Commentary on Galatians, Title page – Argument
A Commentarie of M. J. Caluine vponupon the Epiſtle to the Galathians: And tranſlated into Engliſh by R. V.
Pray for the peace of Hieruſalem, they shall proſper that louelove thee. Pſal. 122.6.
AT LONDON, Jmprinted by Thomas Purfoote, and are to be ſolde at his ſhop ouer agaynſt S. Sepulchres Church. 1581.
¶ To the right Reuerend Father Iohn my Lorde the Biſhop of London, R. V. wiſheth health of ſoule and body, together with happie ſucceſſe in ſetting forth the glory of God. &c.
IT is not long ſithens right Reuerend Father that J purpoſed the Dedication of a ſermon of M. Iuel by me tranſlatd out of the Latine, vntounto your Honour, which for the brefeneſſe and ſmalneſſe of the volume thereof J paſſed vndedicated for a ſeaſon, notwithſtanding the worthie matter therein conteyned might ſufficiently commend it as a thing of very great importaunce: And nowe hauing tranſlated alſo this commentarie of that learned man and godly Father I. Caluine vponupon the Epiſtle of Saint Paule to the Galathians, I thought it my duetie (eſpecially in that I take my ſelfe to be bounde to render an account of my ſtudie in parte vntounto your Honour) ioyning the ſame together with the Sermon afore ſpecified to dedicate both at once vntounto your Lordſhip, deſiring that you will vouchſafe to accept of them with ſuch an affection as the authoures of both (J meane Juel and Caluine) hauehave both for their godlineſſe in life, excellēcie in knowledge, and painfulneſſe in vtteringe the truth, full well deſerued, whereof I make in doubtes. And therfore without troubling your Lordſhip any furder with more circumſtaunces being otherwiſe occupied in waightie and great matters, J commend the ſame together with your affaires to the defence and protection of the moſte higheſt who euer preſerue your Honour.
The firſt of Auguſt. 1581. Your moſte bounder R. V.
The Argument vponupon the Epistle to the Galathians by M. Iohn Caluine.
IT is ſufficiently knowne what part of Aſia the Galathians inhabited, and with what limits their Countrey was bounded: but whence they had their beginning, appeareth not ſo well among Writers. All agree that they were Gaules: and therof they were named Gaulegrecians. But out of what part of Gaule (or Fraunce) they came, they doe not ſo well agree. Strabo thought that the Tectoſages came out of Gaule Narbon, and that the other were Celtae: vvhome all for the moſte part hauehave followed. But vvheras Plinius reckoneth the Ambiani vvith t e Tectoſagi, and beſide that, by the conſent of all, that they had the Toliſtobogi to their fellowes, vvho dwelt vponupon the borders of the Rhine: it ſemeth to me more likelye that they vvere the Belgae, inhabiting the farmoſt coaſt of the Rhine, toward the Brittaine Sea. For the Toliſtobogi held that portion in vvhichwhich nowe the Cleueners and Brabanders do inhabite. But hereof ſprong the error, in my opinion: that whereas ſome band of the Tectoſages hadde made an inroade into Gaule Narbon, they retained their name, & called the Region which they by force poſſeſſed, by it. And this doth Auſonius ſhew, where he ſayth, Euen ſo far as to the Teutoſagi who at the firſt were called Belgae. For he both calleth them Belgae: & teſtifieth that in the beginning they vvere called Teutoſagi, who afterward were named Tectoſagi. And whereas Caeſar doth place the Tectoſagi in the wood called Hercinia, I vnderſtād that to be done by going out of their own country thither: and by the ſtory you may alſo gather it. But as touching the originall of the Nation, more thā ſufficient hath ben ſpoken, as in regard of the preſent place. The Galathians which held that portion of Aſia which toke the nam of thē, as they wer deuided into 3. principal peoples, namly the Tectoſages, Toliſtobogi, & the Trocmi, ſo alſo, ſaith Plinie, they had three principal Cities. They flouriſhed with ſo greate force once among their weake neighboures, that a great part of the leſſer Aſia vvas tributarie to them: at length their Countreyes vertue wearing out, they gaue themſelues to delicacie and exceſſe. So vvith no great adoe they were ouercome in battayle, and ſubdewed by Cneus Manlius, the Romane Conſul. in Saint Paule his tyme they were vnderunder the Romanes. Furthermore whereas he had purely and faithfully inſtructed them in the Goſpel: there came, while he was away the falſe Apoſtles, who corrupted the true ſeede (of the Word) with falſe and corrupt Doctrines. For they taught that the obſeruing of ceremonies was as yet neceſſarie. It might ſeeme a thing of light account in ſhewe. but Paule contendeth about it as a principall poynt of the chriſtian faith: and not without a cauſe, for it is no ſmal euill to ſmother the brightneſſe of the Goſpell, to lay a ſnare vponupon the conſciences, to take awaye the difference of the old and new Teſtament. he did ſee beſides this, that vntounto theſe erroures there was ioyned alſo a wicked and hurtfull opinion of deſeruing righteouſneſſe. This is the cauſe why he ſtriueth with ſuche vehemencye and contention. that we alſo being admoniſhed how waightye and ſerious a matter is here handled, maye be the more attentiue to reade it. If a man eſtimate the cauſe by the Commentaries of Origen or Ierome, he ſhall wonder that Paule was ſo greatly moued for certaine outward cuſtomes. but whoſoeuer ſhall looke vponupon the beginning it ſelfe, ſhall confeſſe that they were matters not vnmeete to be ſo ſharpely contended about. For in that the Galathians by ouer ſwift credite, nay rather by lightneſſe and folly ſuffered themſelues to be lead away from the truth: therefore he reprehendeth them the more ſharply▪ for I am not of their opinion, which ſuppoſe that they were the hardlyer handled for becauſe of the dulneſſe of their witte. The Epheſians and Coloſsians were aſſayed alſo. and if they had ſo lightly yielded to their deceites, thinke we that Paule would hauehave dealte any more mildely with them? The nature of the people then moued him not thus franklye to chide them, but it was rather the hatefulneſſe of the matter that enforced him. Now that we vnderſtande the cauſe why he wrote this Epiſtle: let vsus come to the order of the handling thereof. He contendeth in the two firſte chapters about the authoritie of his Apoſtleſhip: ſauing that by occaſion, about the end of the ſecond chapter, he entreth into the principall (ſtate of the matter): that is to ſay into the queſtion of the iuſtification of man: wherof neuertheleſſe at the laſt in the thirde chapter he openlye frameth a full diſputation. Although he ſeeme to intreate of many thinges in theſe two Chapters: yet this one thing he indeauoureth, to proue himſelfe equall with the higheſt Apoſtles: and that he lacketh nothing but that he maye bee reckoned an Apoſtle in like degree of honour, as they. But it is worth the while to know why hee tooke ſo great pains about the triall of his eſtimation. for ſo that Chriſt raigne, and that the puritie of doctrine remaine ſound, what ſkilleth it whether he be aboue Peter, or leſſe then Peter, or whether they bee all equall among themſelues? If all muſt decreaſe, that only Chriſt may encreaſe, vnfruitfull is the contention about the dignitie of men. Moreouer this maye bee demaunded, why he compareth himſelfe to the other Apoſtles, for what controuerſie had he with Peter and Iames, and Iohn? to what purpoſe then did it belong, that thoſe who were of one mynde and good friendes among themſelues, ſhoulde be at oddes againſt themſelues? I aunſwere, that the falſe Apoſtles, who had beguiled the Galathians, to the end they might the better aduaunce themſelues, pretended the names of the Apoſtles, as though they had ben ſent of them. This was a notable ſhouldring in of thēſelues, for that they were beleeued to be the Apoſtles deputies, and ſpake as it vvere out of their mouth: and in the meane while did pluck away from Paule the name and right of an Apoſtle. For they did obiect that he was not choſen of the Lord, one of the twelue, that he was neuer acknowled to be ſuch an one by the colledge of the Apoſtles: and that not only hee had his doctrine not from Chriſt, but not ſo muche as from the Apoſtles, ſo came it to paſſe that not onelye the authoritie of Paul vvas diminiſhed: but that he was as ſome one of the multitude, much baſer then themſelues. If the matter had bene concearning perſons only, it had bene no great matter for Paule to hauehave bene reputed ſome common Diſciple: but vvhen he did ſee his Doctrine thereby beginne to grow out of credite, and to be ſet leſſe by: he ought not to holde his peace, but ſtoutlye ſpeake againſt it. This is the wylineſſe of the Deuill, vvhen he dareth not aſſayle the Doctrine manifeſtly, vvith crooked mynes to hurle down the maieſtie therof. Let vsus remember than, that in the perſon of Paule the truth of the Goſpell vvas aſſaulted, for if he had ſuffred himſelfe to be ſpoyled of the honour of Apoſtleſhip, it followed that he had vſurped more hitherto than vvas his right. and this falſe boaſting woulde hauehave made him bene ſuſpected in other thinges alſo. And therupon alſo did hang the eſtimation of his doctrine, in that it ſhould hauehave the beginning and was receaued not as proceeding from an Apoſtle of Chriſte, but from ſome common diſciple. On the otherſide hee was ouerwhelmed with the maieſtie of great names and ſtiles. For they wheras they boaſted them of the title of Peter and Iames and Iohn, did chalenge to themſelues Apoſtolicall authoritie. And had not Paule manfully reſiſted this boaſting, he ſhould hauehave geuen roome for a lye, and moreouer ſhould hauehave ſuffered in his owne perſon the truth to hauehave bene trodden downe. Therefore doth he ſeriouſly contend about both, (namely) that he was an Apoſtle appointed of the Lord, and alſo that he was nothing inferiour to the reſt: but that he was of like right and dignitie as they, euen as he had like name with them. He might hauehave denied either that they were ſent by Peter and his felowe Apoſtles, or that they had any commandement from them: but this defence hath much more waight, that he geueth not place to the Apoſtels themſelues: for if he had ſhunned that, he ſhould hauehave bene thought to hauehave diſtruſted his own cauſe. Ieruſalem in thoſe dayes was the mother of all Churches, for that the Goſpel did flowe from thence into the whole worlde, and it was as it weare the principall ſeate of the kingdome of Chriſte. Whoſoeuer came from thence into other Churches he vvas reuerently receiued, and not vvithout good cauſe. But many were ſwolne vvith a fooliſh glory, becauſe they vvere familier vvith the Apoſtles, or at the leaſtwiſe inſtructed by their teaching. Therfore nothing liked them, but that which they ſaw (done) at Ieruſalem. all other rites or vſages not there vſed, they not only reiected, but hardily alſo condemned. Such vvaywardneſſe is a plague very euill: vvhen vvee vvill hauehave the faſhion or cuſtome of one Church to ſtand as a generall law. And it riſeth of a prepoſterous zeale vvhen vve are ſo vvedded to ſome teacher or place, that vvithoute vvaying the matter, vve vvould bynde all places and all perſons to the ſence and vvill of one man, and to the orders of one place, as to a generall or common rule, although ambition is alway mingled to it: yea rather ouermuch vvaywardneſſe is full of ambition. But to returne to theſe falſe Apoſtles: if onelyonly vponupon an ill emulation they had aſſayed in eueryevery place to thruſt in the vſage of the ceremonies, which they ſaw kept at Ieruſalem: in ſo doing they had done no ſmall offence. for it is iniurious of a cuſtom ſtraight vvay to make a rule. But there vvas more euill in their Doctrine being vngodly and pernicious, for that they vvould holde the conſciences bounde by a religion, for that they placed righteouſneſſe in the obſeruation thereof. Nowe vve perceiue vvhy Paule vvas ſo ſtoute in the avouching his Apoſtleſhip, and vvhy he doth ſet himſelfe (by way of comparing) againſt the other Apoſtles. And that doth he til the ende of the ſecond Chapter, vvhere he maketh away ouer vntounto the handling of the matter: namely that vve are iuſtified freely before God, not by the workes of the law. For he vſeth this argument, If ceremonies hauehave not power to iuſtifie, then the obſeruing of them is not neceſſarie. although he ſpeaketh not of ceremonies alone, but reaſoneth generally of vvorkes: or elſe all his argument vvere caycolde. If this ſeeme vntounto any to bee farre fetched, he muſt conſider two thinges. Firſt that hee could not otherwiſe diſpatche the queſtion, but by taking the generall principle (which is) We be iuſtified by the mere grace of God: vvhichwhich excludeth not ceremonies onlye, but alſo other vvorkes. Secondly that Paule made not ſo muche adoe concerning ceremonies, as about the vvicked opinion of getting ſaluation by vvorkes. Lette vsus marke then that Paule beginneth not at the egge (as they ſay): but he ſheweth of neceſſitie the very ſpring head: that the readers maye know, that contention is not moued here about the ſhadow of the aſſe▪ but about the greateſt matter of all, (namelye) By vvhat vvay vve ſhall get ſaluation. They are beguiled than vvho thinke that the Apoſtle keepeth himſelfe in the compaſſe of the perticuler queſtion concearning ceremonies: for he could not vvinde him out of it by it ſelfe. We hauehave the like example Act. 15.2. Strife and contention vvas moued about ceremonies, vvhether they vvere neceſſary to be kept: about diſcourſing vvherof the Apoſtles preach Of the yoke of the Law not able to be borne, Of the free remiſſion of ſinnes. To what purpoſe are theſe thinges? for it ſeemeth to be an abſurde digreſſing from the purpoſe: but it is not ſo. for the perticuler errour could not otherwiſe be ſoundlye confuted, but by taking in hand the generall principle. As for example, If I muſt reaſon about the forbidding of eating fleſh, I vvill make mention not onelyonly of meates, but I vvill arme my ſelfe with the generall doctrine: how farre mans traditions ought to preuayle to the binding of the cōſciences. and this will I take hold of, that there is one law giuer, vvhichwhich hath power to ſaue and deſtroy. Let this be the ſum: Paule in this place reaſoneth from the generall to the ſpeciall negatiuely: vvhichwhich is an ordinarie and moſt naturall maner of diſputing. But with vvhat teſtimonies and reaſons he proueth this ſentence, We are iuſtified by the only grace of Chriſt, vve ſhal ſee in his place. This he proſecuteth euen to the end of the third Chapter. In the beginning of the fourth chapter, he intreateth of the right vſe of ceremonies, and vvhy they vvere ordained: vvhere alſo he ſheweth that they are now aboliſhed. For he muſt preuent this abſurditie, vvhichwhich ſtraight vvay might hauehave come in any mans minde, To what end than vvere ceremonies? were they vnprofitable? did the Fathers occupie thēſelues in thē in vaine? He determineth both breefelye. (namelye) that in their time they vvere not ſuperfluous & alſo that now they are abrogated by the comming of Chriſt: becauſe he is the truth and ende of them, wherefore he teacheth that we muſt abide in him. where alſo hee briefely toucheth, what our ſtate differeth from the ſtate of the Fathers. whereof it foloweth, that the doctrine of the falſe apoſtles, which darkeneth the brightneſſe of the Goſpel with the ſhadowes of the old Lawe, is a peruerſe and hurtfull doctrine. with his doctrine hee mingleth certayne exhortations to moue the affections. About the ende of the Chapiter he ſetteth out his matter with a fine and pleaſant allegorie. In the fifte chapiter he exhorteth to holde faſte the libertie purchaſed by the blood of Chriſt, that they deliuer not their conſciences to be entangled vvith the doctrines of men. but yet withall he admoniſheth what is the lawfull meaſure of libertie. And vponupon this occaſion he ſheweth, which are the true exerciſes of Chriſtians: leaſt whileſte they are in vayne occupied about ceremonies, they paſſe ouer thoſe things that are principall.
Finis.