from the doctrine of Religion as it were from money or land? We ſee haw far Paule abhorreth this kind ofTranſactio. agreement which auoucheth y^t not to be the true Goſpel, which is not the pure goſpell.

6 From thoſe which ſeemed to be ſomewhat (what they were in times paſt it is no matter to me. God accepteth not the perſō of a man) for vntounto me they which ſeemeth to be accounted off, added nothing.

7 Nay rather contrariwiſe, whan they ſawe the Goſpell of vncircumciſion committed to me, as the Goſpell of Circumciſion was committed to Peter.

8 For he that was mightie or effectuous in Peter to the Apoſtleſhip of Circumciſion, was alſo mightie in me toward the Gentils.

9 And when Iames, and Cephas, & Iohn, who ſeemed to be pillers did know the grace giuen vntounto me, they gaue the right hands of fellowſhip vntounto me & Barnabas: that we ſhould excerciſe Apoſtleſhip amōg the Gentils, and they vponupon the Circumciſion.

10 OnelyOnly that we ſhould be mindfull of the poore, in the which alſo I hauehave ben diligent, to do the ſame.

p. 286 From them which ſeemed.) Paule is not as yet content, except the Galathians doe alſo know, that he learned nothing of Peter and the Apoſtles. hereof it is that Porphirius and Iulianus acccuſe the holy man of pride, becauſe he doth take ſo much vponupon him. that he may not away to learne any thing of other: becauſe he boaſteth himſelf to be made a teacher or Doctor, hauing no mayſter or helper: becauſe he ſo greatly indeauoreth to ſeeme inferior to no man. But whoſoeuer ſhall conſider how neceſſary this boaſting was, will acknowledge that it was holye and worthye of very great prayſe. For if hee had graunted this to his aduerſaries. that he had profited vnderunder the Apoſtles, hee had armed them with two ſlaunders: for by and by they would hauehave ſayde, At length thou haſt ſomething profited, that thou mightſt correct that which thou haddeſt before offended (in) and that thou mightſt pluck back thy foote frō thy raſh enterpriſe. So firſt of al his whole doctrine of former time ſhould hauehave ben ſuſpected, & his building caſt down, ſecondarily in time to come alſo he ſhould hauehave had leſſe authoritie or eſtimation, becauſe he ſhold hauehave ben takē for a cōmon diſciple. We ſee thā y^t he is caried away into this holy boſting, not ſo much for his own cauſe, as by a neceſſitie of auouching his doctrine. Here is not contention of ambition, for that in no wiſe hee reaſoneth aboute the Perſons: but Paule will not that his Apoſtleſhip, vntounto which the authority of his doctrine was adioined, ſhould be blemiſhed with y^e greatneſſe of any man. And if this be not ynough to ſtop thoſe dogs mouths, yet doth it ſufficiētly confute their barking.

What they were in times paſt.) Theſe wordes are to bee read by themſelues. for to the end that his aduerſaries ſhoulde knowe that he cared not for the iudgement of men, he put in this Parentheſis. But this place they doe diuerſe wayes expounde. Ambroſe doeth thinke that their folly is by the waye reprehended, whiche didde laye the Apoſtles in Paules diſhe, to waye him downe withall, as if he ſhouid ſaye: As though I mighte not make exception that they were poore idiots, whiche knewe nothing but fiſhers craft: but as for me I was inſtructed (with learning) euen from my childehoode vnderunder my Mayſter Gamaliel: but I let all that paſſe, becauſe I know, God forceth not of any mens perſons.

p. 29Chryſoſtome and Hierome doe vnderſtande it more hardlye: as though after a ſort he threatned alſo the chiefe Apoſtles, according to this ſence: Whatſoeuer they be, they ſhall not eſcape the iudgement of God, if they go aſide from their office: neither the dignitie of their office, or elſe the eſtimation of men ſhall deliuer them. But vntounto me this expoſition ſeemeth plainer, and more agreeable to Paules mynde, That he graunteth them to hauehave bene the firſt or chiefe in deede in order of tyme, but hee denyeth that to be any hinderaunce vntounto him, whereby he ſhould not now holde his degree in like maner. He doeth not ſaye, that he careth not what maner of men they be at this preſente, but hee ſpeaketh of the time paſt, in whiche they were alreadye Apoſtles, he himſelfe being a ſtraunger from the fayth of Chriſt. In ſumme: Hee will not hauehave them iudge after the tyme paſt, nor yet that that prouerbe ſhoulde bee of force in this cauſe: That hee which is before in Tyme, ſhoulde be more abled in Righte. The perſon of a man.) Beſides the expoſitions whiche I hauehave already brought, this thirde alſo hath ſome ſhew, That in the Worldes pollicie or gouernment perſons hauehave place: but in the Spirituall kingdome of Chriſt they oughte to giuegive place. That is plauſiblye ſayde. but the Lorde ſpeaketh of Worldelye policye or gouernment when hee ſayeth, Thou ſhalte not accepte a perſon in iudgement. Deut. the tenth Chapt. and the ſeuenteenth ver. But I enter not into that Diſputation: becauſe it maketh nothing to this preſent place. for Paule doth ſimply vnderſtande, that that degree of Honoure into whiche the Apoſtles were come before, didde not lette that hee ſhoulde not be called of GOD, and of a man of no accounte, ſhoulde of a ſodayne be made equall vntounto them. (and) although there were great difference, that that auayled nothing before God, who is not ledde with the accepting of perſons. and whoſe calling is in daunger of no preiudices. But this as yet hee maye ſeeme to hauehave ſpoken withoute reaſon: for graunte that it bee true. that perſons are not to bee reſpected in the Lordes buſineſſe (as that in deede muſt dilligentlye be taken heede of) What is this to Peter, and to his fellowes the Apoſtles, who were not in perſon alone reuerent, but alſo in true holineſſe and p. 30pſiritual giftes for a perſon, or the reſpecting of a perſon is oppoſit or ſet againſt the feare of God & a good conſcience, Act. 10.34.35. & 1. Pet. 1.17. & this is the common vſage of ſcripture. But godlyneſſe, a right zeale, holyneſſe, and other like giftes did get vntounto the Apoſtles ſpeciall fauour and honour. and Paule trulye ſpeaketh as contemptuouſlye in this place, as though there had bene nothing in them but outward ſhewes. I aunſwere, That Paule doth eſtimate in this place the Apoſtles after the value they were of, but according to the vayn boaſting of his aduerſaries. for to the ende they might ſell their ſmoke, with full mouthes they thundered out the names of Peter, Iames, and Iohn: and that reuerence which the Churche did giuegive vntounto them, thoſe (his Aduerſaryes) did ambitiouſlye abuſe, to the contempte of Paule. He doeth not therefore in this place diſpute what kynde of men the Apoſtles were, ne yet what his opinyon is of them, this contention being fet aparte: but he confuteth thoſe outwarde ſhowes which the falſe Apoſtles did pretende. Therefore euen as afterwarde hee will intreate of Circumciſion, not according to the proper fence thereof, but according to the falſe and vngodly opinyon which thoſe deceauers deuiſed: euen ſo now alſo pronounceth he of the Apoſtles. that the outwarde ſhewes wherewith they ſhined in the worlde are nothing in the ſight of God. and that appeareth by the wordes. for why did they preferre them before Paule? forſooth becauſe they were afore him. This was meerelye an outwarde ſhewe. Otherwiſe no doubte but Paule according to his ſinguler modeſtye woulde hauehave honoured them with his harte, and hauehave embraced the giftes of GOD in them, who 1. Cor. 15.9. of his accord doth graunt himſelfe to be the leſt of the Apoſtles, and vnworthy to be accoūted of ſo noble an order. Conferred nothing to me. It might alſo be thus read Conferred nothing with me. for it is the ſame worde which twiſe before he hath vſed. The ſence notwithſtanding is certayne, that the Apoſtles hauing heard Paules Goſpell, pronounced not their Goſpell againſte it (as men accuſtomed when anye thing they hauehave better and more perfect) but being content to expounde the ſame, hauehave embraced his doctrine ſimplye and p. 31without delay: ſo that as in a thing neuer a whitte doubtfull, there was no alteration betweene them. And yet that Paule tooke not vponupon him the firſt place in ſpeaking, as excelling (the reſt) as they doe which preſcribe a forme (of ſpeaking) vntounto others: but he expounded his fayth, of whiche there was ſprong ſiniſter reports: and they (I meane the Apoſtles) allowed the ſame with their aſſent.

7 Nay rather contrariwiſe. They did ſtraight way giuegive vntounto him the right handes of fellowſhip. therefore they didde giuegive their teſtimonye to his doctrine, and that without exception, becauſe they brought nothing agaynſte it, as is accuſtomed in matters of controuerſie. and they profeſſed that his and their Goſpell was all one: and therefore they did vouchſafe him the honour and degree of fellow in commiſſion with them. Moreouer the maner of this fellowſhip was ſuch, that they parted the Prouinces or charge among them. therefore they were equall, therefore Paule was no whit vnderunder them. To giuegive the righte handes of fellowſhip, doth ſignifie in this place, to bee couenant fellowes. When they ſawe the Goſpell.) Hee doth denye the Apoſtles to hauehave gratified him in this (reſpect) that he was by their beck or graunt made an Apoſtle: but that the honoure of the Apoſtleſhip was yielded to him by them: leſt they ſhould take away that which God had giuen. He doth alwayes vrge this, that he was made an Apoſtle by the gifte and ordinaunce of God: but hee adioyneth here in this place, that hee was of the Apoſtles acknowledged to bee ſuche an one. and thereof it followeth that thoſe Varlets didde indeuoure that whiche the Apoſtles durſte not, leaſt they ſhould reſiſt the election of God. And here he beginneth to challenge vntounto himſelfe, that whiche was proper and peculier vntounto him before (all) others: that is to ſaye the Apoſtleſhip of vncircumciſion. for in this poynte did Paule and Barnabas differ from the reſidue, for that they two were appoynted Apoſtles to the Gentils. That was brought to paſſe by the Oracle of God: the which to be ratifyed, the Apoſtles not onelyonly ſuffered it, but alſo willed it, becauſe it was vngodly not to obay (it). We ſee than after what faſhion according to the oracle they deuided their offices amōg p. 32them: that is, that Paule and Barnabas ſhoulde bee the Apoſtles of the Gentils, and the other ſhoulde be the Apoſtles of the Iewes. Obiection. But this ſeemeth to be agaynſt the commaundemente of Chriſt, which biddeth the twelue goe into the whole worlde, Mar. 16.15. I aunſwere, Anſwere. that this is not reſtrayned to eueryevery one of their perſons ſingulerly, but that the ende of their office is deſcribed generally: that is to ſay, that ſaluation or health mighte be publiſhed to all nations by the Doctrine of the Goſpell. For it is manifeſt that the Apoſtles neuer trauayled the (whole) Worlde. naye rather it is credible that none of the xii. euer paſſed ouer into Europe: for that whiche they affyrme of Peter, I cannot tell whether it be a tale or not: but truelye it is very vncertayne. If any man will make exception and ſaye, notwithſtanding this, eueryevery one of their miniſteries is cōmon, as well to the Gentils as to the Iewes: I graunte it, as occaſion ſhall ſerue. I graunt, I ſay, that eueryevery Apoſtle had the office of ſpreading abroade the Goſpell, as well among the Gentils, as the Iewes: neyther had they ſo parted it among themſelues that they had limits or boundes ſet betweene, beyonde whiche it was not lawfull to paſſe: as kingdomes, principallities, and Capitaynſhips are accuſtomed to be bounded. For we ſee howe Paule, whereſoeuer he came, accounted it ordinary firſt of all to offer his labour and miniſterie to the Iewes. as it was lawfull for him among the Gentils to exhibite and ſhewe himſelfe an Apoſtle and teacher vntounto the Iewes: ſo was it free vntounto the others to bring vntounto Chriſte whomeſoeuer they coulde of the Gentils, the whiche authoritie Peter vſed towarde Cornelius and others, Act. 10.1. But becauſe the other Apoſtles were in that Countrey whoſe inhabitauntes were almoſte all Iewes: Paule went about Aſia, Graecia, and other farre Countreyes: by this occaſion he was peculiarly ordayned the Apoſtle of the Gentils. Yea rather when as the Lorde in the beginning commaunded him to be ſette aparte, his will was that hee ſhoulde leaue Antiochia, and Syria, and go ouer the ſea into far countreyes for the Gentils ſake. Therefore his ordinary Apoſtleſhip was ouer the Gentils, and his extraordinary Apoſtleſhip ouer the Iewes. Contrarywiſe, the other tooke vntounto them properly the (charge of the) Iewes: but vnderunder this condition, that p. 33vntounto the Gentils, when occaſion was offered, their miniſterie ſhould not be ſhut vp. but this later, was as it were, extraordinarye vntounto them. But if the Apoſtleſhip of Peter did peculyerly belong vntounto the Iewes, let the Romaniſtes conſider by what right they drawe or deriue the ſucceſſion of the Primacie from him vntounto them. For if the Pope of Rome doe therefore challenge vntounto himſelfe the ſupremacie becauſe he is the ſucceſſour of Peter: he muſt exerciſe the ſame ouer the Iewes. In this place Paule is declared to be the cheefe Apoſtle of the Gentils, whome they denye to hauehave bene the Romane Biſhop. therefore, that he may enioy ſome poſſeſſion of his Supremacie, hee muſt get him churches among the Iewes. for it becommeth vsus to acknowledge him (our) Apoſtle, which both by the determination or appoyntment of the holye Ghoſt, and by the conſente of the whole Colledge of the Apoſtles, is expreſly named vntounto vsus. Hee that doth paſſe ouer this right to Peter, doth confound the ordinaunce both of God and man. The figure Metonymya in the wordes circumciſion beeing meant for the Iewes, and vncircumciſion for the Gentiles, is ſufficiently knowen, and therefore I paſſe it ouer.

8 He that was effectuous. He affirmeth the charge giuen vntounto him, by right to hauehave belonged vntounto him, becauſe the Lord had ſhewed foorth his power in his miniſterie. Such manifeſtation of God his working or efficacie, as we hauehave often ſeene, is as it were a ſeale to ſeale the certentie of doctrine, and to confirme the office of teaching. But it is doubtfull whether Paul do referre the efficacie of God to the ſucceſſe of his preaching, or to the graces of the holy Ghoſt, which then were giuen vntounto the beleeuers. I do not take it to be ment of the bare ſucceſſe, but of the ſpirituall energie or effectuall working of which he maketh mention 1. Cor. 2.4. The ſumme is, it was no vayne couenaunt that the Apoſtles had among them ſelues, but a iudgement ſealed of God.

9 And when they did know the grace. In diſpleaſure doth he defame their proude diſdaynfulnes, who made little account of the grace of God, which drue the principall Apoſtles to hauehave him in admiration and reuerence. For their winking was not to be borne withall, if they would pretende that they knew p. 34not that which the Apoſtles in the beginning did manifeſtly ſee. Here are we admoniſhed, to giuegive place to the grace of God, whereſoeuer it is ſeene, except we meane to warre agaynſt the holy Ghoſt him ſelfe, who will not hauehave his gyftes to be ydle and fruitleſſe. Therefore the grace which the Apoſtles did ſee to be giuen to Paul and Barnabas, did prouoke and moue them to eſtabliſh their felowſhip in the miniſtery. Iames & Cephas. I hauehave afore ſhewed that this Iames was the ſonne of Alpheus: neither could he be the brother of Iohn, which Herode had a litle afore ſlaine, and that he ſhould be one of the diſciples, which ſhould ſo much excell the Apoſtles, in my iudgement, is very vnlikely. And that he (I meane Iames) was a principall among the Apoſtles, Luke alſo doth ſhew, who doth attribute vntounto him the concluſion and the defining of the cauſe in the Councell. Act. 15.13. and 21.18. he ſheweth that all the Seniors of the Church of Ieruſalem were gathered together vntounto him. That they ſeemed to be pillers, he ſpeaketh not it in contempt, but he alleageth the cōmon opinion: becauſe thereof it followeth, that that which they did, might not be refuſed or reiected raſhly or lightly. Seeing that the queſtion is here touching dignitie it is maruell that Iames is preferred before Peter. it may happe that it was becauſe he was ruler or biſhop of the Church of Ieruſalem. As touching the name Piller, we know that the nature of things doth ſo beare or ſuffer, that they which excell in wit, in wiſedome, or in other giftes, are alſo ſuperiors in authoritye. In the Church of God the matter ſtandeth thus, that as eueryevery one excelleth in greater grace, ſo the more honour ſhoulde bee giuen vntounto him. For it is vnthankfulneſſe, naye rather impiety, not to worſhip the ſpirite of God, whereſoeuer he appeareth in his giftes. Moreouer as the people cannot lack a Paſtor: ſo eueryevery company of Paſtors doth require ſome moderatour or ruler. But let that alwayes be in force, that he whiche is chiefe of all, be as though he were Miniſter. Mat. 23.11.

10 Only that he ſhould.) It appeareth that the Bretheren which were in Iury were very pore: otherwiſe they would not hauehave burdened other Churches. That mought happen partlye for becauſe of the ſundrye calamities of the whole nation: partly for that they were ſpoyled of their goods, theire owne p. 35countreymen cruelly raging againſt them. It was meete that they ſhould be ayded with the releefe of the Gentils, who were indebted to them for the Goſpell, a treaſure indeede incomparable. Paule doth ſaye that he hath faythfullye performed that which the Apoſtles required of him, and therefore hee taketh awaye from his aduerſaries the pretence or coloure whiche they ſought.

11 And when Peter was come to Antiochia, I manifeſtlye reſiſted him, becauſe he was worthy of reprehenſion.

12 For before that there came ſome from Iames, he did eate meat together with the Gentils, but when they were come he conuaied himſelf away, and ſeperated himſelfe from them, fearing thoſe which were of the Circumciſion.

13 And the other Iewes did diſſemble alſo with him: in ſo much that Barnabas alſo was led away into their ſimulation.

14 But when I ſaw that they went not forwarde,Recto pede .i. with a right foote. rightly to the truth of the Goſpell, I ſayd to Peter before them all. If thou, ſeing thou art a Iew, doeſt liue like a Gē tile and not like a Iewe, why compelleſt thou the Gentils to playe the Iewes?

15 We by nature are Iewes, and not ſinners of the Gentils.

16 Knowing this, that man is not iuſtified by the workes of the Lawe, but by the faith of Ieſus Chriſt: and wee hauehave beleeued in Chriſte Ieſus, that wee might be iuſtified by the faith of Chriſt, and not by the workes of the lawe: becauſe that all fleſhe ſhall not be iuſtified by the law.No fleſhe ſhall be iuſtified.

11 When Peter was come.) Whoſoeuer ſhal prudently way al circumſtances, ſhall agree to me (as I hope) that this happened before the Apoſtles had pronounced that the Gentils ſhould not be moleſted about ceremonies. For Peter woulde not hauehave bene afrayde to offende Iames or thoſe whiche were ſent from him: p. 36ſeeing that that determination proceeded from his iudgement. but nowe Paule is caried further, for that he auoucheth his goſpell agaynſt the ſimulation of Peter. In the beginning he ſaid, that the certentie of his Goſpell did not hang vppon Peter and the Apoſtles, that by their arbitrement it ſhould ſtande or fall. Secondarily, he ſayde that it was approued of all without any exception or gayneſaying: ſpecially of them which by all mens conſentes were the principall. Now (as I hauehave ſayd) he goeth farther, ſhewing that Peter was reprehended by him, becauſe he enclined to the contrary part: by which occaſion alſo, he entreth in to the handling of the cauſe it ſelfe. And hereof it appeareth howe ſounde his doctrine is, of which he hath not onelyonly obteined a voluntary ſubſcription or conſent: but alſo howe conſtauntly he hath auouched it agaynſt Peter, and howe in the controuerſie he was ſuperiour. What more doubt dothe there then remayne, that it ſhould not be receiued for a certaine and an inuincible trueth? That ſlaunder alſo is beaten downe, That Paule was a common diſciple farre diſtaunt from the degree of Apoſtleſhip. For this reprehenſion is a ſigne of equalitie. I graunt that the higheſt are reprehended of the loweſt, and that by right. and ſo it followeth not that they which reproue any man, be ſtraightways equals vntounto them. For this libertie is of God permitted the inferiours toward their betters. but the qualitie of the reprehenſion is in this place to be marked. For Paule did not ſimply reprehende Peter as one Chriſtian doth another: but he did it as they ſay Ex officio, that is to ſay, according to the right or prerogatiue of the Apoſtolike perſon which he executed. And here the Papacie of Rome is throwne flat downe with an other thunderbolt: ſpeciallye that ſhameleſneſſe or impudencie is conuinced and manifeſtly ſhewed in that the Romane Antichriſt doth boaſt himſelfe free from giuing an account, and in that he doeth exempt himſelfe from the iudgement of the whole Church. In this place one man, not raſhly, not with an vnlawfull boldnes, but according to y^e power and authoritie graunted him of God, doth rebuke Peter before the whole Church: and Peter doth ſubmit himſelfe obediently to the rebuke. nay rather the whole diſputation of theſe two Chapters, was nothing elſe then a manifeſt ouerthrowing of p. 37that tyrannicall ſupremacie, which the Romaniſts do babble to hauehave bene founded by the law of God. But if they will hauehave god to be the authour thereof, they muſt needes then forge a newe ſcripture. And if they will not hauehave him to their profeſſed enimie: of neceſſitie they muſt wipe out theſe two chapters out of the holy ſcripture. Becauſe he was worthy of reprehenſion.) The greeke Participle ſignifieth reprehenſus, that is, reprehended, but I am out of doubte that it is put in ſteede of the Nowne, for him that deſerueth a iuſte reprehenſion. for whereas Chryſoſtom doth enterprete it thus, That that complainte and the accuſation did ariſe of others, truly it is a cold or weake expoſition. For it is often vſed of the Greekes, to giuegive vntounto participles the ſignification of nownes, the which eueryevery man ſeeth to agree to this place. and hereof a man maye readilye gather, how vnapt the expoſition of Hierome and Chriſoſtome is, who thought the Apoſtles of a ſet matche to hauehave played this part or pranke before the people. Neither doe theſe two wordes foreign helpe them, which ſignifie that Peter being reprehended to his face had neuer a word to aunſwere. Whereas Chriſoſtome doth iudge, that they, to auoyd offence, would hauehave talked together priuately, if they had had any diſſention, it is of no waight: for other ſmall offences were little to bee regarded in reſpect of this moſt pernicious offence, becauſe the Churche (by this) ſhould be deuyded, becauſe (by this) the Chriſtian lybertie was in hazarde, becauſe (by this) the grace of Chriſt was ouerwhelmed. openly therfore muſt this open or publique ſinne be reprehended. The cheefeſt argument or reaſon whereto Hierome leaneth, is to be friuolous and vayne. Why would Paule hauehave condemned [ſayth he] in an other, that which he counteth prayſe worthy in himſelfe? for he boaſteth that to the Iewes he was become a Iewe, 1. Cor. 9.20. I aunſwere, That Peter did farre otherwiſe. for Paule didde not in any wiſe conforme himſelfe to the Iewes, but that the doctrine of libertie ſhoulde remayne ſafe and ſound. whereby neither would he circumciſe Titus, that the truth of the Goſpell might remayn whole. But Peter did ſo play the Iewe, that he draue the Gentils into bondage and ſeruitude: and alſo as it were with this preiudice he did abaſe the doctrine of Paule. He did not therefore holde the p. 38meane: becauſe he had more regarde to gratifie, than to edifie, and he did more reſpect what pleaſed the Iewes, then what was expedient for the whole body. More rightly therefore hath Auguſtine iudged, whiche ſayth that nothing was done of a ſette matehe; but that Paule did ſincerelye of a Chriſtian zeale ſette himſelfe againſte the naughtye and vnſeaſonable ſimulation of Peter: becauſe he deemed it harmefull to the Church.

12 For before certaine came.) The ſtate of the cauſe is here deſcribed, that Peter for the Iewes ſake had made a departing from the Gentils: ſo that he would driue them from the cōmunion of the Church, except they would renounce the liberty of the Goſpell, and put their necks vnderunder the yoke of the law. If Paul ſhould now hauehave held his peace, his whole doctrine did fall, his whole building erected through his miniſterie did lie aground. therefore it was neede for him both ſtoutly to reſiſt, and ſharpely to fight. Here we beholde how warily we muſt attemper our ſelues to pleaſe men: leſt we ſwerue aſide from the right courſe, with too much deſire to pleaſe, or elſe with prepoſterous feare to offend. If that might happen to Peter, howe much more eaſilye ſhall it happen to vsus, except we take very good heede?

14 When I ſaw they went not forward rightly.) Some expounde this of the Gentils, who being troubled with the example of Peter, did now begin to faynt: but it is more conuenient to vnderſtand it of Peter & Barnabas and their followers. The right path or way to the truth of the Goſpel, keeping ſound the true Doctrine, was to vnite and bring in one the Iewes and the Gentils. but to bynde the conſciences of the Godlye with the neceſſitye of keeping the lawe, and in ſilence to burye the Doctrine of libertie: were an vnworthye rewarde of vnitie. The truth of the Goſpell. Paule taketh in this place as afore hee didde: vntounto which he ſetteth oppoſite the colour, wherewith Peter and other did deforme the Goſpell: Whiche ſith it is ſo, it is not to bee doubted that Paules contention was ſerious and waightye. As touching doctrine they did verye well agree: but becauſe Peter hauing no reſpecte of Doctrine did too too ſeruilely followe the Iewes mynde, therefore is he reproued of halting. There be ſome which with another pretence may excuſe Peter: for that hee being the Apoſtle of the p. 39Circumciſion, ought to hauehave had more care of the Iewes ſauegarde or ſaluation: and neuertheleſſe they maye alſo graunte, that Paule did well in taking vponupon him the Gentils cauſe. but it is a fonde thing to defende that whiche the holye Ghoſt hath condemned by the mouth of Paule. Neyther was mans buſineſſe talked of here, but the puritie of the Goſpell was brought into daunger▪ leaſt it ſhoulde be defiled with Iudaicall leauen. Before all. By this example we are admoniſhed, that they are openly to be chaſtiſed, which to the hurt of many hauehave offended: as farre forth as it is profitable for the Churche. The ende is, leſt if ſuche a fault ſhoulde be lefte vnpuniſhed, it ſhoulde by the example thereof doe harme. and Paule doth teach 1. Tim. 5. ver. 20. that that oughte to bee obſerued namely in Prieſts or Elders, that is to ſaye for that, in reſpecte of the office whiche they beare, they doe by their example more greeuouſlye hurte. but ſpeciallye it was profitable to defende conſtantlye before the people a good cauſe whiche did belong to all, whereby Paule might make it more manifeſt that he did not flye y^e light.

If thou ſeing thou art a Iewe. Paules Oration to Peter conſiſteth of two partes. in the firſte he doth expoſtulate for that he doth the Gentils wrong becauſe he doth driue them to keepe the lawe, from which he himſelfe woulde be free. For beſide this that eueryevery man ought to keepe that Law which he preſcribeth vntounto other: in this yet he offended the more, for that hee would compell the Gentils to Iudaiſme, and he being himſelfe a Iew permitted to himſelfe libertye. For the Law was giuen to the Iewes and not to the Gentils. Therfore he vſeth an Argumēt a minori ad mains frō the les to y^e more, furthermore this was an hard and a violent coaction, that he did renounce vntounto the Gentils communion or partaking except they wold receaue the yoke of y^e law, which was an vniuſt offer & conditiō. And the whole force of y^e reprehending cōſiſteth in this word**That is, the law.: which of Chriſoſtom & Hierom was not perceiued. for the vſe of ceremonies was free to edification: ſo y^t the faithfull were not robbed of their liberty nor neceſſitie laid vponupon thē. from y^e which y^e goſpel hath ſet thē free. 15 We are by nature Iewes.) I know that to ſome it ſemeth to be a figure called Anthypophora in Engliſh an obiectiō: as thogh Paul did preuēt in y^e perſō of y^e aduerſe party p. 40that which he mought obiect: that is, y^t the Iewes hauehave a greater priuiledge (as they commonly ſaye). not that they might boaſt immunitie or freedome from the law. for it ſhoulde hauehave bene more then vnlikelye for them vntounto whome the lawe was giuen, to boaſt of that: but becauſe they ought by certayne notable tokens to be diſtinguiſhed from the Gentils. That, therfore I neither wholy reiect, neyther yet altogether allowe, as by and by it ſhall appeare. Some doe vnderſtande this as ſpoken in the perſon of Paule, but in this ſence: if thou wouldeſt laye the burthen of the Lawe vppon the Iewes. it were more agreeable to reaſon, for it commeth vntounto them by inheritaunce. but this expoſition doth not agree neither. It is rather, than, the ſeconde parte of the ſentence which beginneth with the figure Occupatio. Occupatio is a Figure whereby in preuenting our aduerſaries Obiections we confute the ſame.for whereas there was a difference betwene the Iewes and the Gentils, for that the Gentils were vnholy and vncleane, but the Iewes holy, as farre forthe as God had adopted them for his people: the Iewes might contende as touching this prerogatiue. But Paule by preuenting dothe wiſely wreſte it to the contrarye. for ſeing that the Iewes themſelues with all their dignitie were conſtrained to flie to the faithe of Chriſt: howe muche more behoued it the Gentils to get ſaluation by faith? The mind of Paule than is thus, We which ſeme to excell other, which hauehave bine through the benifite of his couenaunt alwayes nighe God; hauehave neuer the later founde no reaſon or meane to get ſaluation, but vy beleuing in Chriſt; why than ſhould we preſcribe any other meane vntounto the Gentils? For if the Lawe were neceſſarie, or els could preuaile the folowers thereof vntounto ſaluation: it would moſte of all hauehave preuailed vsus, vntounto whome it was giuen. and if ſo be that we hauehave left it and are gone vntounto Chriſt, much leſſe are the gentils to be vrged to take it vppon thē. The word Sinner doth ſignifie here, as it doth often in other places, vnholye or loſt and eſtraunged from God. ſuch were the Gentils, who had no fellowſhip with God: but the Iewes were by adoption the Children of God, and therefore ſegregate or ſet apart into holyneſſe. Whereas he ſayth▪ by nature, hee doth not meane that they are by nature free from the corruption of mankinde: for Dauid who diſcended by lineage from Abraham, confeſſeth that he was begotte p. 41of vncleane ſeede. Pſa. 51.7. but the remedye of grace wherewith they were ſanctified, didde ſuppreſſe the corruption of nature to whiche they were in daunger. And becauſe the promiſe made the bleſſing an inheritaunce, therefore it is called a good thing, naturall or by nature. So to the Romaynes, Chap. 11. ver. 16. he ſayth they were ſprong oute of an holy roote. Therefore when hee ſayth, We are by nature Iewes, is as muche as if he ſhoulde ſaye, Wee are borne holye not by our owne deſart, but becauſe we are choſen of God to be his people. We than which by nature were Iewes, what hauehave we done? wee hauehave beleeued in Chriſt. To what ende hauehave wee beleeued? that by the fayth of Chriſte we mighte be iuſtifyed. For what cauſe? Becauſe we were conuinced and put oute of doubte that men could not obtayne righteouſneſſe by the workes of the Lawe. Hee than reaſoneth after the nature and effecte of faith, that the Iewes are not iuſtified by the Lawe. For as they who would eſtabliſh their owne righteouſneſſe of workes are not ſubiecte to the righteouſneſſe of GOD, Rom. 10.3. ſo on the contrary part they whiche beleeue in Chriſte, doe confeſſe themſelues to be ſinners, and renounce the righteouſneſſe of workes. Hee is buſied here in the chiefeſt queſtyon: naye rather in the whole ſumme almoſt of the controuerſie, is included in this propoſition: wherefore it is meete the more dilligently to ſtande vponupon the diſcuſſing of this preſent place. Firſte and formoſt this is to be noted, that righteouſneſſe muſt bee ſought by the fayth of Chriſt, becauſe we cannot bee iuſtified by workes. Now it is demaunded what hee meaneth by Workes of the Law. The Papiſtes being beguiled by Origen and Hierome doe ſuppoſe that the controuerſie is of ſhadowes onelye: nay rather they doe firmely define ſo. and therefore they doe alwaye by the Workes of the Law interprete ceremonies: as though Paule didde not diſpute of the free righteouſneſſe which is giuen vntounto vsus by Chriſt. neyther doe they holde it to be an abſurditie that no man is iuſtified by the workes of the Law:Without rime or reaſon. and yet (they holde) that wee are accounted righteous before GOD through the merite of workes. To bee ſhorte they account no mention to be made of morall workes, in this place. But the Texte doeth plainelye ſhewe, that the p. 42morall law is comprehended alſo in theſe wordes: for almoſte whatſoeuer thinges Paule will afterwarde adde or ſpeake, they doe pertayne to the morall lawe rather than to the ceremoniall, moreouer he doeth alway ſet the free accepting or allowing, wherewith God doth vouchſafe to accepte vsus, agaynſte the righteouſneſſe of the law. But the aduerſaries obiect, Obiection. That workes ſhoulde hauehave bene named, without (any) addition: except Paule would reſtrayne it to ſome certaine ſpecialtye. I aunſwere, Anſwere. That of this (kinde of) ſpeaking there is a very good reaſon: for although a man might excell the Aungels in holyneſſe, yet were there no rewarde due for his workes, except (in this reſpect) becauſe it is promiſed of the Lorde. therefore wheras the perfection (or perfect obſeruation) of the lawe is righteouſnes, and hath the reward of eternall life laide vp (therfore); it commeth of God who pronounceth that they ſhall hauehave the victory which doe fulfil the ſame. of which matter I will ſpeake more in place conuenient. Moreouer the contention with the Iewes was concerning the Lawe. Paule than had rather, by fighting with them hande to hande, as I may ſaye, wound them within their owne liſtes; than by ſtraing farder to ſhewe them a kinde of running awaye, as though he diſtruſted his cauſe. therefore hee abideth firmelye in the diſputation of the Lawe. Secondarily they obiect, Obiection. that ther was onelyonly a queſtion aboute ceremonies moued: the which we graunt alſo. Why than, ſaye they, ſhould Paule paſſe ouer from the particular cauſe to the vniuerſall? Anſwere. This was the onelyonly occation of the error of Origen and Hierom: for they thought it conuenient▪ that Paule, ſeing the falſe Apoſtles contended about ceremonies onelyonly, ſhould apprehend or take hold of no more (than they ſpake of). But they cōſidered not that this was the very cauſe why he did ſo ſharply contend (with them), for that that doctrine did drawe a longer traine, than at the firſt ſight it did ſhewe. for it woulde not hauehave bene ſo greeuous to Paule to hauehave had ceremonies obſerued, as to hauehave the confidence and glory of ſaluation aſcribed vntounto works. as whan we contend about y^e forbidding of eating fleſhe except vponupon certen dayes, we do not reſpect ſo much howe great a matter it is to forbid the eating of fleſhe, as wee are carefull concerning the ſnare of the conſcience. Therefore Paule doth not ſtray beſide the cauſe or matter, when as he frameth p. 43his diſputation of the whole Lawe: although the falſe Apoſtles did onelyonly contende about Ceremonies, for therefore did they vrge Ceremonyes, that men ſhould ſeeke ſaluation in the keeping of the Law: becauſe, forſooth, they fayned it to bee a meritorious worſhipping or ſeruice. wherefore Paule doeth not lay againſt them the Lawe morall, but the onelye grace of Chriſt. Neyther is the whole Epiſtle ſpente in this vniuerſall contention, for he commeth at length to Ceremonies by name. but becauſe this was a principall Knot and Doubte, Whether righteouſneſſe happened vntounto vsus by Fayth or by workes, it behooued that it ſhould firſt be diſpatched. The Papiſtes at theſe dayes, becauſe it greeueth them, if we wring out of them that men are iuſtified by fayth only, do hardly graunt morall things to be comprehended vnderunder the workes of the Law. yea many of them obiecting the gloſe of Hierome thinke they hauehave handled the matter very handſomly: but the texte will euidently ſhewe y^t he ſpeaketh of the morall law alſo. But by the faith.) He doth not meane ceremonies only or any maner workes not to ſuffice, except the helpe of fayth be ioyned: but vntounto the negatiue propoſition he doth counterſet the excluſiue: as if he ſhould ſay, Not by workes, but by the onelyonly fayth of Chriſt. Otherwiſe it were an vnapt ſentence, & cleane came from his purpoſe. for y^e falſe Apoſtles did not refuſe chriſt, nor yet faith: but they required that ceremonyes ſhould be ioyned with thē. If Paul would hauehave allowed ſuch a maner of ioining, there had bene a full agreement betweene thē. and than Paule had in vain troubled the Church with ſo hateful a contention. Let this than remain determined: that in this place there is an excluſiue propoſition, That we are not iuſtified otherwiſe than by faith: or, That we are not iuſtified but by faith, vntounto y^e which, this is equiualent, We are iuſtified by faith only. Wherby it appeareth how childiſhly the Papiſtes at theſe dayes doe dote, brawling with vsus aboute the worde OnelyOnly, as though it were oures, but forſooth the Papiſtes Diuinitie was vnknowne to Paule. they ſaye a man is iuſtifyed by faith, but they place part of the iuſtifiing in works. Paule was ignoraunt of ſuch halfe iuſtifying. for whan hee teacheth y^t we are righteous through faith, becauſe wee cannot be ſo by works: he taketh it as a thing graunted which is (alſo) true y^t we are capable of Chriſts righteouſneſſe no otherwiſe, p. 44than if we be in our owne righteouſneſſe pore and needy. Therfore eyther nothing, or all oughte to bee aſcribed to fayth or workes. As touching the word righteouſneſſe or iuſtifying, and in what maner, fayth is the cauſe thereof, afterwarde ſhall bee ſeene. All fleſh ſhall not be iuſtified. Hee hath afore cited the conſcience of Peter and of other to be witneſſe, nowe he doeth more confyrme it by pronouncing that it is ſo: that is, Not one mortall man ſhall obtaine righteouſneſſe by the workes of the law. This is the foundation of free righteouſneſſe, when we are made naked and bare of our own righteouſneſſe. Finallye in denying any mortal man to be iuſtified, is as much, as if he ſhould ſay, that all men are ſhut out from the righteouſneſſe of the law, nor that it can be, that any man ſhould attayne therevnto.

17 Farthermore if we ſeeking to be iuſtified in Chriſt, are our ſelues found alſo ſinners: is Chriſt therfore the miniſter of ſinne? God forbid.

18 For if I build thoſe thinges agayne whiche I hauehave deſtroyed, I make my ſelfe a treſpaſſer.

19 For I by the law am dead to the lawe, that I might liue to God: with Chriſt I am crucified.

20 And I liue no… any more, but Chriſt liueth in mee, in as much as I liue now in the fleſh, I liue in the faith of the ſonne of God, which hath loued me and giuen himſelfe for me,

21 I caſt not away the grace of God. for if righteouſneſſe be by the Lawe; than Chriſte hath dyed**Gratis, in vayne. for nothing.

17 If we ſeeking.) He returneth (his talke) now to the Galathians, leſt any man ſhoulde ioyne this ſentence with the former, as though it were a part of the communication hadde with Peter. for to what ende ſhoulde theſe thinges neede for Peter? Although this bee nothing, or a very little to the matter. therfore let eueryevery man chooſe whether of them he liſt. Furthermore ſome read it affirmatiuely, among whome is Chriſoſtome: and they make this the ſence, If we ſeeking to be iuſtified in Chriſt, are not yet fullye iuſt, but are as yet vncleane, neyther (yet) p. 45Chriſt doth ſuffice vsus vntounto righteouſneſſe: it followeth that Chriſt is the miniſter of doctrine which leaueth men in ſinne. as though hauing propounded this abſurditie, Paule ſhould accuſe of blaſphemie thoſe who doe attribute parte of iuſtification to the law. But becauſe the word abſit, which is God forbid doth by and by follow, which Paule is not accuſtomed to vſe but after interrogations or queſtions: I ſuppoſe it is rather ſpoken to remoue the abſurditie which ſeemed to followe of it. According to his cuſtome than, by aſking (the queſtion) he vſeth the figure Occupatio, as in the perſon of his aduerſaries: If, ſayeth he, the righteouſneſſe of fay…h doe bring this, that we whiche be Iewes, and ſanctified from our mothers wombe, ſhould be deemed guiltie and polluted: ſhall we ſaye that Chriſte is the authour of ſinne, as he which maketh the power of ſinne to flouriſh in his? Thereof ſprang this doubt, for that hee had ſayde that the Iewes, by beleuing in Chriſt, had giuen ouer the righteouſneſſe of the Law. for if Chriſt be taken out of the way, the Iewes being ſeperated from the common pollution of the Gentils, doe ſeeme in that reſpect to be after a ſort exempted oute of the number of ſinners. The grace of Chriſt doth make them and the Gentils equall, and the remedy which is to both common, doth ſhew their diſeaſe and ſickneſſe to bee like (in equalitie). The word Alſo maketh to this purpoſe. We our ſelues alſo, ſaith he, we ſpeake not of eueryevery body, but of thoſe who are notable ſuch as the Iewes were. God forbid.) Deſeruingly doth he reiect that, for Chriſt, in vncouering of ſinne which laye hidden, is not the miniſter of ſinne: as though making iuſtice of no force, he ſhould open the gate vntounto ſinne. nor yet as though hee ſhould eſtabliſh the kingdome of ſinne. This didde deceaue the Iewes that they did without Chriſt challenge to themſelues ſome holyneſſe, which in deede was none at all. thereof (grew) their quarrell and complaynt, Did Chriſt therefore come, that he ſhould take from vsus the righteouſneſſe of the Law? that of holy he ſhould make vsus vnholy? that he ſhould make vsus in ſubiection to ſinne and guiltineſſe? Paule denyeth it to be ſo, and therefore he reiecteth this blaſphemie with deteſting (it). for Chriſt did not being ſinne but he did reueale ſinne: neither did he take away iuſtice or righteouſneſſe, but he drewe awaye the p. 46falſe viſar from the Iewes.

18 For if I build againe.) The aunſwere is double. This former aunſwere is vndirecte, whileſt hee ſheweth, that that is repugnaunt to his whole doctrine: ſeing that hee hadde ſo preached the fayth of Chriſte, that he ioyned withall the ruine and aboliſhing of ſinne. For as wee are taught, 1. Ioh. 3.8. that Chriſt came not to build vp the kingdome of ſinne, but to deſtroye it: ſo Paule doth witneſſe here that hee in preaching the Goſpell hath reſtored true righteouſneſſe, that ſinne might be deſtroyed.That is Chriſt. Than was it verye diſagreeable, that of one and the ſelfe ſame, ſinne ſhoulde bee both flayne and reuyued. By the Obiecting of this abſurditie, hee putteth awaye the ſlaunder.

19 For I by the Law.) Nowe followeth the directe aunſwere. That that oughte not to bee imputed to Chriſte, whiche properlye is the worke of the Lawe. for there is no neede of Chriſte to make voyde the righteouſneſſe of the Law: becauſe the Lawe it ſelfe doeth kill the Diſciples thereof: as though hee ſhoulde ſaye, You deceaue poore miſerable men with a falſe imagination, as though they ſhoulde liue by the lawe, and by that pretence you detayne them in the Lawe: in the meane while you make the Goſpell to bee ſpyted, as though it broughte to noughte the righteouſneſſe whiche wee hauehave by the Lawe. but it is the Lawe it ſelfe whiche compelleth vsus to die to it. for wheras it threatneth deſtruction vntounto vsus and leueth nothing vntounto vsus but deſpaire, by that means it driueth vsus from truſting to it. A more eaſie vnderſtanding of this place is to be ſought out of the ſeuenth chapter to the Romaines, for there Paule doth plainely deſcribe, that no man liueth to the lawe, but he vntounto whome the lawe is dead, that is to ſay, idle and without working. or for as ſoone as the law beginneth to liue in vsus, it ſtriketh vsus with a deadly wound wherby we periſhe: and with all it inſpireth life, ſinne being firſt dead. They therefore which liue vntounto the Lawe, hauehave neuer felte the ſtrength of the Lawe, no nor yet hauehave once taſted what the lawe meaneth: for the law being truly vnderſtanded, doth compell vsus to dye to it, and hereof is ſinne, and not of p. 47Chriſt.

To die to the Law, is eyther to renounce it and to be ſette at freedome from the power and dominyon thereof, ſo that wee hauehave no confidence in it, nor agayne that it holde vsus Captyues vnderunder the yoke of bondage: or elſe thus, for that it alotteth vsus all to deſtruction, wee can fynde no lyfe in it. and this latter ſence is more conuenient. For hee denyeth Chriſte to bee the authour of this euill, becauſe the Lawe is more hurtfull then profitable: but (hee affyrmeth) that there is included in the Lawe it ſelfe, the curſe which killeth vsus. Whereof it followeth, that that ſtroke or wounde whiche is ſtriken by the Lawe, is in deede deadlye: agaynſte this is ſette another kynde of death being liuely, in the fellowſhip of the croſſe of Chriſt. And therefore hee ſayeth that hee is crucified together with Chriſte, that hee mighte beginne to lyue. That diſtinction that commonlye hath preuayled doth darken the naturall ſence and meaning: if they reade I by the Lawe am deade to the Lawe that I mighte liue to Chriſte. but the contrarye Texte ſoundeth better (namelye) I by the Lawe am deade to the Lawe: and than by it ſelfe, that I mighte liue to Chriſte I am crucified vyith Chriſt.

That I might liue to God) Hee ſheweth that kynde of death to bee worthye the wiſhing, whereof the falſe Apoſtles tooke occaſion of ſpighte. for hee declareth that wee doe not therefore dye to the Lawe that wee ſhoulde lyue to ſinne, but to GOD. To liue to GOD ſometyme is (taken) to frame our lyfe after his will: ſo that wee ſtudye nothing elſe all our life long, but to be accepted of him. but in this place, it is to liue the life of GOD (if I maye ſo ſaye) whereby the thinges oppoſite maye aunſwere the one the other. for by that reaſon that it is ſayde wee dye vntounto the Lawe, by the ſame it is ſayde that wee liue vntounto GOD. In ſumme, Paule doeth admoniſhe vsus that that death is not mortall, but rather a cauſe of a better life: for God taketh vsus oute of the Shipwracke of the Lawe, and by his grace reſtoreth vsus to a better life. I lette paſſe other expoſitions, me thinkes this is the naturall meaning of Paule. Whereas p. 48he ſayth he is crucified with Chriſt, he expreſſeth the meane how we being dead vntounto the Law liue vntounto God: when as forſooth we being grafted into the death of Chriſt, doe drawe an hidden power from thence, as a grafte doth from the roote. Farthermore Chriſt hath faſtened to his croſſe the handwriting of the Law which was againſte vsus. therefore we being crucified with Chriſt are deliuered from all the curſes of the Lawe and guiltineſſe, he that goeth about to make this deliuerance vaine, doth make voyde the croſſe of Chriſt. But let vsus make account that we are not otherwiſe loſed from the yoke of the Lawe, than while we are made one with Chriſt, euen as the grafte doth not otherwiſe draw moyſture from the roote, except it grow togeather into one nature (with it).

20. And I liue not any more.) The name of death is alwayes healthfull to the vnderſtanding of man. and therefore after he hath taught that wee are faſtened to the Croſſe together with Chriſt: hee doth adde this that it bringeth alſo vntounto vsus life. And alſo he doth declare, what he meante before (by theſe wordes) to liue to God: that forſooth nowe hee liueth not by his owne life, but that he is ſo liued with the hidden vertue & power of Chriſt, that Chriſt may he ſayde to liue and to flouriſh in him. For as the ſoule nouriſheth the body (with life): ſo alſo doth Chriſt inſpire life into his membres. A notable ſentence. That the faythfull liue without themſelues, that is to ſaye in Chriſt. which cannot be but they muſt hauehave a true and a ſubſtā tiall communicating with him. Finally Chriſt liueth in vsus two maner of wayes: One life is whan hee gouerneth vsus with his ſpirite, and doth direct all our doinges. The other is, that hee maketh vsus pertakers of his righteouſneſſe: that when wee bee not able in our ſelues, (yet) in him we maye be acceptable vntounto God. The firſt belongeth to regeneration or new byrth: the ſeconde belongeth to the free accepting of righteouſneſſe, of the which we may vnderſtande this place (to meane): although, if any man had rather vnderſtand it of both, I willingly will embrace it. In as much as I now liue in the fleſh▪ ) There is here almoſt no ſentence which hath not bene torn with ſundry expoſitions, as, ſome expounde fleſh in this place to be the euil of nature corrupted. But Paule doth meane it more ſimply to be the p. 49bodily life. For the faithfull by liuing in the fleſh, doe neuertheleſſe not liue after the fleſh, although it doe alſo comprehend the infirmities, in which wee are now helde enwrapped. Or elſe there had ben another obiection in a readineſſe, Obiection. Thou alſo liueſt a bodily and fraile life; where not onelyonly this corruptible bodie doth exerciſe his offices, wheras it is ſuſteined or fed with meat and drinke: but alſo it is in like manner compaſſed with many vices, ſo that on eueryevery ſide the face of death doth ſhewe it ſelfe: this is not the heauenly life of Chriſt.A Paradox is a ſentence or opinyon ſtraunge and contrary to the opinyon of the moſt part. Aunſwer. therfore it is a paradox contrary to (all) reaſon, that, whereas thou doeſt manifeſtely liue after the common maner of men, yet thou ſayeſt thou haſte no life of thine owne. Paule aunſwereth, that it (namelye his life) conſiſteth in fayth, whereby he auoucheth that it is a miſterie hidden from the ſence of man. The life than whiche wee obtayne by fayth, appeareth not to the eyes, but it is perceyued within in the conſcience, by the efficacie of the ſpirite, and therfore the bodily life letteth not, but that we maye by fayth poſſeſſe the heauenly life. Ephe. 1.20. He hath placed vsus in heauenly thinges, &c. Alſo, Now yee are the Citizens of the Saynts, and of the houſholde of God. Ephe. 2.19. Alſo to the Philippians, 3.20 Our conuerſation is in heauen. Alſo to the Coloſſians, We are dead, and our lyfe is hid with Chriſt in God▪ to be ſhort, Paule is full of ſuch teſtimonyes, whereby hee affirmeth that we doe ſo liue in the world, that neuertheleſſe we liue alſo in heauen: not only becauſe there is our head, but alſo that by the right or intereſt of vnitie, we hauehave a life common with him: as S. Iohn ſpeaketh, cap. 14. ver. 1. In the meane while let vsus note that here he bringeth his reaſon from the nature of fayth, that he may teache vsus that it is no abſurditie if that life bee hid which is graffed or placed in fayth: becauſe that thing whiche we hope for doth not yet appeare, that fayth maye be named the knowledge of thinges inuiſible. Which hath loued me. Theſe wordes are added to expreſſe the force of Fayth, or elſe this thought would come into eueryevery mans mynde, Whence cōmeth ſuch vertue of fayth that it ſhould ſhead out vppon vsus the life of Chriſt? therefore the hypostaſis whereon fayth leaneth,Subſtance or foundation. doth declare the louelove and death of Chriſt: for thereof is the effecte of fayth to be eſtimated. Howe commeth it to paſſe than that wee p. 50liue by the fayth of Chriſt? becauſe he hath loued vsus, and giuen himſelfe for vsus. the louelove I ſaye wherwith Chriſt hath imbraced vsus, did cauſe that he did make himſelfe one with vsus, that hath he done by his death: for in giuing himſelfe for vsus, he hath ſuffered no otherwiſe than in our perſon. and therfore whatſoeuer faith findeth in Chriſte, of the ſame it maketh vsus partakers. Wheras he maketh mention of LoueLove, he meaneth that whiche is taught, 1. Ioh. 4.19. Not becauſe we loued him firſte, but that he hath preuented vsus firſte with his louelove. For if he being prouoked with merites had redemed vsus: the cauſe therof would hauehave bene tolde. but now Paule aſcribeth all vntounto louelove: it is therfore free or without merite. For the order muſt be marked, He hath loued vsus and giuen himſelfe for vsus. which is as muche as if he hadde ſayde, There was no other cauſe wherefore hee ſhoulde dye, but becauſe he loued vsus. and that at ſuch time as we were his enimies: as he teacheth, Rom. 5.10. And giuen himſelfe.) We cannot wel expreſſe with any wordes how great a thing this is▪ for who canne declare in wordes howe greate the excellencie of the Sonne of GOD is? hee hath appoynted himſelfe to bee the price to redeeme vsus. VnderUnder the worde (giuen) is included the whole commoditie whiche commeth vntounto vsus by the death of Chriſte: that is to ſaye, that it is the Sacrifice of Purging, the Waſhing, Satiſfaction, &c. Neyther hauehave theſe wordes (for me) a ſmall force in them, becauſe it was not ynough, to conſider or thinke that Chriſt died for the ſaluation of the worlde, excepte euerye one doe challenge priuatelye vntounto himſelfe the effect and poſſeſſion of this grace.

21 I caſt not awaye.) There is a greate emphaſis or vehemencie in thoſe wordes: for what and how horrible vnkyndeneſſe is it to contemne ſo ineſtimable grace of GOD, and purchaſe with ſo greate a price? Hee accuſeth the falſe Apoſtles of this ſacriledge (whiche is robbing Chriſte of his honour) which being not contence with Chriſte alone, doe thruſt in alſo other helpes of ſaluation. For the grace of GOD is refuſed, excepte that wee renounce all other thinges, and embrace Chriſte alone finallye what hath a man left him, after he hath refuſed the grace of God and p. 51made himſelfe vnworthye of it? For if righteouſnes.) Gratis which I hauehave tranſlated for nothing is taken for frustra which is in vaine; that is, there ſhould be nothing much worth in the death of Chriſt: or Chriſte died for nor reward. For this is the rewarde of (his) death, that by purging of our ſinnes, he hath reconciled vsus vntounto his Father. hereof it followeth that by his grace we are iuſtified, and therfore not by workes. The Papiſts interprete it of the ceremoniall Lawe, but who ſeeth not that it hath reſpecte to the whole Lawe? for it is as muche as Paule ſhoulde ſaye, If wee our ſelues deſerue righteouſneſſe, than Chriſte hath ſuffered in vayne. for therefore ſuffered hee that hee mighte obtayne righteouſneſſe for vsus. and what needeth that to be gotten vsus of another, that wee canne giuegive to oure owne ſelues? Truelye if the death of Chriſte bee oure redemption, than were wee Captiues: if our ſatiſfaction, than were wee Debters: if oure purging, than were wee guiltie: if our waſhing, than were wee vncleane. And ſo on the contrarye ſyde hee that doeth attribute vntounto workes his cleanneſſe, his forgiueneſſe, purging, righteouſneſſe, and deliueraunce: doeth make the death of Chriſt vayne. Here perhappe ſomebody will Obiect, Obiection. That the Argumente is not of force agaynſte them whiche couple the grace of Chriſte with workes. whiche no man neede doubte, but the falſe Apoſtles didde. for theſe two clauſes ſtande together, That righteouſneſſe is by the Lawe, and, Wee are redeemed by the death of Chriſte. I graunte, Aunſwer. if wee yielde parte of our righteouſneſſe to bee gotten by workes, and parte to come by grace. But we maye readilye gather that this kynde of Diuinitye was vnknowne vntounto Paule: for eyther hee didde wiſelye and orderlye reaſon agaynſte his Aduerſaries, or elſe fooliſhlye and ouerthwartelye. If ſo bee any Blaſphemer dare be ſo bolde to accuſe him, the defence for Paule is forcible ynough, namelye. That that is reputed righteouſneſſe before GOD, not ſuche as wee men imagine, but ſuche vntounto whiche nothing is wanting. But, becauſe it belongeth not to the preſente purpoſe, to pleade Paules cauſe againſte Blaſphemers which dare barke p. 52agaynſt the holy Ghoſt, let vsus try the matter with the Papiſts. They mocke vsus, when according to Paule wee reaſon, That Chriſt dyed in vayne if righteouſneſſe bee by workes▪ for they thinke themſelues armed with a trimme aunſwere, when they bring out of their Sophiſters, That Chriſt deſerued for vsus the firſte grace, that is to ſaye the occaſion of deſeruing: and that the merite of his death doth concurre (and meete) together with the ſatiſfactions of workes, to the daylye forgiueneſſe of ſinnes. Let them than mock Paule, out of whoſe mouth we ſpeake: for they muſt confute him before they confute vsus. Wee knowe that he had to doe with men which did not vtterly ſhut out the grace of Chriſt: but did place the one halfe of ſaluation in workes, agaynſte whome he reaſoneth thus, Chriſt died in vayne, if righteouſneſſe be by the law: and in ſo doing he leaueth not one drop of righteouſneſſe vntounto workes. The Papiſtes differ not from them a whit, and therefore it is lawfull vntounto vsus alſo to vſe the argument or reaſon of Paule to confute them.

The ende of the ſeconde Chapter.