Institutes of the Christian Religion
INSTITUTES OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION.
BY
JOHN CALVIN.
TRANSLATED FROM THE ORIGINAL LATIN, AND COLLATED WITH
THE AUTHOR’S LAST EDITION IN FRENCH,
BY JOHN ALLEN.
Non tamen omnino potuit mors invida totum
Tollere Calvinum terris; æterna manebunt
Ingenii monumenta tui: et livoris iniqui
Languida paulatim cum flamma resederit, omnes
Religio qua pura nitet se fundet in oras
Fama tui.
BUCHANAN.
SIXTH AMERICAN EDITION, REVISED AND CORRECTED.
IN TWO VOLUMES.
VOL. II.
PHILADELPHIA:
PRESBYTERIAN BOARD OF PUBLICATION.
BOOK III.
CHAPTER XIV.
THE COMMENCEMENT AND CONTINUAL PROGRESS OF JUSTIFICATION.
For the further elucidation of this subject, let us examine what kind of
righteousness can be found in men during the whole course of their
lives. Let us divide them into four classes. For either they are
destitute of the knowledge of God, and immerged in idolatry; or, having
been initiated by the sacraments, they lead impure lives, denying God in
their actions, while they confess him with their lips, and belong to
Christ only in name; or they are hypocrites, concealing the iniquity of
their hearts with vain disguises; or, being regenerated by the Spirit of
God, they devote themselves to true holiness. In the first of these
classes, judged of according to their natural characters, from the crown
of the head to the sole of the foot there will not be found a single
spark of goodness; unless we mean to charge the Scripture with falsehood
in these representations which it gives of all the sons of Adam—that
“the heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked;”[1]
that “every imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth;”[2] that
“the thoughts of man are vanity; that there is no fear of God before his
eyes;”[3] that “there is none that understandeth, none that seeketh
after God;”[4] in a word, “that he is flesh,”[5] a term expressive of
all those works which are enumerated by Paul—“adultery, fornication,
uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance,
emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders,”[6]
and every impurity and abomination that can be conceived. This is the
dignity, in the confidence of which they must glory. But if any among
them discover that integrity in their conduct which among men has some
appearance of sanctity, yet, since we know that God regards not external
splendour, we must penetrate to the secret springs of these actions, if
we wish them to avail any thing to justification. We must narrowly
examine, I say, from what disposition of heart these works proceed.
Though a most extensive field of observation is now before us, yet,
since the subject may be despatched in very few words, I shall be as
compendious as possible.
II. In the first place, I do not deny, that whatever excellences appear
in unbelievers, they are the gifts of God. I am not so at variance with
the common opinion of mankind, as to contend that there is no difference
between the justice, moderation, and equity of Titus or Trajan, and the
rage, intemperance, and cruelty of Caligula, or Nero, or Domitian;
between the obscenities of Tiberius and the continence of Vespasian;
and, not to dwell on particular virtues or vices, between the observance
and the contempt of moral obligation and positive laws. For so great is
the difference between just and unjust, that it is visible even in the
lifeless image of it. For what order will be left in the world, if these
opposites be confounded together? Such a distinction as this, therefore,
between virtuous and vicious actions, has not only been engraven by the
Lord in the heart of every man, but has also been frequently confirmed
by his providential dispensations. We see how he confers many blessings
of the present life on those who practise virtue among men. Not that
this external resemblance of virtue merits the least favour from him;
but he is pleased to discover his great esteem of true righteousness, by
not permitting that which is external and hypocritical to remain without
a temporal reward. Whence it follows, as we have just acknowledged, that
these virtues, whatever they may be, or rather images of virtues, are
the gifts of God; since there is nothing in any respect laudable which
does not proceed from him.
III. Nevertheless the observation of Augustine is strictly true—that all
who are strangers to the religion of the one true God, however they may
be esteemed worthy of admiration for their reputed virtue, not only
merit no reward, but are rather deserving of punishment, because they
contaminate the pure gifts of God with the pollution of their own
hearts. For though they are instruments used by God for the preservation
of human society, by the exercise of justice, continence, friendship,
temperance, fortitude, and prudence, yet they perform these good works
of God very improperly; being restrained from the commission of evil,
not by a sincere attachment to true virtue, but either by mere ambition,
or by self-love, or by some other irregular disposition. These actions,
therefore, being corrupted in their very source by the impurity of their
hearts, are no more entitled to be classed among virtues, than those
vices which commonly deceive mankind by their affinity and similitude to
virtues. Besides, when we remember that the end of what is right is
always to serve God, whatever is directed to any other end, can have no
claim to that appellation. Therefore, since they regard not the end
prescribed by Divine wisdom, though an act performed by them be
externally and apparently good, yet, being directed to a wrong end, it
becomes sin. He concludes, therefore, that all the Fabricii, Scipios,
and Catos, in all their celebrated actions, were guilty of sin, inasmuch
as, being destitute of the light of faith, they did not direct those
actions to that end to which they ought to have directed them; that
consequently they had no genuine righteousness; because moral duties are
estimated not by external actions, but by the ends for which such
actions are designed.
IV. Besides, if there be any truth in the assertion of John, that “he
that hath not the Son of God, hath not life;”[7] they who have no
interest in Christ, whatever be their characters, their actions, or
their endeavours, are constantly advancing, through the whole course of
their lives, towards destruction and the sentence of eternal death. On
this argument is founded the following observation of Augustine: “Our
religion discriminates between the righteous and the unrighteous, not by
the law of works, but by that of faith, without which works apparently
good are perverted into sins.” Wherefore the same writer, in another
place, strikingly compares the exertions of such men to a deviation in a
race from the prescribed course. For the more vigorously any one runs
out of the way, he recedes so much the further from the goal, and
becomes so much the more unfortunate. Wherefore he contends, that it is
better to halt in the way, than to run out of the way. Finally, it is
evident that they are evil trees, since without a participation of
Christ there is no sanctification. They may produce fruits fair and
beautiful to the eye, and even sweet to the taste, but never any that
are good. Hence we clearly perceive that all the thoughts, meditations,
and actions of man, antecedent to a reconciliation to God by faith, are
accursed, and not only of no avail to justification, but certainly
deserving of condemnation. But why do we dispute concerning it as a
dubious point, when it is already proved by the testimony of the
apostle, that “without faith it is impossible to please God?”[8]
V. But the proof will be still clearer, if the grace of God be directly
opposed to the natural condition of man. The Scripture invariably
proclaims, that God finds nothing in men which can incite him to bless
them, but that he prevents them by his gratuitous goodness. For what can
a dead man do to recover life? But when God illuminates us with the
knowledge of himself, he is said to raise us from death, and to make us
new creatures.[9] For under this character we find the Divine goodness
towards us frequently celebrated, especially by the apostle. “God,” says
he, “who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,
even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ,”
&c.[10] In another place, when, under the type of Abraham, he treats of
the general calling of believers, he says, It is “God, who quickeneth
the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they
were.”[11] If we are nothing, what can we do? Wherefore God forcibly
represses this presumption, in the Book of Job, in the following words:
“Who hath prevented me, that I should repay him? Whatsoever is under the
whole heaven is mine.”[12] Paul, explaining this passage, concludes from
it, that we ought not to suppose we bring any thing to the Lord but
ignominious indigence and emptiness.[13] Wherefore, in the passage cited
above, in order to prove that we attain to the hope of salvation, not by
works, but solely by the grace of God, he alleges, that “we are his
workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath
before ordained that we should walk in them.”[14] As though he would
say, Who of us can boast that he has influenced God by his
righteousness, since our first power to do well proceeds from
regeneration? For, according to the constitution of our nature, oil
might be extracted from a stone sooner than we could perform a good
work. It is wonderful, indeed, that man, condemned to such ignominy,
dares to pretend to have any thing left. Let us confess, therefore, with
that eminent servant of the Lord, that “God hath saved us, and called us
with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his
own purpose and grace;”[15] and that “the kindness and love of God our
Saviour towards man appeared,” because “not by works of righteousness
which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us; that being
justified by his grace, we should be made heirs of eternal life.”[16] By
this confession we divest man of all righteousness, even to the smallest
particle, till through mere mercy he has been regenerated to the hope of
eternal life; for if a righteousness of works contributed any thing to
our justification, we are not truly said to be “justified by grace.” The
apostle, when he asserted justification to be by grace, had certainly
not forgotten his argument in another place, that “if it be of works,
then it is no more grace.”[17] And what else does our Lord intend, when
he declares, “I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners?”[18] If
sinners only are admitted, why do we seek to enter by a counterfeit
righteousness?
VI. The same thought frequently recurs to me, that I am in danger of
injuring the mercy of God, by labouring with so much anxiety in the
defence of this doctrine, as though it were doubtful or obscure. But
such being our malignity, that, unless it be most powerfully subdued, it
never allows to God that which belongs to him, I am constrained to dwell
a little longer upon it. But as the Scripture is sufficiently
perspicuous on this subject, I shall use its language in preference to
my own. Isaiah, after having described the universal ruin of mankind,
properly subjoins the method of recovery. “The Lord saw it, and it
displeased him that there was no judgment. And he saw that there was no
man, and wondered that there was no intercessor: therefore his own arm
brought salvation unto him; and his righteousness it sustained him.”[19]
Where are our righteousnesses, if it be true, as the prophet says, that
no one assists the Lord in procuring his salvation? So another prophet
introduces the Lord speaking of the reconciliation of sinners to
himself, saying, “I will betroth thee unto me for ever, in
righteousness, and in judgment, and in loving-kindness, and in mercies.
I will have mercy upon her that had not obtained mercy.”[20] If this
covenant, which is evidently our first union with God, depend on his
mercy, there remains no foundation for our righteousness. And I should
really wish to be informed by those, who pretend that man advances to
meet God with some righteousness of works, whether there be any
righteousness at all, but that which is accepted by God. If it be
madness to entertain such a thought, what that is acceptable to God can
proceed from his enemies, who, with all their actions, are the objects
of his complete abhorrence? And that we are all the inveterate and
avowed enemies of our God, till we are justified and received into his
friendship, is an undeniable truth.[21] If justification be the
principle from which love originates, what righteousnesses of works can
precede it? To destroy that pestilent arrogance, therefore, John
carefully apprizes us that “we did not first love him.”[22] And the Lord
had by his prophet long before taught the same truth: “I will love them
freely,” saith he, “for mine anger is turned away.”[23] If his love was
spontaneously inclined towards us, it certainly is not excited by works.
But the ignorant mass of mankind have only this notion of it—that no man
has merited that Christ should effect our redemption; but that towards
obtaining the possession of redemption, we derive some assistance from
our own works. But however we may have been redeemed by Christ, yet till
we are introduced into communion with him by the calling of the Father,
we are both heirs of darkness and death, and enemies to God. For Paul
teaches, that we are not purified and washed from our pollutions by the
blood of Christ, till the Spirit effects that purification within
us.[24] This is the same that Peter intends, when he declares that the
“sanctification of the Spirit” is effectual “unto obedience, and
sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ.”[25] If we are sprinkled by the
Spirit with the blood of Christ for purification, we must not imagine
that before this ablution we are in any other state than that of sinners
destitute of Christ. We may be certain, therefore, that the commencement
of our salvation is, as it were, a resurrection from death to life;
because, when “on the behalf of Christ it is given to us to believe on
him,”[26] we then begin to experience a transition from death to life.
VII. The same reasoning may be applied to the second and third classes
of men in the division stated above. For the impurity of the conscience
proves, that they are neither of them yet regenerated by the Spirit of
God; and their unregeneracy betrays also their want of faith: whence it
appears, that they are not yet reconciled to God, or justified in his
sight, since these blessings are only attained by faith. What can be
performed by sinners alienated from God, that is not execrable in his
view? Yet all the impious, and especially hypocrites, are inflated with
this foolish confidence. Though they know that their heart is full of
impurity, yet if they perform any specious actions, they esteem them too
good to be despised by God. Hence that pernicious error, that though
convicted of a polluted and impious heart, they cannot be brought to
confess themselves destitute of righteousness; but while they
acknowledge themselves to be unrighteous, because it cannot be denied,
they still arrogate to themselves some degree of righteousness. This
vanity the Lord excellently refutes by the prophet. “Ask now,” saith he,
“the priests, saying, If one bear holy flesh in the skirt of his
garment, and with his skirt do touch bread, or any meat, shall it be
holy? And the priests answered and said, No. Then said Haggai, If one
that is unclean by a dead body touch any of these, shall it be unclean?
And the priests answered and said, It shall be unclean. Then answered
Haggai, and said, So is this people, and so is this nation before me,
saith the Lord; and so is every work of their hands; and that which they
offer there is unclean.”[27] I wish that this passage might either
obtain full credit with us, or be deeply impressed on our memory. For
there is no one, however flagitious his whole life may be, who can
suffer himself to be persuaded of what the Lord here plainly declares.
The greatest sinner, as soon as he has performed two or three duties of
the law, doubts not but they are accepted of him for righteousness; but
the Lord positively denies that any sanctification is acquired by such
actions, unless the heart be previously well purified; and not content
with this, he asserts that all the works of sinners are contaminated by
the impurity of their hearts. Let the name of righteousness, then, no
longer be given to these works which are condemned for their pollution
by the lips of God. And by what a fine similitude does he demonstrate
this! For it might have been objected that what the Lord had enjoined
was inviolably holy. But he shows, on the contrary, that it is not to be
wondered at, if those things which are sanctified by the law of the
Lord, are defiled by the pollution of the wicked; since an unclean hand
cannot touch any thing that has been consecrated, without profaning it.
VIII. He excellently pursues the same argument also in Isaiah: “Bring no
more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; your new moons
and your appointed feasts my soul hateth; they are a trouble unto me; I
am weary to bear them. When ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine
eyes from you; yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your
hands are full of blood. Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of
your doings.”[28] What is the reason that the Lord is so displeased at
an obedience to his law? But, in fact, he here rejects nothing that
arises from the genuine observance of the law; the beginning of which,
he every where teaches, is an unfeigned fear of his name.[29] If that be
wanting, all the oblations made to him are not merely trifles, but
nauseous and abominable pollutions. Let hypocrites go now, and,
retaining depravity concealed in their hearts, endeavour by their works
to merit the favour of God. But by such means they will add provocation
to provocation; for “the sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to
the Lord; but the prayer of the upright” alone “is his delight.”[30] We
lay it down, therefore, as an undoubted truth, which ought to be well
known to such as are but moderately versed in the Scriptures, that even
the most splendid works of men not yet truly sanctified, are so far from
righteousness in the Divine view, that they are accounted sins. And
therefore they have strictly adhered to the truth, who have maintained
that the works of a man do not conciliate God’s favour to his person;
but, on the contrary, that works are never acceptable to God, unless the
person who performs them has previously found favour in his sight. And
this order, to which the Scripture directs us, is religiously to be
observed. Moses relates, that “The Lord had respect unto Abel and to his
offering.”[31] Does he not plainly indicate that the Lord is propitious
to men, before he regards their works? Wherefore the purification of the
heart is a necessary prerequisite, in order that the works which we
perform may be favourably received by God; for the declaration of
Jeremiah is always in force, that the “eyes of the Lord are upon the
truth.”[32] And the Holy Spirit has asserted by the mouth of Peter, that
it is “by faith” alone that the “heart” is “purified,”[33] which proves
that the first foundation is laid in a true and living faith.
IX. Let us now examine what degree of righteousness is possessed by
those whom we have ranked in the fourth class. We admit, that when God,
by the interposition of the righteousness of Christ, reconciles us to
himself, and having granted us the free remission of our sins, esteems
us as righteous persons, to this mercy he adds also another blessing;
for he dwells in us by his Holy Spirit, by whose power our carnal
desires are daily more and more mortified, and we are sanctified, that
is, consecrated to the Lord unto real purity of life, having our hearts
moulded to obey his law, so that it is our prevailing inclination to
submit to his will, and to promote his glory alone by all possible
means. But even while, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, we are
walking in the ways of the Lord,—that we may not forget ourselves, and
be filled with pride, we feel such remains of imperfection, as afford us
abundant cause for humility. The Scripture declares, that “there is not
a just man upon earth, that doeth good and sinneth not.”[34] What kind
of righteousness, then, will even believers obtain from their own works?
In the first place, I assert, that the best of their performances are
tarnished and corrupted by some carnal impurity and debased by a mixture
of some alloy. Let any holy servant of God select from his whole life
that which he shall conceive to have been the best of all his actions,
and let him examine it with attention on every side; he will undoubtedly
discover in it some taint of the corruption of the flesh; since our
alacrity to good actions is never what it ought to be, but our course is
retarded by great debility. Though we perceive that the blemishes which
deform the works of the saints, are not difficult to be discovered, yet
suppose we admit them to be very diminutive spots, will they not be at
all offensive in the sight of God, in which even the stars are not pure?
We have now ascertained, that there is not a single action performed by
the saints, which, if judged according to its intrinsic merit, does not
justly deserve to be rewarded with shame.
X. In the next place, even though it were possible for us to perform any
works completely pure and perfect, yet one sin is sufficient to
extinguish and annihilate all remembrance of antecedent righteousness,
as is declared by the prophet.[35] With him James also agrees:
“Whosoever shall offend,” says he, “in one point, he is guilty of
all.”[36] Now, since this mortal life is never pure or free from sin,
whatever righteousness we might acquire being perpetually corrupted,
overpowered, and destroyed by subsequent sins, it would neither be
admitted in the sight of God, nor be imputed to us for righteousness.
Lastly, in considering the righteousness of works, we should regard, not
any action commanded in the law, but the commandment itself. Therefore,
if we seek righteousness by the law, it is in vain for us to perform two
or three works; a perpetual observance of the law is indispensably
necessary. Wherefore God does not impute to us for righteousness that
remission of sins, of which we have spoken, once only, (as some
foolishly imagine,) in order that, having obtained pardon for our past
lives, we may afterwards seek righteousness by the law; which would be
only sporting with us, and deluding us by a fallacious hope. For since
perfection is unattainable by us, as long as we are in this mortal body,
and the law denounces death and judgment on all whose works are not
completely and universally righteous, it will always have matter of
accusation and condemnation against us, unless it be prevented by the
Divine mercy continually absolving us by a perpetual remission of our
sins. Wherefore it will ever be true, as we asserted at the beginning,
that if we be judged according to our demerits, whatever be our designs
or undertakings, we are nevertheless with all our endeavours and all our
pursuits, deserving of death and destruction.
XI. We must strenuously insist on these two points—first, that there
never was an action performed by a pious man, which, if examined by the
scrutinizing eye of Divine justice, would not deserve condemnation; and
secondly, if any such thing be admitted, (though it cannot be the case
with any individual of mankind,) yet being corrupted and contaminated by
the sins, of which its performer is confessedly guilty, it loses every
claim to the Divine favour. And this is the principal hinge on which our
controversy [with the Papists] turns. For concerning the beginning of
justification, there is no dispute between us and the sounder schoolmen,
but we all agree, that a sinner being freely delivered from condemnation
obtains righteousness, and that by the remission of his sins; only they,
under the term _justification_, comprehend that renovation in which we
are renewed by the Spirit of God to an obedience to the law, and so they
describe the righteousness of a regenerate man as consisting in
this—that a man, after having been once reconciled to God through faith
in Christ, is accounted righteous with God on account of his good works,
the merit of which is the cause of his acceptance. But the Lord, on the
contrary, declares, “that faith was reckoned to Abraham for
righteousness,”[37] not during the time while he yet remained a
worshipper of idols, but after he had been eminent during many years for
the sanctity of his life. Abraham, then, had for a long time worshipped
God from a pure heart, and performed all that obedience to the law,
which a mortal man is capable of performing; yet, after all, his
righteousness consisted in faith. Whence we conclude, according to the
argument of Paul, that it was not of works. So when the prophet says,
“The just shall live by his faith,”[38] he is not speaking of the
impious and profane, whom the Lord justifies by converting them to the
faith; but his address is directed to believers, and they are promised
life by faith. Paul also removes every doubt, when, in confirmation of
this sentiment, he adduces the following passage of David: “Blessed are
they whose iniquities are forgiven.”[39] But it is certain that David
spake not of impious men, but of believers, whose characters resembled
his own; for he spoke from the experience of his own conscience.
Wherefore it is necessary for us, not to have this blessing for once
only, but to retain it as long as we live. Lastly, he asserts, that the
message of a free reconciliation with God, is not only promulgated for a
day or two, but is perpetual in the church.[40] Believers, therefore,
even to the end of their lives, have no other righteousness than that
which is there described. For the mediatorial office is perpetually
sustained by Christ, by whom the Father is reconciled to us; and the
efficacy of whose death is perpetually the same, consisting in ablution,
satisfaction, expiation, and perfect obedience, which covers all our
iniquities. And Paul does not tell the Ephesians that they are indebted
to grace merely for the beginning of their salvation, but that they “are
saved by grace, not of works, lest any man should boast.”[41]
XII. The subterfuges, by which the schoolmen endeavour to evade these
arguments, are unavailing. They say, that the sufficiency of good works
to justification arises not from their intrinsic merit, but from the
grace through which they are accepted. Secondly, because they are
constrained to acknowledge the righteousness of works to be always
imperfect in the present state, they admit, that as long as we live we
need the remission of our sins, in order to supply the defects of our
works; but that our deficiencies are compensated by works of
supererogation. I reply, that what they denominate the grace through
which our works are accepted, is no other than the free goodness of the
Father, with which he embraces us in Christ, when he invests us with the
righteousness of Christ, and accepts it as ours, in order that, in
consequence of it, he may treat us as holy, pure, and righteous persons.
For the righteousness of Christ (which, being the only perfect
righteousness, is the only one that can bear the Divine scrutiny) must
be produced on our behalf, and judicially presented, as in the case of a
surety. Being furnished with this, we obtain by faith the perpetual
remission of our sins. Our imperfections and impurities, being concealed
by its purity, are not imputed to us, but are as it were buried, and
prevented from appearing in the view of Divine justice, till the advent
of that hour, when the old man being slain and utterly annihilated in
us, the Divine goodness shall receive us into a blessed peace with the
new Adam, in that state to wait for the day of the Lord, when we shall
receive incorruptible bodies, and be translated to the glories of the
celestial kingdom.
XIII. If these things are true, surely no works of ours can render us
acceptable to God; nor can the actions themselves be pleasing to him,
any otherwise than as a man, who is covered with the righteousness of
Christ, pleases God and obtains the remission of his sins. For God has
not promised eternal life as a reward of certain works; he only
declares, that “he that doeth these things shall live,”[42] denouncing,
on the contrary, that memorable curse against all who continue not in
the observance of every one of his commands.[43] This abundantly refutes
the erroneous notion of a partial righteousness, since no other
righteousness is admitted into heaven but an entire observance of the
law. Nor is there any more solidity in their pretence of a sufficient
compensation for imperfections by works of supererogation. For are they
not by this perpetually recurring to the subterfuge, from which they
have already been driven, that the partial observance of the law
constitutes, as far as it goes, a righteousness of works? They
unblushingly assume as granted, what no man of sound judgment will
concede. The Lord frequently declares, that he acknowledges no
righteousness of works, except in a perfect obedience to his law. What
presumption is it for us, who are destitute of this, in order that we
may not appear to be despoiled of all our glory, or, in other words, to
submit entirely to the Lord—what presumption is it for us to boast of I
know not what fragments of a few actions, and to endeavour to supply
deficiencies by other satisfactions! _Satisfactions_ have already been
so completely demolished, that they ought not to occupy even a transient
thought. I only remark, that those who trifle in this manner, do not
consider what an execrable thing sin is in the sight of God; for indeed
they ought to know, that all the righteousness of all mankind,
accumulated in one mass, is insufficient to compensate for a single sin.
We see that man on account of one offence was rejected and abandoned by
God, so that he lost all means of regaining salvation.[44] They are
deprived, therefore, of the power of satisfaction, with which, however
they flatter themselves, they will certainly never be able to render a
satisfaction to God, to whom nothing will be pleasing or acceptable that
proceeds from his enemies. Now, his enemies are all those to whom he
determines to impute sin. Our sins, therefore, must be covered and
forgiven, before the Lord can regard any of our works. Whence it follows
that the remission of sins is absolutely gratuitous, and that it is
wickedly blasphemed by those who obtrude any _satisfactions_. Let us,
therefore, after the example of the apostle, “forgetting those things
which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,
press toward the mark for the prize of our high calling.”[45]
XIV. But how is the pretence of works of supererogation consistent with
this injunction—“When ye shall have done all those things which are
commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants; we have done that
which was our duty to do?”[46] This direction does not inculcate an act
of simulation or falsehood, but a decision in our mind respecting that
of which we are certain. The Lord, therefore, commands us sincerely to
think and consider with ourselves, that our services to him are none of
them gratuitous, but merely the performance of indispensable duties; and
that justly; for we are servants under such numerous obligations as we
could never discharge; even though all our thoughts and all our members
were devoted to the duties of the law. In saying, therefore, “When ye
shall have done all those things which are commanded,” he supposes a
case of one man having attained to a degree of righteousness beyond what
is attained by all the men in the world. How, then, while every one of
us is at the greatest distance from this point, can we presume to glory
that we have completely attained to that perfect standard? Nor can any
one reasonably object, that there is nothing to prevent his efforts from
going beyond his necessary obligations, who in any respect fails of
doing the duty incumbent on him. For we must acknowledge, that we cannot
imagine any thing pertaining either to the service of God or to the love
of our neighbour, which is not comprehended in the Divine law. But if it
is a part of the law, let us not boast of voluntary liberality, where we
are bound by necessity.
XV. It is irrelevant to this subject, to allege the boasting of
Paul,[47] that among the Corinthians he voluntarily receded from what,
if he had chosen, he might have claimed as his right, and not only did
what was incumbent on him to do, but afforded them his gratuitous
services beyond the requisitions of duty. They ought to attend to the
reason there assigned, that he acted thus, “lest he should hinder the
gospel of Christ.”[48] For wicked and fraudulent teachers recommended
themselves by this stratagem of liberality, by which they endeavoured,
both to conciliate a favourable reception to their own pernicious
dogmas, and to fix an odium on the gospel; so that Paul was necessitated
either to endanger the doctrine of Christ, or to oppose these artifices.
Now, if it be a matter of indifference to a Christian to incur an
offence when he may avoid it, I confess that the apostle performed for
the Lord a work of supererogation; but if this was justly required of a
prudent minister of the gospel, I maintain that he did what was his duty
to do. Even if no such reason appeared, yet the observation of
Chrysostom is always true—that all that we have is on the same tenure as
the possessions of slaves, which the law pronounces to be the property
of their masters. And Christ has clearly delivered the same truth in the
parable, where he inquires whether we thank a servant, when he returns
home in the evening, after the various labours of the day.[49] But it is
possible that he may have laboured with greater diligence than we had
ventured to require. This may be granted; yet he has done no more than,
by the condition of servitude, he was under an obligation to do; since
he belongs to us, with all the ability he has. I say nothing of the
nature of the supererogations which these men wish to boast of before
God; for they are contemptible trifles, which he has never commanded,
which he does not approve, nor, when they render up their account to
him, will he accept them. We cannot admit that there are any works of
supererogation, except such as those of which it is said by the prophet,
“Who hath required this at your hand?”[50] But let them remember the
language of another passage respecting these things: “Wherefore do ye
spend money for that which is not bread? and your labour for that which
satisfieth not?”[51] It is easy, indeed, for these idle doctors to
dispute concerning these things in easy chairs; but when the Judge of
all shall ascend the judgment seat, all such empty notions must vanish
away. The object of our inquiries ought to be, what plea we may bring
forward with confidence at his tribunal, not what we can invent in
schools and cloisters.
XVI. On this subject our minds require to be guarded chiefly against two
pernicious principles—That we place no confidence in the righteousness
of our works, and that we ascribe no glory to them. The Scriptures every
where drive us from all confidence, when they declare that all our
righteousnesses are odious in the Divine view, unless they are perfumed
with the holiness of Christ; and that they can only excite the vengeance
of God, unless they are supported by his merciful pardon. Thus they
leave us nothing to do, but to deprecate the wrath of our Judge with the
confession of David, “Enter not into judgment with thy servant; for in
thy sight shall no man living be justified.”[52] And where Job says, “If
I be wicked, woe unto me; and if I be righteous, yet will I not lift up
my head;”[53] though he refers to that consummate righteousness of God,
compared to which even the angels are deficient, yet he at the same time
shows, that when God comes to judgment, all men must be dumb. For he not
only means that he would rather freely recede, than incur the danger of
contending with the rigour of God, but signifies that he experiences in
himself no other righteousness than what would instantaneously vanish
before the Divine presence. When confidence is destroyed, all boasting
must of necessity be relinquished. For who can give the praise of
righteousness to his works, in which he is afraid to confide in the
presence of God? We must therefore have recourse to the Lord, in whom we
are assured, by Isaiah, that “all the seed of Israel shall be justified,
and shall glory;”[54] for it is strictly true, as he says in another
place, that we are “the planting of the Lord, that he might be
glorified.”[55] Our minds therefore will then be properly purified, when
they shall in no degree confide nor glory in our works. But foolish men
are led into such a false and delusive confidence, by the error of
always considering their works as the cause of their salvation.
XVII. But if we advert to the four kinds of causes, which the
philosophers direct us to consider in the production of effects, we
shall find none of them consistent with works in the accomplishment of
our salvation. For the Scripture every where proclaims, that the
efficient cause of eternal life being procured for us, was the mercy of
our heavenly Father, and his gratuitous love towards us; that the
material cause is Christ and his obedience, by which he obtained a
righteousness for us; and what shall we denominate the formal and
instrumental cause, unless it be faith? These three John comprehends in
one sentence, when he says, that “God so loved the world that he gave
his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not
perish, but have everlasting life.”[56] The final cause the apostle
declares to be, both the demonstration of the Divine righteousness and
the praise of the Divine goodness, in a passage in which he also
expressly mentions the other three causes. For this is his language to
the Romans: “All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God, being
justified freely by his grace:”[57] here we have the original source of
our salvation, which is the gratuitous mercy of God towards us. It
follows, “through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:” here we have
the matter of our justification. “Through faith in his blood:” here he
points out the instrumental cause, by which the righteousness of Christ
is revealed to us. Lastly, he subjoins the end of all, when he says, “To
declare his righteousness; that he might be just, and the justifier of
him which believeth in Jesus.” And to suggest, by the way, that this
righteousness consists in reconciliation or propitiation, he expressly
asserts that Christ was “set forth to be a propitiation.” So also in the
first chapter to the Ephesians, he teaches that we are received into the
favour of God through his mere mercy; that it is accomplished by the
mediation of Christ; that it is apprehended by faith; and that the end
of all is, that the glory of the Divine goodness may be fully
displayed.[58] When we see that every part of our salvation is
accomplished without us, what reason have we to confide or to glory in
our works? Nor can even the most inveterate enemies of Divine grace
raise any controversy with us concerning the efficient or the final
cause, unless they mean altogether to renounce the authority of the
Scripture. Over the material and formal causes they superinduce a false
colouring; as if our own works were to share the honour of them with
faith and the righteousness of Christ. But this also is contradicted by
the Scripture, which affirms that Christ is the sole author of our
righteousness and life, and that this blessing of righteousness is
enjoyed by faith alone.
XVIII. The saints often confirm and console themselves with the
remembrance of their own innocence and integrity, and sometimes even
refrain not from proclaiming it. Now, this is done for two reasons;
either that, in comparing their good cause with the bad cause of the
impious, they derive from such comparison an assurance of victory, not
so much by the commendation of their own righteousness, as by the just
and merited condemnation of their adversaries; or that, even without any
comparison with others, while they examine themselves before God, the
purity of their consciences affords them some consolation and
confidence. To the former of these reasons we shall advert hereafter;
let us now briefly examine the consistency of the latter with what we
have before asserted, that in the sight of God we ought to place no
reliance on the merit of works, nor glory on account of them. The
consistency appears in this—that for the foundation and accomplishment
of their salvation, the saints look to the Divine goodness alone,
without any regard to works. And they not only apply themselves to it
above all things, as the commencement of their happiness, but likewise
depend upon it as the consummation of their felicity. A conscience thus
founded, built up, and established, is also confirmed by the
consideration of works; that is, as far as they are evidences of God
dwelling and reigning in us. Now, this confidence of works being found
in none but those who have previously cast all the confidence of their
souls on the mercy of God, it ought not to be thought contrary to that
upon which it depends. Wherefore, when we exclude the confidence of
works, we only mean that the mind of a Christian should not be directed
to any merit of works as a mean of salvation; but should altogether rely
on the gratuitous promise of righteousness. We do not forbid him to
support and confirm this faith by marks of the Divine benevolence to
him. For if, when we call to remembrance the various gifts which God has
conferred on us, they are all as so many rays from the Divine
countenance, by which we are illuminated to contemplate the full blaze
of supreme goodness,—much more the grace of good works, which
demonstrates that we have received the Spirit of adoption.
XIX. When the saints, therefore, confirm their faith, or derive matter
of rejoicing from the integrity of their consciences, they only
conclude, from the fruits of vocation, that they have been adopted by
the Lord as his children. The declaration of Solomon, that “In the fear
of the Lord is strong confidence;”[59] and the protestation sometimes
used by the saints to obtain a favourable audience from the Lord, that
“they have walked before” him “in truth and with a perfect heart;”[60]
these things have no concern in laying the foundation for establishing
the conscience; nor are they of any value, except as they are
consequences of the Divine vocation. For there nowhere exists that fear
of God which can establish a full assurance, and the saints are
conscious that their integrity is yet accompanied with many relics of
corruption. But as the fruits of regeneration evince that the Holy
Spirit dwells in them, this affords them ample encouragement to expect
the assistance of God in all their necessities, because they experience
him to be their Father in an affair of such vast importance. And even
this they cannot attain, unless they have first apprehended the Divine
goodness, confirmed by no other assurance but that of the promise. For
if they begin to estimate it by their good works, nothing will be weaker
or more uncertain; for, if their works be estimated in themselves, their
imperfection will menace them with the wrath of God, as much as their
purity, however incomplete, testifies his benevolence. In a word, they
declare the benefits of God, but in such a way as not to turn away from
his gratuitous favour, in which Paul assures us there is “length, and
breadth, and depth, and height;” as though he had said, Which way soever
the pious turn their views, how high soever they ascend, how widely
soever they expatiate, yet they ought not to go beyond the love of
Christ, but employ themselves wholly in meditating on it, because it
comprehends in itself all dimensions. Therefore he says that it “passeth
knowledge,” and that when we know how much Christ has loved us, we are
“filled with all the fulness of God.”[61] So also in another place, when
he glories that believers are victorious in every conflict, he
immediately adds, as the reason of it, “through him that loved us.”[62]
XX. We see now, that the confidence which the saints have in their works
is not such as either ascribes any thing to the merit of them, (since
they view them only as the gifts of God, in which they acknowledge his
goodness, and as marks of their calling, whence they infer their
election,) or derogates the least from the gratuitous righteousness
which we obtain in Christ; since it depends upon it, and cannot subsist
without it. This is concisely and beautifully represented by Augustine,
when he says, “I do not say to the Lord, Despise not the works of my
hands. I have sought the Lord with my hands, and I have not been
deceived. But I commend not the works of my hands; for I fear that when
thou hast examined them, thou wilt find more sin than merit. This only I
say, this I ask, this I desire; Despise not the works of thy hands.
Behold in me thy work, not mine. For if thou beholdest mine, thou
condemnest me; if thou beholdest thine own, thou crownest me. Because
whatever good works I have, they are from thee.” He assigns two reasons
why he ventured not to boast of his works to God; first, that if he has
any good ones, he sees nothing of his own in them; secondly, that even
these are buried under a multitude of sins. Hence the conscience
experiences more fear and consternation than security. Therefore he
desires God to behold his best performances, only that he may recognize
in them the grace of his own calling, and perfect the work which he has
begun.
XXI. The remaining objection is, that the Scripture represents the good
works of believers as the causes for which the Lord blesses them. But
this must be understood so as not to affect what we have before proved,
that the efficient cause of our salvation is the love of God the Father;
the material cause, the obedience of the Son; the instrumental cause,
the illumination of the Spirit, that is, faith; and the final cause, the
glory of the infinite goodness of God. No obstacle arises from these
things to prevent good works being considered by the Lord as inferior
causes. But how does this happen? Because those whom his mercy has
destined to the inheritance of eternal life, he, in his ordinary
dispensations, introduces to the possession of it by good works. That
which, in the order of his dispensations, precedes, he denominates the
cause of that which follows. For this reason he sometimes deduces
eternal life from works; not that the acceptance of it is to be referred
to them; but because he justifies the objects of his election, that he
may finally glorify them; he makes the former favour, which is a step to
the succeeding one, in some sense the cause of it. But whenever the true
cause is to be assigned, he does not direct us to take refuge in works,
but confines our thoughts entirely to his mercy. For what does he teach
us by the apostle? “The wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is
eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Why does he not oppose
righteousness to sin, as well as life to death? Why does he not make
righteousness the cause of life, as well as sin the cause of death? For
then the antithesis would have been complete, whereas by this variation
it is partly destroyed. But the apostle intended by this comparison to
express a certain truth—that death is due to the demerits of men, and
that life proceeds solely from the mercy of God. Lastly, these phrases
denote rather the order of the Divine gifts, than the cause of them. In
the accumulation of graces upon graces, God derives from the former a
reason for adding the next, that he may not omit any thing necessary to
the enrichment of his servants. And while he thus pursues his
liberality, he would have us always to remember his gratuitous election,
which is the source and original of all. For although he loves the gifts
which he daily confers, as emanations from that fountain, yet it is our
duty to adhere to that gratuitous acceptance, which alone can support
our souls, and to connect the gifts of his Spirit, which he afterwards
bestows on us, with the first cause, in such a manner as will not be
derogatory to it.
Footnote 1:
Jer. xvii. 9.
Footnote 2:
Gen. vi. 5; viii. 21.
Footnote 3:
Psalm xciv. 11; xxxvi. 1.
Footnote 4:
Psalm xiv. 1-3. Rom. iii. 11.
Footnote 5:
Gen. vi. 3.
Footnote 6:
Gal. v. 19, &c.
Footnote 7:
1 John v. 12.
Footnote 8:
Heb. xi. 6.
Footnote 9:
John v. 25.
Footnote 10:
Eph. ii. 4, 5.
Footnote 11:
Rom. iv. 17.
Footnote 12:
Job xli. 11.
Footnote 13:
Rom. xi. 35.
Footnote 14:
Ephes. ii. 10.
Footnote 15:
2 Tim. i. 9.
Footnote 16:
Titus iii. 4, 5, 7.
Footnote 17:
Rom. xi. 6.
Footnote 18:
Matt. ix. 13.
Footnote 19:
Isaiah lix. 15, 16.
Footnote 20:
Hosea ii. 19, 23.
Footnote 21:
Rom. v. 6, 10. Col. i. 21.
Footnote 22:
1 John iv. 10.
Footnote 23:
Hosea xiv. 4.
Footnote 24:
1 Cor. vi. 11.
Footnote 25:
1 Peter i. 2.
Footnote 26:
Phil. i. 29.
Footnote 27:
Hag. ii. 11-14.
Footnote 28:
Isaiah i. 13-16.
Footnote 29:
Deut. iv. 6. Psalm cxi. 10. Prov. i. 7; ix. 10.
Footnote 30:
Prov. xv. 8.
Footnote 31:
Gen. iv. 4.
Footnote 32:
Jer. v. 3.
Footnote 33:
Acts xv. 9.
Footnote 34:
Eccles. vii. 20.
Footnote 35:
Ezek. xviii. 24.
Footnote 36:
James ii. 10.
Footnote 37:
Rom. iv. 9.
Footnote 38:
Hab. ii. 4.
Footnote 39:
Rom. iv. 7.
Footnote 40:
2 Cor. v. 18, 19.
Footnote 41:
Ephes. ii. 8, 9.
Footnote 42:
Lev. xviii. 5. Rom. x. 5.
Footnote 43:
Deut. xxvii. 26. Gal. iii. 10.
Footnote 44:
Gen. iii.
Footnote 45:
Phil. iii. 13, 14.
Footnote 46:
Luke xvii. 10.
Footnote 47:
1 Cor. ix.
Footnote 48:
1 Cor. ix. 12.
Footnote 49:
Luke xvii. 9.
Footnote 50:
Isaiah i. 12.
Footnote 51:
Isaiah lv. 2.
Footnote 52:
Psalm cxliii. 2.
Footnote 53:
Job x. 15.
Footnote 54:
Isaiah xlv. 25.
Footnote 55:
Isaiah lxi. 3.
Footnote 56:
John iii. 16.
Footnote 57:
Rom. iii. 23, &c.
Footnote 58:
Ephes. i. 5-7, 13.
Footnote 59:
Prov. xiv. 26.
Footnote 60:
2 Kings xx. 3.
Footnote 61:
Ephes. iii. 18, 19.
Footnote 62:
Rom. viii. 37.
CHAPTER XV.
BOASTING OF THE MERIT OF WORKS, EQUALLY SUBVERSIVE OF GOD’S GLORY IN THE
GIFT OF RIGHTEOUSNESS, AND OF THE CERTAINTY OF SALVATION.
We have now discussed the principal branch of this subject; that because
righteousness, if dependent on works, must inevitably be confounded in
the sight of God, therefore it is contained exclusively in the mercy of
God and the participation of Christ, and consequently in faith alone.
Now, it must be carefully remarked that this is the principal hinge on
which the argument turns, that we may not be implicated in the common
delusion, which equally affects the learned and the vulgar. For as soon
as justification by faith or works becomes the subject of inquiry, they
have immediate recourse to those passages which seem to attribute to
works some degree of merit in the sight of God; as though justification
by works would be fully evinced, if they could be proved to be of any
value before God. We have already clearly demonstrated that the
righteousness of works consists only in a perfect and complete
observance of the law. Whence it follows, that no man is justified by
works, but he who, being elevated to the summit of perfection, cannot be
convicted even of the least transgression. This, therefore, is a
different and separate question, whether, although works be utterly
insufficient for the justification of men, they do not, nevertheless,
merit the grace of God.
II. In the first place, with respect to the term _merit_, it is
necessary for me to premise, that whoever first applied it to human
works, as compared with the Divine judgment, showed very little concern
for the purity of the faith. I gladly abstain from all controversies
about mere words; but I could wish that this sobriety had always been
observed by Christian writers, that they had avoided the unnecessary
adoption of terms not used in the Scriptures, and calculated to produce
great offence, but very little advantage. For what necessity was there
for the introduction of the word _merit_, when the value of good works
might be significantly expressed without offence by a different term?
But the great offence contained in it, appears in the great injury the
world has received from it. The consummate haughtiness of its import can
only obscure the Divine grace, and taint the minds of men with
presumptuous arrogance. I confess, the ancient writers of the Church
have generally used it, and I wish that their misuse of one word had not
been the occasion of error to posterity. Yet they also declare in some
places that they did not intend any thing prejudicial to the truth. For
this is the language of Augustine in one passage: “Let human merit,
which was lost by Adam, here be silent, and let the grace of God reign
through Jesus Christ.” Again: “The saints ascribe nothing to their own
merits; they will ascribe all, O God, only to thy mercy.” In another
place: “And when a man sees that whatever good he has, he has it not
from himself, but from his God, he sees that all that is commended in
him proceeds not from his own merits, but from the Divine mercy.” We see
how, by divesting man of the power of performing good actions, he
likewise destroys the dignity of merit. Chrysostom says, “Our works, if
there be any consequent on God’s gratuitous vocation, are a retribution
and a debt; but the gifts of God are grace, beneficence, and immense
liberality.” Leaving the name, however, let us rather attend to the
thing. I have before cited a passage from Bernard: “As not to presume on
our merits is sufficiently meritorious, so to be destitute of merits is
sufficient for the judgment.” But by the explanation immediately
annexed, he properly softens the harshness of these expressions, when he
says, “Therefore you should be concerned to have merits; and if you have
them, you should know that they are given to you; you should hope for
the fruit, the mercy of God; and you have escaped all danger of poverty,
ingratitude, and presumption. Happy the Church which is not destitute,
either of merits without presumption, or of presumption without merits.”
And just before he had fully shown how pious his meaning was. “For
concerning merits,” he says, “why should the Church be solicitous, which
has a more firm and secure foundation for glorying in the purpose of
God? For God cannot deny himself; he will perform what he has promised.
Thus you have no reason for inquiring, on account of what merits we may
hope for blessings, especially when you read, ‘Not for your sakes, but
for my sake;’[63] it is sufficiently meritorious to know that merits are
insufficient.”
III. The Scripture shows what all our works are capable of meriting,
when it represents them as unable to bear the Divine scrutiny, because
they are full of impurity; and in the next place, what would be merited
by the perfect observance of the law, if this could any where be found,
when it directs us, “When ye shall have done all those things which are
commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants;”[64] because we shall
not have conferred any favour on God, but only have performed the duties
incumbent on us, for which no thanks are due. Nevertheless, the good
works which the Lord has conferred on us, he denominates our own, and
declares that he will not only accept, but also reward them. It is our
duty to be animated by so great a promise, and to stir up our minds that
we “be not weary in well doing,”[65] and to be truly grateful for so
great an instance of Divine goodness. It is beyond a doubt, that
whatever is laudable in our works proceeds from the grace of God; and
that we cannot properly ascribe the least portion of it to ourselves. If
we truly and seriously acknowledge this truth, not only all confidence,
but likewise all idea of merit, immediately vanishes. We, I say, do not,
like the sophists, divide the praise of good works between God and man,
but we preserve it to the Lord complete, entire, and uncontaminated. All
that we attribute to man, is, that those works which were otherwise good
are tainted and polluted by his impurity. For nothing proceeds from the
most perfect man, which is wholly immaculate. Therefore let the Lord sit
in judgment on the best of human actions, and he will indeed recognize
in them his own righteousness, but man’s disgrace and shame. Good works,
therefore, are pleasing to God, and not unprofitable to the authors of
them; and they will moreover receive the most ample blessings from God
as their reward; not because they merit them, but because the Divine
goodness has freely appointed them this reward. But what wickedness is
it, not to be content with that Divine liberality which remunerates
works destitute of merit with unmerited rewards, but with sacrilegious
ambition still to aim at more, that what entirely originates in the
Divine munificence may appear to be a compensation of the merit of
works! Here I appeal to the common sense of every man. If he who, by the
liberality of another, enjoys the use and profit of an estate, usurp to
himself also the title of proprietor, does he not by such ingratitude
deserve to lose the possession which he had? So also if a slave,
manumitted by his master, conceal his mean condition as a freed-man, and
boast that he was free by birth, does he not deserve to be reduced to
his former servitude? For this is the legitimate way of enjoying a
benefit, if we neither arrogate more than is given us, nor defraud our
benefactor of his due praise; but, on the contrary, conduct ourselves in
such a manner, that what he has conferred on us may appear, as it were,
to continue with himself. If this moderation ought to be observed
towards men, let every one examine and consider what is due to God.
IV. I know that the sophists abuse some texts in order to prove that the
term _merit_ is found in the Scriptures with reference to God. They cite
a passage from Ecclesiasticus: “Mercy shall make place for every man
according to the merit of his works.”[66] And from the Epistle to the
Hebrews: “To do good, and to communicate, forget not; for with such
sacrifices men merit of God.”[67] My right to reject the authority of
Ecclesiasticus I at present relinquish; but I deny that they faithfully
cite the words of the writer of Ecclesiasticus, whoever he might be; for
in the Greek copy it is as follows: Παση ελεημοσυνη ποιησει τοπον·
ἑκαστος γαρ κατα τα εργα αυτου εὑρησει. “He shall make place for every
mercy; and every man shall find according to his works.” And that this
is the genuine reading, which is corrupted in the Latin version, appears
both from the complexion of the words themselves and from the preceding
context. In the passage quoted from the Epistle to the Hebrews, there is
no reason why they should endeavour to insnare us by a single word, when
the apostle’s words in the Greek imply nothing more than that “with such
sacrifices God is well pleased.” This alone ought to be abundantly
sufficient to repress and subdue the insolence of our pride, that we
transgress not the scriptural rule by ascribing any dignity to human
works. Moreover, the doctrine of the Scripture is, that our good works
are perpetually defiled with many blemishes, which might justly offend
God and incense him against us; so far are they from being able to
conciliate his favour, or to excite his beneficence towards us; yet
that, because in his great mercy he does not examine them according to
the rigour of his justice, he accepts them as though they were
immaculately pure, and therefore rewards them, though void of all merit,
with infinite blessings both in this life and in that which is to come.
For I cannot admit the distinction laid down by some, who are otherwise
men of learning and piety, that good works merit the graces which are
conferred on us in this life, and that eternal salvation is the reward
of faith alone; because the Lord almost always places the reward of
labours and the crown of victory in heaven. Besides, to ascribe the
accumulation of graces upon graces, given us by the Lord, to the merit
of works, in such a manner as to detract it from grace, is contrary to
the doctrine of the Scripture. For though Christ says, that “to every
one that hath shall be given,” and that “the good and faithful servant,
who hath been faithful over a few things, shall be made ruler over many
things,”[68] yet he likewise shows in another place, that the
improvements of believers are the gifts of his gratuitous kindness. “Ho,
every one that thirsteth,” says he, “come ye to the waters, and he that
hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk
without money and without price.”[69] Whatever, therefore, is now
conferred on believers to promote their salvation as well as their
future blessedness, flows exclusively from the beneficence of God;
nevertheless he declares, that both in the latter and in the former, he
has respect to our works, because, to demonstrate the magnitude of his
love to us, he dignifies with such honour, not only ourselves, but even
the gifts which he has bestowed on us.
V. If these points had been handled and digested in proper order in
former ages, there would never have arisen so many debates and
dissensions. Paul says, that in erecting the superstructure of Christian
doctrine, it is necessary to retain that foundation which he had laid
among the Corinthians, other than which no man can lay, which is Jesus
Christ.[70] What kind of a foundation have we in Christ? Has he begun
our salvation, that we may complete it ourselves? and has he merely
opened a way for us to proceed in by our own powers? By no means; but,
as the apostle before stated, when we acknowledge him, he is “made unto
us righteousness.”[71] No man, therefore, is properly founded on Christ,
but he who has complete righteousness in him; since the apostle says,
that he was sent, not to assist us in the attainment of righteousness,
but to be himself our righteousness; that is to say, that we were chosen
in him from eternity, before the formation of the world, not on account
of any merit of ours, but according to the purpose of the Divine
will;[72] that by the death of Christ we are redeemed from the sentence
of death, and liberated from perdition;[73] that in him we are adopted
as sons and heirs by the heavenly Father,[74] to whom we have been
reconciled by his blood; that being committed to his protection, we are
not in the least danger of perishing;[75] that being thus ingrafted into
him, we are already, as it were, partakers of eternal life, and entered
by hope into the kingdom of God; and moreover, that having obtained such
a participation of him, however foolish we may be in ourselves, he is
our wisdom before God; that however impure we are, he is our purity;
that though we are weak and exposed to Satan, yet that power is ours
which is given to him in heaven and in earth,[76] by which he defeats
Satan for us, and breaks the gates of hell; that though we still carry
about with us a body of death, yet he is our life; in short, that all
that is his belongs to us, and that we have every thing in him, but
nothing in ourselves. On this foundation, I say, it is necessary for us
to build, if we wish to “grow unto a holy temple in the Lord.”[77]
VI. But the world has long been taught a different lesson; for I know
not what good works of morality have been invented to render men
acceptable to God, before they are ingrafted into Christ. As though the
Scripture were false in asserting, that “he that hath not the Son of
God, hath not life.”[78] If they are destitute of life, how could they
generate any cause of life? As though there were no truth in the
declaration, that “whatsoever is not of faith, is sin!”[79] as though an
evil tree could produce good fruits! But what room have these most
pestilent sophists left to Christ for the exertion of his power? They
say that he has merited for us the first grace; that is, the opportunity
of meriting; and that now it is our part not to miss the offered
opportunity. What extreme impudence and impiety! Who would have expected
that any persons professing the name of Christ, would presume thus to
rob him of his power, and almost to trample him under their feet? It is
every where testified of him, that all who believe in him are
justified:[80] these men tell us, that the only benefit received from
him is, that a way is opened for all men to justify themselves. But I
wish that they had experienced what is contained in these passages: “He
that hath the Son, hath life;”[81] “he that believeth is passed from
death unto life;”[82] “justified by his grace,” that we might “be made
heirs of eternal life;”[83] that believers have Christ abiding in them,
by whom they are united to God;[84] that they are partakers of his life,
and sit with him “in heavenly places;”[85] that they are translated into
the kingdom of God, and have obtained salvation;[86] and innumerable
places of similar import. For they do not signify that by faith in
Christ we merely gain the ability to attain righteousness or effect our
salvation, but that both are bestowed on us. Therefore, as soon as we
are ingrafted into Christ by faith, we are already become sons of God,
heirs of heaven, partakers of righteousness, possessors of life, and
(the better to refute their falsehoods) we have attained, not the
opportunity of meriting, but all the merits of Christ; for they are all
communicated to us.
VII. Thus the Sorbonic schools, those sources of all kinds of errors,
have deprived us of justification by faith, which is the substance of
all piety. They grant, indeed, in words, that a man is justified by
faith formed; but this they afterwards explain to be, because faith
renders good works effectual to justification; so that their mention of
faith has almost the appearance of mockery, since it could not be passed
over in silence, while the Scripture is so full of it, without exposing
them to great censure. And not content with this, they rob God of part
of the praise of good works, and transfer it to man. Perceiving that
good works avail but little to the exaltation of man, and that they
cannot properly be denominated merits if they be considered as the
effects of Divine grace, they derive them from the power of free-will;
which is like extracting oil from a stone. They contend, that though
grace be the principal cause of them, yet that this is not to the
exclusion of free-will, from which all merit originates. And this is
maintained not only by the latter sophists, but likewise by their
master, Lombard, whom, when compared with them, we may pronounce to be
sound and sober. Truly wonderful was their blindness, with Augustine so
frequently in their mouths, not to see how solicitously he endeavoured
to prevent men from arrogating the least degree of glory on account of
good works. Before, when we discussed the question of free-will, we
cited from him some testimonies to this purpose; and similar ones
frequently recur in his writings; as when he forbids us ever to boast of
our merits, since even they are the gifts of God; and when he says,
“that all our merit proceeds from grace alone; that it is not obtained
by our sufficiency, but is produced entirely by grace,” &c. That Lombard
was blind to the light of Scripture, in which he appears not to have
been so well versed, need not excite so much surprise. Yet nothing could
be wished for more explicit, in opposition to him and his disciples,
than this passage of the apostle; who, having interdicted Christians
from all boasting, subjoins as a reason why boasting is unlawful, that
“we are his (God’s) workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good
works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.”[87]
Since nothing good, then, can proceed from us but as we are regenerated,
and our regeneration is, without exception, entirely of God, we have no
right to arrogate to ourselves the smallest particle of our good works.
Lastly, while they assiduously inculcate good works, they at the same
time instruct the consciences of men in such a manner, that they can
never dare to be confident that God is propitious and favourable to
their works. But, on the contrary, our doctrine, without any mention of
merit, animates the minds of believers with peculiar consolation, while
we teach them that their works are pleasing to God, and that their
persons are undoubtedly accepted by him. And we likewise require, that
no man attempt or undertake any work without faith; that is, unless he
can previously determine, with a certain confidence of mind, that it
will be pleasing to God.
VIII. Wherefore let us not suffer ourselves to be seduced even a hair’s
breadth from the only foundation, on which, when it is laid, wise
architects erect a firm and regular superstructure. For if there be a
necessity for doctrine and exhortation, they apprize us, that “for this
purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works
of the devil; whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin:”[88] “the
time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the
Gentiles;”[89] the elect of God are vessels of mercy selected to honour,
and therefore ought to be cleansed from all impurity.[90] But every
thing is said at once, when it is shown that Christ chooses such for his
disciples as will deny themselves, take up their cross, and follow
him.[91] He who has denied himself, has laid the axe to the root of all
evils, that he may no longer seek those things which are his own; he who
has taken up his cross, has prepared himself for all patience and
gentleness. But the example of Christ comprehends not only these, but
all other duties of piety and holiness. He was obedient to his Father,
even to death; he was entirely occupied in performing the works of God;
he aspired with his whole soul to promote the glory of his Father; he
laid down his life for his brethren; he both acted and prayed for the
benefit of his enemies. But if there be need of consolation, these
passages will afford it in a wonderful degree: “We are troubled on every
side, yet not distressed; we are perplexed, but not in despair;
persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed; always
bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life
also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body.”[92] “If we be dead
with him, we shall also live with him; if we suffer, we shall also reign
with him.”[93] “Being made conformable unto his death; if by any means I
might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.”[94] The Father has
predestinated all whom he has chosen in his Son “to be conformed to his
image, that he might be the first-born among many brethren;” and
therefore “neither death, nor life, nor things present, nor things to
come, shall separate us from the love of God which is in Christ
Jesus;”[95] but “all things shall work together for good”[96] to us, and
conduce to our salvation. We do not justify men by works before God; but
we say, that all who are of God are regenerated and made new creatures,
that they may depart from the kingdom of sin into the kingdom of
righteousness; and that by this testimony they ascertain their
vocation,[97] and, like trees, are judged by their fruits.
Footnote 63:
Ezek. xxxvi. 32.
Footnote 64:
Luke xvii. 10.
Footnote 65:
Gal. vi. 9. 2 Thess. iii. 13.
Footnote 66:
Ecclus. xvi. 14.
Footnote 67:
Heb. xiii. 16.
Footnote 68:
Matt. xxv. 21, 29.
Footnote 69:
Isaiah lv. 1.
Footnote 70:
1 Cor. iii. 10, 11.
Footnote 71:
1 Cor. i. 30.
Footnote 72:
Ephes. i. 3-5.
Footnote 73:
Col. i. 14, 20, 21.
Footnote 74:
John i. 12.
Footnote 75:
John x. 28, 29.
Footnote 76:
Matt. xxviii. 18.
Footnote 77:
Ephes. ii 21. Titus iii. 7.
Footnote 78:
1 John v. 12.
Footnote 79:
Rom. xiv. 23.
Footnote 80:
Acts xiii. 39.
Footnote 81:
1 John v. 12.
Footnote 82:
John v. 24.
Footnote 83:
Rom. iii. 24.
Footnote 84:
1 John iii. 24.
Footnote 85:
Ephes. ii. 6.
Footnote 86:
Col. i. 13.
Footnote 87:
Ephes. ii. 10.
Footnote 88:
1 John iii. 8, 9.
Footnote 89:
1 Peter iv. 3.
Footnote 90:
2 Tim. ii. 20. Rom. ix. 23.
Footnote 91:
Luke ix. 23.
Footnote 92:
2 Cor. iv. 8-10.
Footnote 93:
2 Tim. ii. 11, 12.
Footnote 94:
Phil. iii. 10, 11.
Footnote 95:
Rom. viii. 29, 38, 39.
Footnote 96:
Rom. viii. 28.
Footnote 97:
2 Peter i. 10.
CHAPTER XVI.
A REFUTATION OF THE INJURIOUS CALUMNIES OF THE PAPISTS AGAINST THIS
DOCTRINE.
The observation with which we closed the preceding chapter is, of
itself, sufficient to refute the impudence of some impious persons, who
accuse us, in the first place, of destroying good works, and seducing
men from the pursuit of them, when we say that they are not justified by
works, nor saved through their own merit; and secondly, of making too
easy a road to righteousness, when we teach that it consists in the
gratuitous remission of sins; and of enticing men, by this allurement,
to the practice of sin, to which they have naturally too strong a
propensity. These calumnies, I say, are sufficiently refuted by that one
observation; yet I will briefly reply to them both. They allege that
justification by faith destroys good works. I forbear any remarks on the
characters of these zealots for good works, who thus calumniate us. Let
them rail with impunity as licentiously as they infest the whole world
with the impurity of their lives. They affect to lament that while faith
is so magnificently extolled, works are degraded from their proper rank.
What if they be more encouraged and established? For we never dream
either of a faith destitute of good works, or of a justification
unattended by them: this is the sole difference, that while we
acknowledge a necessary connection between faith and good works, we
attribute justification, not to works, but to faith. Our reason for this
we can readily explain, if we only turn to Christ, towards whom faith is
directed, and from whom it receives all its virtue. Why, then, are we
justified by faith? Because by faith we apprehend the righteousness of
Christ, which is the only medium of our reconciliation to God. But this
you cannot attain, without at the same time attaining to sanctification;
for he “is made unto us wisdom and righteousness, and sanctification and
redemption.”[98] Christ therefore justifies no one whom he does not also
sanctify. For these benefits are perpetually and indissolubly connected,
so that whom he illuminates with his wisdom, them he redeems; whom he
redeems, he justifies; whom he justifies, he sanctifies. But as the
present question relates only to righteousness and sanctification, let
us insist upon them. We may distinguish between them, but Christ
contains both inseparably in himself. Do you wish, then, to obtain
righteousness in Christ? You must first possess Christ; but you cannot
possess him without becoming a partaker of his sanctification; for he
cannot be divided. Since, then, the Lord affords us the enjoyment of
these blessings only in the bestowment of himself, he gives them both
together, and never one without the other. Thus we see how true it is
that we are justified, not without works, yet not by works; since union
with Christ, by which we are justified, contains sanctification as well
as righteousness.
II. It is also exceedingly false, that the minds of men are seduced from
an inclination to virtue, by our divesting them of all ideas of merit.
Here the reader must just be informed, that they impertinently argue
from reward to merit, as I shall afterwards more fully explain; because,
in fact, they are ignorant of this principle, that God is equally
liberal in assigning a reward to good works, as in imparting an ability
to perform them. But this I would rather defer to its proper place. It
will suffice, at present, to show the weakness of their objection, which
shall be done two ways. For, first, when they say that there will be no
concern about the proper regulation of our life without a hope of reward
being proposed, they altogether deceive themselves. If they only mean
that men serve God in expectation of a reward, and hire or sell their
services to him, they gain but little; for he will be freely worshipped
and freely loved, and he approves of that worshipper who, after being
deprived of all hope of receiving any reward, still ceases not to
worship him. Besides, if men require to be stimulated, it is impossible
to urge more forcible arguments than those which arise from the end of
our redemption and calling; such as the word of God adduces, when it
inculcates, that it is the greatest and most impious ingratitude not
reciprocally to “love him who first loved us;”[99] that “by the blood of
Christ our consciences are purged from dead works, to serve the living
God;”[100] that it is a horrible sacrilege, after having been once
purged, to defile ourselves with new pollutions, and to profane that
sacred blood;[101] that we have been “delivered out of the hand of our
enemies,” that we “might serve him without fear, in holiness and
righteousness before him, all the days of our life;”[102] that we are
made “free from sin,” that with a free spirit we might “become the
servants of righteousness;”[103] “that our old man is crucified,” that
“we should walk in newness of life.”[104] Again: “If ye be risen with
Christ,” as his members indeed are, “seek those things which are above,”
and conduct yourselves as “pilgrims on the earth;” that you may aspire
towards heaven, where your treasure is.[105] That “the grace of God hath
appeared, teaching us, that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we
should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great
God and our Saviour.”[106] Wherefore “God hath not appointed us to
wrath, but to obtain salvation by Christ.”[107] That we are the “temples
of the Holy Ghost,” which it is unlawful to profane;[108] that we are
not _darkness_, “but light in the Lord,” whom it becomes to “walk as
children of the light;”[109] that “God hath not called us unto
uncleanness, but unto holiness; for this is the will of God, even our
sanctification, that we should abstain from fornication;”[110] that our
calling is a holy one, which should be followed by a correspondent
purity of life;[111] that we are “made free from sin,” that we might
“become servants of righteousness.”[112] Can we be incited to charity by
any stronger argument than that of John, “If God so loved us, we ought
also to love one another?” “in this the children of God are manifest,
and the children of the devil;”[113] hereby the children of light, by
their abiding in love, are distinguished from the children of darkness;
or that of Paul, That if we be united to Christ, we are members of one
body, and ought to afford each other mutual assistance?[114] Or can we
be more powerfully excited to holiness, than when we are informed by
John, that “every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even
as God is pure?”[115] Or when Paul says, “Having therefore these
promises, (relative to our adoption,) let us cleanse ourselves from all
filthiness of the flesh and spirit?”[116] or than when we hear Christ
proposing himself as our example, that we should follow his steps?[117]
III. These few instances, indeed, I have given as a specimen; for if I
were disposed to quote every particular passage, I should produce a
large volume. The apostles are quite full of admonitions, exhortations,
and reproofs, to “furnish the man of God unto all good works,”[118] and
that without any mention of merit. But they rather deduce their
principal exhortations from this consideration, That our salvation
depends not on any merit of ours, but merely on the mercy of God. As
Paul, after having very largely shown that we can have no hope of life,
but from the righteousness of Christ, when he proceeds to exhortations,
beseeches us “by the mercies of God” with which we have been
favoured.[119] And indeed this one reason ought to be enough; that God
may be glorified in us.[120] But if any persons be not so powerfully
affected by the glory of God, yet the remembrance of his benefits should
be amply sufficient to incite them to rectitude of conduct. But these
men, who by the obtrusion of merit extort some servile and constrained
acts of obedience to the law, are guilty of falsehood when they affirm
that we have no arguments to enforce the practice of good works, because
we do not proceed in the same way; as though, truly, such obedience were
very pleasing to God, who declares that he “loveth a cheerful giver;”
and forbids any thing to be given “grudgingly, or of necessity.”[121]
Nor do I say this, because I either reject or neglect that kind of
exhortation, which the Scripture frequently uses, that no method of
animating us to our duty may be omitted. It mentions the reward which
“God will render to every man according to his works;”[122] but that
this is the only argument, or the principal one, I deny. In the next
place, I assert that we ought not to begin with it. Moreover, I contend
that it has no tendency to establish the merit preached by these men, as
we shall afterwards see; and, lastly, that it is entirely useless,
unless preceded by this doctrine, That we are justified solely on
account of the merit of Christ, apprehended by faith, and not on account
of any merit in our own works; because none can be capable of the
pursuit of holiness, but such as have previously imbibed this doctrine.
This sentiment is beautifully suggested by the Psalmist when he thus
addresses the Lord: “There is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be
feared;”[123] for he shows that there is no worship of God without an
acknowledgment of his mercy, on which alone it is both founded and
established. And this well deserves to be remarked, in order that we may
know, not only that the true worship of God arises from a reliance on
his mercy, but that the fear of God (which the Papists hold to be
meritorious) cannot be dignified with the title of _merit_, because it
is founded in the pardon and remission of sins.
IV. But the most futile of all their calumnies is, that men are
encouraged to the practice of sin by our maintaining the gratuitous
remission of sins, in which we make righteousness to consist. For we say
that so great a blessing could never be compensated by any virtue of
ours, and that therefore it could never be obtained, unless it were
gratuitously bestowed; moreover, that it is gratuitous to us indeed, but
not so to Christ, whom it cost so much, even his own most sacred blood,
beside which no price sufficiently valuable could be paid to Divine
justice. When men are taught in this manner, they are apprized that it
is not owing to them that this most sacred blood is not shed as often as
they sin. Besides, we learn that such is our pollution, that it can
never be washed away, except in the fountain of this immaculate blood.
Must not persons who hear these things conceive a greater horror of sin,
than if it were said to be cleansed by a sprinkling of good works? And
if they have any fear of God, will they not dread, after being once
purified, to plunge themselves again into the mire, and thereby to
disturb and infect, as far as they can, the purity of this fountain? “I
have washed my feet,” (says the believing soul in Solomon,) “how shall I
defile them?”[124] Now, it is plain which party better deserves the
charge of degrading the value of remission of sins, and prostituting the
dignity of righteousness. They pretend that God is appeased by their
frivolous _satisfactions_, which are no better than dung; we assert,
that the guilt of sin is too atrocious to be expiated by such
insignificant trifles; that the displeasure of God is too great to be
appeased by these worthless satisfactions; and therefore that this is
the exclusive prerogative of the blood of Christ. They say, that
righteousness, if it ever be defective, is restored and repaired by
works of satisfaction. We think it so valuable that no compensation of
works can be adequate to it; and therefore that for its restitution we
must have recourse to the mercy of God alone. The remaining particulars
that pertain to the remission of sins may be found in the next chapter.
Footnote 98:
1 Cor. i. 30.
Footnote 99:
1 John iv. 10, 19.
Footnote 100:
Heb. ix. 14.
Footnote 101:
Heb. x. 29.
Footnote 102:
Luke i. 74, 75.
Footnote 103:
Rom. vi. 18.
Footnote 104:
Rom. vi. 4, 6.
Footnote 105:
Col. iii. 1. Heb. xi. 13. 1 Peter ii. 11.
Footnote 106:
Titus ii. 11-13.
Footnote 107:
1 Thess. v. 9.
Footnote 108:
1 Cor. iii. 16, 17; vi. 19. Ephes. ii. 21.
Footnote 109:
Ephes. v. 8.
Footnote 110:
1 Thess. iv. 3, 7.
Footnote 111:
2 Tim. i. 9. 1 Peter i. 15.
Footnote 112:
Rom. vi. 18.
Footnote 113:
1 John iv. 11; iii. 10.
Footnote 114:
1 Cor. xii. 12, &c.
Footnote 115:
1 John iii. 3.
Footnote 116:
2 Cor. vii. 1.
Footnote 117:
Matt. xi. 29. John xiii. 15.
Footnote 118:
2 Tim. iii. 17.
Footnote 119:
Rom. xii. 1.
Footnote 120:
Matt. v. 16.
Footnote 121:
2 Cor. ix. 7.
Footnote 122:
Matt. xvi. 27. Rom. ii. 6.
Footnote 123:
Psalm cxxx. 4.
Footnote 124:
Cant. v. 3.
CHAPTER XVII.
THE HARMONY BETWEEN THE PROMISES OF THE LAW AND THOSE OF THE GOSPEL.
Let us now pursue the other arguments with which Satan by his satellites
attempts to destroy or to weaken justification by faith. I think we have
already gained this point with these calumniators—that they can no
longer accuse us of being enemies to good works. For we reject the
notion of justification by works, not that no good works may be done, or
that those which are performed may be denied to be good, but that we may
neither confide in them, nor glory in them, nor ascribe salvation to
them. For this is our trust, this is our glory, and the only anchor of
our salvation, That Christ the Son of God is ours, and that we are
likewise, in him, sons of God and heirs of the celestial kingdom; being
called, not for our worthiness, but by the Divine goodness, to the hope
of eternal felicity. But since they assail us besides, as we have
observed, with other weapons, let us also proceed to the repulsion of
them. In the first place, they return to the legal promises which the
Lord gave to the observers of his law, and inquire whether we suppose
them to be entirely vain, or of any validity. As it would be harsh and
ridiculous to say they are vain, they take it for granted that they have
some efficacy. Hence they argue, that we are not justified by faith
alone. For thus saith the Lord, “Wherefore it shall come to pass, if ye
hearken to these judgments, and keep and do them, that the Lord thy God
shall keep unto thee the covenant and the mercy which he sware unto thy
fathers; and he will love thee, and bless thee, and multiply thee.”[125]
Again: “If ye thoroughly amend your ways and your doings; if ye
thoroughly execute judgment between a man and his neighbour; if ye
oppress not, neither walk after other gods; then will I cause you to
dwell in this place,” &c.[126] I am not willing to recite a thousand
passages of the same kind, which, not being different in sense, will be
elucidated by an explanation of these. The sum of all is declared by
Moses, who says that in the law are proposed “a blessing and a curse,
life and death.”[127] Now, they argue, either that this blessing becomes
inefficacious and nugatory, or that justification is not by faith alone.
We have already shown, how, if we adhere to the law, being destitute of
every blessing, we are obnoxious to the curse which is denounced on all
transgressors. For the Lord promises nothing, except to the perfect
observers of his law, of which description not one can be found. The
consequence then is, that all mankind are proved by the law to be
obnoxious to the curse and wrath of God; in order to be saved from
which, they need deliverance from the power of the law, and emancipation
from its servitude; not a carnal liberty, which would seduce us from
obedience to the law, invite to all kinds of licentiousness, break down
the barriers of inordinate desire, and give the reins to every lawless
passion; but a spiritual liberty, which will console and elevate a
distressed and dejected conscience, showing it to be delivered from the
curse and condemnation under which it was held by the law. This
liberation from subjection to the law, and manumission, (if I may use
the term,) we attain, when we apprehend by faith the mercy of God in
Christ, by which we are assured of the remission of sins, by the sense
of which the law penetrated us with compunction and remorse.
II. For this reason all the promises of the law would be ineffectual and
vain, unless we were assisted by the goodness of God in the gospel. For
the condition of a perfect obedience to the law, on which they depend,
and in consequence of which alone they are to be fulfilled, will never
be performed. Now, the Lord affords this assistance, not by leaving a
part of righteousness in our works, and supplying part from his mercy,
but by appointing Christ alone for the completion of righteousness. For
the apostle, having said that he and other Jews, “knowing that a man is
not justified by the works of the law, believed in Christ,” adds as a
reason, not that they might be assisted to obtain a complete
righteousness by faith in Christ, but “that they might be justified by
the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law.”[128] If the
faithful pass from the law to faith, to find righteousness in the
latter, which they perceive to be wanting in the former, they certainly
renounce the righteousness of the law. Therefore let whosoever will now
amplify the rewards which are said to await the observer of the law;
only let him remark, that our depravity prevents us from receiving any
benefit from them, till we have obtained by faith another righteousness.
Thus David, after having mentioned the reward which the Lord has
prepared for his servants, immediately proceeds to the acknowledgment of
sins, by which it is annulled. In the nineteenth psalm, likewise, he
magnificently celebrates the benefits of the law; but immediately
exclaims, “Who can understand his errors? cleanse thou me from secret
faults.”[129] This passage perfectly accords with that before referred
to, where, after having said, “All the paths of the Lord are mercy and
truth unto such as keep his covenant and his testimonies,” he adds, “For
thy name’s sake, O Lord, pardon mine iniquity; for it is great.”[130] So
we ought also to acknowledge, that the Divine favour is offered to us in
the law, if we could purchase it by our works; but that no merit of ours
can ever obtain it.
III. What, then, it will be said, were those promises given, to vanish
away without producing any effect? I have already declared that this is
not my opinion. I assert, indeed, that they have no efficacy with
respect to us as long as they are referred to the merit of works;
wherefore, considered in themselves, they are in some sense abolished.
Thus that grand promise, “Keep my statutes and judgments; which if a man
do, he shall live in them;”[131] the apostle maintains to be of no value
to us, if we rest upon it, and that it will be no more beneficial to us
than if it had never been given; because it is inapplicable to the
holiest of God’s servants, who are all far from fulfilling the law, and
are encompassed with a multitude of transgressions.[132] But when these
are superseded by the evangelical promises, which proclaim the
gratuitous remission of sins, the consequence is, that not only our
persons, but also our works, are accepted by God; and not accepted only,
but followed by those blessings, which were due by the covenant to the
observance of the law. I grant, therefore, that the works of believers
are rewarded by those things which the Lord has promised in his law to
the followers of righteousness and holiness; but in this retribution it
is always necessary to consider the cause, which conciliates such favour
to those works. Now, this we perceive to be threefold: The first is,
That God, averting his eyes from the actions of his servants, which are
invariably more deserving of censure than of praise, receives and
embraces them in Christ, and by the intervention of faith alone
reconciles them to himself without the assistance of works. The second
is, That in his paternal benignity and indulgence, he overlooks the
intrinsic worth of these works, and exalts them to such honour, that he
esteems them of some degree of value. The third cause is, That he
pardons these works as he receives them, not imputing the imperfection
with which they are all so defiled, that they might otherwise be
accounted rather sins than virtues. Hence it appears how great has been
the delusion of the sophists, who thought that they had dexterously
avoided all absurdities by saying that works are sufficient to merit
salvation, not on account of their own intrinsic goodness, but by reason
of the covenant, because the Lord in his mercy has estimated them so
highly. But at the same time, they had not observed how far the works,
which they styled _meritorious_, fell short of the condition of the
promise; unless they were preceded by justification founded on faith
alone, and by remission of sins, by which even good works require to be
purified from blemishes. Therefore, of the three causes of the Divine
goodness, in consequence of which the works of believers are accepted,
they only noticed one, and suppressed two others, and those the
principal.
IV. They allege the declaration of Peter, which Luke recites in the
Acts: “Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons; but in
every nation he that worketh righteousness is accepted with him.”[133]
And hence they conclude, what they think admits of no doubt, that if a
man by rectitude of conduct conciliate to himself the favour of God, the
grace of God is not the sole cause of his salvation; moreover, that God
of his own mercy assists a sinner in such a manner, as to be influenced
to the exercise of mercy by his works. But we cannot by any means
reconcile the Scriptures with themselves, unless we observe a twofold
acceptance of man with God. For God finds nothing in man, in his native
condition, to incline him to mercy, but mere misery. If, then, it is
evident that man is entirely destitute of all good, and full of every
kind of evil, when he is first received by God, by what good qualities
shall we pronounce him entitled to the heavenly calling? Let us reject,
therefore, all vain imagination of merits, where God so evidently
displays his unmerited clemency. The declaration of the angel to
Cornelius in the same passage, “Thy prayers and thine alms are come up
for a memorial before God,” they most wickedly pervert to prove that the
practice of good works prepares a man to receive the grace of God. For
Cornelius must have been already illuminated with the Spirit of wisdom,
since he was endued with the fear of God, which is true wisdom; and he
must have been sanctified by the same Spirit, since he was a follower of
righteousness, which the apostle represents as one of the Spirit’s most
certain fruits.[134] It was from the grace of God, then, that he derived
all these things in which he is said to have pleased him; so far was he
from preparing himself to receive it by the exercise of his own powers.
There cannot indeed be adduced a single syllable of the Scripture, which
is not in harmony with this doctrine; That there is no other cause for
God’s reception of man into his love, than his knowledge that man, if
abandoned by him, would be utterly lost; and because it is not his will
to abandon him to perdition, he displays his mercy in his deliverance.
Now, we see that this acceptance is irrespective of the righteousness of
man, but is an unequivocal proof of the Divine goodness towards
miserable sinners, who are infinitely unworthy of so great a favour.
V. After the Lord has recovered a man from the abyss of perdition, and
separated him to himself by the grace of adoption,—because he has
regenerated him, and raised him to a new life, he now receives and
embraces him, as a new creature, with the gifts of his Spirit. This is
the acceptance mentioned by Peter, in which even the works of believers
after their vocation are approved by God; for the Lord cannot but love
and accept those good effects which are produced in them by his Spirit.
But it must always be remembered, that they are accepted by God in
consequence of their works, only because, for their sakes and the favour
which he bears to them, he deigns to accept whatever goodness he has
liberally communicated to their works. For whence proceeds the goodness
of their works, but from the Lord’s determination to adorn with true
purity those whom he has chosen as vessels of honour? And how is it that
they are accounted good, as though they were free from all imperfection,
except from the mercy of their Father, who pardons the blemishes which
adhere to them? In a word, Peter intends nothing else in this passage,
but that God accepts and loves his children, in whom he beholds the
marks and lineaments of his own countenance; for we have elsewhere shown
that regeneration is a reparation of the Divine image in us. Wherever
the Lord contemplates his own likeness, he justly both loves and honours
it. The life of his children, therefore, being devoted to holiness and
righteousness, is truly represented as pleasing to him. But as the
faithful, while they are surrounded with mortal flesh, are still
sinners, and all their works are imperfect, and tainted with the vices
of the flesh, he cannot be propitious either to their persons or to
their works, without regarding them in Christ rather than in themselves.
It is in this sense that those passages must be understood, which
declare God to be merciful and compassionate to the followers of
righteousness. Moses said to the Israelites, “The Lord thy God, which
keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his
commandments, to a thousand generations”[135]—a sentence which was
afterwards in frequent use among that people. Thus Solomon, in his
solemn prayer: “Lord God of Israel, who keepest covenant and mercy with
thy servants that walk before thee with all their heart.”[136] The same
language is also repeated by Nehemiah.[137] For as, in all the covenants
of his mercy, the Lord stipulates with his servants for integrity and
sanctity in their lives, that his goodness may not become an object of
contempt, and that no man infected with a vain confidence in his
mercy,[138] may bless himself in his mind while walking in the depravity
of his heart, so he designs by these means to confine to their duty all
that are admitted to the participation of his covenant; yet,
nevertheless, the covenant is originally constituted and perpetually
remains altogether gratuitous. For this reason, David, though he
declares that he had been rewarded for the purity of his hands, does not
overlook that original source which I have mentioned: “He delivered me,
because he delighted in me;”[139] where he commends the goodness of his
cause, so as not to derogate from the gratuitous mercy which precedes
all the gifts that originate from it.
VI. And here it will be useful to remark, by the way, what difference
there is between such forms of expression and the legal promises. By
legal promises I intend, not all those which are contained in the books
of Moses,—since in those books there likewise occur many evangelical
ones,—but such as properly pertain to the ministry of the law. Such
promises, by whatever appellation they may be distinguished, proclaim
that a reward is ready to be bestowed, on condition that we perform what
is commanded. But when it is said that “the Lord keepeth covenant and
mercy with them that love him,” this rather designates the characters of
his servants, who have faithfully received his covenant, than expresses
the causes of his beneficence to them. Now, this is the way to prove it:
As the Lord favours us with the hope of eternal life, in order that he
may be loved, reverenced, and worshipped by us, therefore all the
promises of mercy contained in the Scriptures are justly directed to
this end, that we may revere and worship the Author of our blessings.
Whenever, therefore, we hear of his beneficence to them who observe his
laws, let us remember that the children of God are designated by the
duty in which they ought always to be found; and that we are adopted as
his children, in order that we may venerate him as our Father.
Therefore, that we may not renounce the privilege of our adoption, we
ought to aim at that which is the design of our vocation. On the other
hand, however, we may be assured, that the accomplishment of God’s mercy
is independent of the works of believers; but that he fulfils the
promise of salvation to them whose vocation is followed by a
correspondent rectitude of life, because in them who are directed by his
Spirit to good works, he recognizes the genuine characters of his
children. To this must be referred what is said of the citizens of the
Church: “Lord, who shall abide in thy tabernacle? who shall dwell in thy
holy hill? He that walketh uprightly, and worketh righteousness,”
&c.[140] And in Isaiah: “Who shall dwell with the devouring fire? He
that walketh righteously, and speaketh uprightly,” &c.[141] For these
passages describe, not the foundation which supports the faithful before
God, but the manner in which their most merciful Father introduces them
into communion with him, and preserves and confirms them in it. For as
he detests sin, and loves righteousness, those whom he unites to him he
purifies by his Spirit, in order to conform them to himself and his
kingdom. Therefore, if it be inquired what is the first cause which
gives the saints an entrance into the kingdom of God, and which makes
their continuance in it permanent, the answer is ready; Because the Lord
in his mercy has once adopted and perpetually defends them. But if the
question relate to the manner in which he does this, it will then be
necessary to advert to regeneration and its fruits, which are enumerated
in the psalm that we have just quoted.
VII. But there appears to be much greater difficulty in those places
which dignify good works with the title of _righteousness_, and assert
that a man is justified by them. Of the former kind there are many,
where the observance of the commands is denominated _justification_ or
_righteousness_. An example of the other kind we find in Moses: “And it
shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these
commandments.”[142] If it be objected that this is a legal promise,
which, having an impossible condition annexed to it, proves
nothing,—there are other passages which will not admit of a similar
reply; such as, “In case thou shalt deliver him the pledge, &c., it
shall be righteousness unto thee before the Lord.”[143] Similar to this
is what the Psalmist says, that the zeal of Phinehas in avenging the
disgrace of Israel, “was counted unto him for righteousness.”[144]
Therefore the Pharisees of our day suppose that these passages afford
ample ground for their clamour against us. For when we say, that if the
righteousness of faith be established, there is an end of justification
by works,—they argue, in the same manner, that if righteousness be by
works, then it is not true that we are justified by faith alone. Though
I grant that the precepts of the law are termed _righteousness_, there
is nothing surprising in this; for they are so in reality. The reader,
however, ought to be apprized that the Hebrew word חקים (_commandments_)
is not well translated by the Greek word δικαιωματα, (_righteousness_.)
But I readily relinquish all controversy respecting the word. Nor do we
deny that the Divine law contains perfect righteousness. For although,
being under an obligation to fulfil all its precepts, we should, even
after a perfect obedience to it, only be unprofitable servants,—yet,
since the Lord has honoured the observance of it with the title of
_righteousness_, we would not detract from what he has given. We freely
acknowledge, therefore, that the perfect obedience of the law is
righteousness, and that the observance of every particular command is a
part of righteousness; since complete righteousness consists of all the
parts. But we deny that such a kind of righteousness any where exists.
And therefore we reject the righteousness of the law; not that it is of
itself defective and mutilated, but because, on account of the debility
of our flesh,[145] it is no where to be found. It may be said, that the
Scripture not only calls the Divine precepts _righteousnesses_, but
gives this appellation also to the works of the saints. As where it
relates of Zacharias and his wife, that “they were both righteous before
God, walking in all his commandments:”[146] certainly, when it speaks
thus, it estimates their works rather according to the nature of the
law, than according to the actual condition of the persons. Here it is
necessary to repeat the observation which I have just made, that no rule
is to be drawn from the incautiousness of the Greek translator. But as
Luke has not thought proper to alter the common version, neither will I
contend for it. Those things which are commanded in the law, God has
enjoined upon man as necessary to righteousness; but that righteousness
we do not fulfil without observing the whole law, which is broken by
every act of transgression. Since the law, therefore, only prescribes a
righteousness, if we contemplate the law itself, all its distinct
commands are parts of righteousness; if we consider men, by whom they
are performed, they cannot obtain the praise of righteousness from one
act, while they are transgressors in many, and while that same act is
partly vicious by reason of its imperfection.
VIII. But I proceed to the second class of texts, in which the principal
difficulty lies. Paul urges nothing more forcible in proof of
justification by faith, than what is stated respecting Abraham—that he
“believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.”[147]
Since the action of Phinehas, therefore, is said to have been “counted
unto him for righteousness,”[148] we may also use the same argument
concerning works, which Paul insists on respecting faith. Therefore our
adversaries, as though they had established the point, determine that we
are justified neither without faith, nor by faith alone; and that our
righteousness is completed by works. Therefore I conjure believers, if
they know that the true rule of righteousness is to be sought in the
Scripture alone, to accompany me in a serious and solemn examination how
the Scripture may be properly reconciled with itself without any
sophistry. Paul, knowing the righteousness of faith to be the refuge of
those who are destitute of any righteousness of their own, boldly infers
that all who are justified by faith, are excluded from the righteousness
of works. It being likewise evident, on the other hand, that this is
common to all believers, he with equal confidence concludes that no man
is justified by works, but rather, on the contrary, that we are
justified independently of all works. But it is one thing to dispute
concerning the intrinsic value of works, and another, to argue
respecting the place they ought to hold after the establishment of the
righteousness of faith. If we are to determine the value of works by
their own worthiness, we say that they are unworthy to appear in the
sight of God; that there is nothing in our works of which we can glory
before God; and consequently, that being divested of all assistance from
works, we are justified by faith alone. Now, we describe this
righteousness in the following manner: That a sinner, being admitted to
communion with Christ, is by his grace reconciled to God; while, being
purified by his blood, he obtains remission of sins, and being clothed
with his righteousness, as if it were his own, he stands secure before
the heavenly tribunal. Where remission of sins has been previously
received, the good works which succeed are estimated far beyond their
intrinsic merit; for all their imperfections are covered by the
perfection of Christ, and all their blemishes are removed by his purity,
that they may not be scrutinized by the Divine judgment. The guilt,
therefore, of all transgressions, by which men are prevented from
offering any thing acceptable to God being obliterated, and the
imperfection, which universally deforms even the good works of
believers, being buried in oblivion, their works are accounted
righteous, or, which is the same thing, are imputed for righteousness.
IX. Now, if any one urge this to me as an objection, to oppose the
righteousness of faith, I will first ask him, Whether a man is reputed
righteous on account of one or two holy works, who is in the other
actions of his life a transgressor of the law. This would be too absurd
to be pretended. I shall next inquire, If he is reputed righteous on
account of many good works, while he is found guilty of any instance of
transgression. This, likewise, my adversary will not presume to
maintain, in opposition to the sanction of the law, which denounces a
curse on all those who do not fulfil every one of its precepts.[149] I
will further inquire, If there is any work which does not deserve the
charge of impurity or imperfection.[150] But how could this be possible
before those eyes, in which the stars are not sufficiently pure, nor the
angels sufficiently righteous? Thus he will be compelled to concede,
that there is not a good work to be found, which is not too much
polluted, both by its own imperfection and by the transgressions with
which it is attended, to have any claim to the honourable appellation of
_righteousness_. Now, if it be evidently in consequence of justification
by faith, that works, otherwise impure and imperfect, unworthy of the
sight of God, and much more of his approbation, are imputed for
righteousness,—why do they attempt, by boasting of the righteousness of
works, to destroy the righteousness of faith, from which all
righteousness of works proceeds? But do they wish to produce a viperous
offspring to destroy the parent? For such is the true tendency of this
impious doctrine. They cannot deny that justification by faith is the
beginning, foundation, cause, motive, and substance of the righteousness
of works; yet they conclude, that a man is not justified by faith
because good works also are imputed for righteousness. Let us therefore
leave these impertinences, and acknowledge the real state of the case;
if all the righteousness which can be attributed to works depends on
justification by faith, the latter is not only not diminished, but, on
the contrary, is confirmed by it; since its influence appears the more
extensive. But let us not suppose that works, subsequent to gratuitous
justification, are so highly esteemed, that they succeed to the office
of justifying men, or divide that office with faith. For unless
justification by faith remain always unimpaired, the impurity of their
works will be detected. Nor is there any absurdity in saying, that a man
is so justified by faith, that he is not only righteous himself, but
that even his works are accounted righteous beyond what they deserve.
X. In this way we will admit, not only a partial righteousness of works,
which our opponents maintain, but such as is approved by God, as though
it were perfect and complete. A remembrance of the foundation on which
it stands will solve every difficulty. For no work is ever acceptable,
till it be received with pardon. Now, whence proceeds pardon, but from
God’s beholding us and all our actions in Christ? When we are ingrafted
into Christ, therefore, as our persons appear righteous before God,
because our iniquities are covered by his righteousness, so our works
are accounted righteous, because the sinfulness otherwise belonging to
them is not imputed, being all buried in the purity of Christ. So we may
justly assert, that not only our persons, but even our works, are
justified by faith alone. Now, if this righteousness of works, whatever
be its nature, is consequent and dependent on faith and gratuitous
justification, it ought to be included under it, and subordinated to it,
as an effect to its cause; so far is it from deserving to be exalted,
either to destroy or to obscure the righteousness of faith. Thus Paul,
to evince that our blessedness depends on the mercy of God, and not on
our works, chiefly urges this declaration of David: “Blessed are they
whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is
the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.”[151] If, in opposition to
this, the numerous passages be adduced where blessedness seems to be
attributed to works; such as, “Blessed is the man that feareth the
Lord;[152] that hath mercy on the poor;[153] that walketh not in the
counsel of the ungodly;[154] that endureth temptation;”[155] “Blessed
are they that keep judgment;[156] the undefiled,[157] the poor in
spirit, the meek, the merciful,” &c.;[158] they will not at all weaken
the truth of what is advanced by Paul. For since no man ever attains all
these characters, so as thereby to gain the Divine approbation, it
appears that men are always miserable till they are delivered from
misery by the pardon of their sins. Since all the beatitudes celebrated
in the Scriptures are of no avail, and no man can derive any benefit
from them, till he has obtained blessedness by the remission of his
sins, which then makes room for the other beatitudes, it follows that
this is not merely the noblest and principal, but the only blessedness;
unless, indeed, we suppose it to be diminished by those which are
dependent on it. Now, we have much less reason to be disturbed by the
appellation of _righteous_, which is generally given to believers. I
acknowledge that they are denominated _righteous_ from the sanctity of
their lives; but as they rather devote themselves to the pursuit of
righteousness than actually attain to righteousness itself, it is proper
that this righteousness, such as it is, should be subordinate to
justification by faith, from which it derives its origin.
XI. But our adversaries say that we have yet more difficulty with James,
since he contradicts us in express terms. For he teaches, that “Abraham
was justified by works,” and that we are all “justified by works, and
not by faith only.”[159] What then? Will they draw Paul into a
controversy with James? If they consider James as a minister of Christ,
his declarations must be understood in some sense not at variance with
Christ when speaking by the mouth of Paul. The Spirit asserts, by the
mouth of Paul, that Abraham obtained righteousness by faith, not by
works; we likewise teach, that we are all justified by faith without the
works of the law. The same Spirit affirms by James, that both Abraham’s
righteousness and ours consists in works, and not in faith only. That
the Spirit is not inconsistent with himself is a certain truth. But what
harmony can there be between these two apparently opposite assertions?
Our adversaries would be satisfied, if they could totally subvert the
righteousness of faith, which we wish to be firmly established; but to
afford tranquillity to the disturbed conscience, they feel very little
concern. Hence we perceive, that they oppose the doctrine of
justification by faith, but at the same time fix no certain rule of
righteousness, by which the conscience may be satisfied. Let them
triumph then as they please, if they can boast no other victory but that
of having removed all certainty of righteousness. And this miserable
victory, indeed, they will obtain, where, after having extinguished the
light of truth, they are permitted by the Lord to spread the shades of
error. But, wherever the truth of God remains, they will not prevail. I
deny, therefore, that the assertion of James, which they hold up against
us as an impenetrable shield, affords them the least support. To evince
this, we shall first examine the scope of the apostle, and then remark
wherein they are deceived. Because there were many persons at that time,
and the Church is perpetually infested with similar characters, who, by
neglecting and omitting the proper duties of believers, manifestly
betrayed their real infidelity, while they continued to glory in the
false pretence of faith, James here exposes the foolish confidence of
such persons. It is not his design, then, to diminish, in any respect,
the virtue of true faith, but to show the folly of these triflers, who
were content with arrogating to themselves the vain image of it, and
securely abandoned themselves to every vice. This statement being
premised, it will be easy to discover where lies the error of our
adversaries. For they fall into two fallacies; one respecting the word
“faith,” the other respecting the word “justification.” When the apostle
gives the appellation of _faith_ to a vain notion, widely different from
true faith, it is a concession which derogates nothing from the
argument; this he shows from the beginning in these words: “What doth it
profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not
works?”[160] He does not say, If any one have faith without works; but,
If any one boast of having it. He speaks still more plainly just after,
where he ridicules it by representing it as worse than the knowledge of
devils; and lastly, when he calls it _dead_. But his meaning may be
sufficiently understood from the definition he gives: “Thou believest,”
says he, “that there is one God.” Indeed, if nothing be contained in
this creed but a belief of the Divine existence, it is not at all
surprising that it is inadequate to justification. And we must not
suppose this denial to be derogatory to Christian faith, the nature of
which is widely different. For how does true faith justify, but by
uniting us to Christ, that, being made one with him, we may participate
his righteousness? It does not, therefore, justify us, by attaining a
knowledge of God’s existence, but by a reliance on the certainty of his
mercy.
XII. But we shall not have ascertained the whole scope of the apostle,
till we have exposed the other fallacy; for he attributes justification
partly to works. If we wish to make James consistent with the rest of
the Scriptures, and even with himself, we must understand the word
“justify” in a different signification from that in which it is used by
Paul. For we are said by Paul to be justified, when the memory of our
unrighteousness is obliterated, and we are accounted righteous. If James
had alluded to this, it would have been preposterous for him to make
that quotation from Moses: “Abraham believed God,” &c.[161] For he
introduces it in the following manner: Abraham obtained righteousness by
works, because he hesitated not to sacrifice his son at the command of
God. And thus was the Scripture fulfilled, which saith, Abraham believed
God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness. If an effect
antecedent to its cause be an absurdity, either Moses falsely asserts in
that place, that Abraham’s faith was imputed to him for righteousness,
or Abraham did not obtain righteousness by his obedience, displayed in
the oblation of his son. Abraham was justified by faith, while Ishmael,
who arrived at adolescence before the birth of Isaac, was not yet
conceived. How, then, can we ascribe his justification to an act of
obedience performed so long after? Wherefore, either James improperly
inverted the order of events, (which it is unlawful to imagine,) or, by
saying that Abraham was justified, he did not mean that the patriarch
deserved to be accounted righteous. What, then, was his meaning? He
evidently appears to speak of a declaration of righteousness before men,
and not of an imputation of it in the sight of God; as though he had
said, They who are justified by true faith, prove their justification,
not by a barren and imaginary resemblance of faith, but by obedience and
good works. In a word, he is not disputing concerning the method of
justification, but requiring of believers a righteousness manifested in
good works. And as Paul contends for justification independent of works,
so James will not allow those to be accounted righteous, who are
destitute of good works. The consideration of this object will extricate
us from every difficulty. For the principal mistake of our adversaries
consists in supposing, that James describes the method of justification,
while he only endeavours to destroy the corrupt security of those who
make vain pretences to faith, in order to excuse their contempt of good
works. Into whatever forms, therefore, they pervert the words of James,
they will extort nothing but these two truths—that a vain notion of
faith cannot justify; and that the faithful, not content with such an
imagination, manifest their righteousness by their good works.
XIII. Nor can they derive the least support from a similar passage which
they cite from Paul, that “Not the hearers of the law, but the doers of
the law, shall be justified.”[162] I have no wish to evade it by the
explanation of Ambrose, that this is spoken, because faith in Christ is
the fulfilling of the law. For this I conceive to be a mere subterfuge,
which is totally unnecessary. The apostle in that place is demolishing
the foolish confidence of the Jews, who boasted of possessing the
exclusive knowledge of the law, whilst at the same time they were the
greatest despisers of it. To prevent such great self-complacence on
account of a mere acquaintance with the law, he admonishes them, that if
righteousness be sought by the law, it is requisite not only to know but
to observe it. We certainly do not question that the righteousness of
the law consists in works, nor that this righteousness consists in the
worthiness and merit of works. But still it cannot be proved that we are
justified by works, unless some person be produced who has fulfilled the
law. That Paul had no other meaning, is sufficiently evident from the
context. After having condemned the Gentiles and Jews indiscriminately
for unrighteousness, he proceeds particularly to inform us, that “as
many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law;” which
refers to the Gentiles; and that “as many as have sinned in the law
shall be judged by the law;” which belongs to the Jews. Moreover,
because they shut their eyes against their transgressions, and gloried
in their mere possession of the law, he adds, what is exceedingly
applicable, that the law was not given that men might be justified
merely by hearing its voice, but by obeying it; as though he had said,
Do you seek righteousness by the law? Plead not your having heard it,
which of itself is a very small advantage, but produce works as an
evidence that the law has not been given to you in vain. Since in this
respect they were all deficient, they were consequently deprived of
their glorying in the law. The meaning of Paul, therefore, rather
furnishes an opposite argument: Legal righteousness consists in perfect
works; no man can boast of having satisfied the law by his works;
therefore there is no righteousness by the law.
XIV. Our adversaries proceed to adduce those passages in which the
faithful boldly offer their righteousness to the examination of Divine
justice, and desire to be judged according to it. Such are the
following: “Judge me, O Lord, according to my righteousness, and
according to mine integrity that is in me.”[163] Again: “Hear the right,
O Lord. Thou hast proved mine heart; thou hast visited me in the night;
thou hast tried me, and shalt find nothing.”[164] Again: “I have kept
the ways of the Lord, and have not wickedly departed from my God. I was
also upright before him, and I kept myself from mine iniquity. Therefore
hath the Lord recompensed me according to my righteousness, according to
the cleanness of my hands.”[165] Again: “Judge me, O Lord, for I have
walked in mine integrity. I have not sat with vain persons; neither will
I go in with dissemblers. Gather not my soul with sinners, nor my life
with bloody men; in whose hands is mischief, and their right hand is
full of bribes. But as for me, I will walk in mine integrity.”[166] I
have already spoken of the confidence which the saints appear to derive
from their works. The passages now adduced will form no objection to our
doctrine, when they are explained according to the occasion of them.
Now, this is twofold. For believers who have expressed themselves in
this manner, have no wish to submit to a general examination, to be
condemned or absolved according to the whole tenor of their lives, but
they bring forward a particular cause to be judged; and they attribute
righteousness to themselves, not with reference to the Divine
perfection, but in comparison with men of impious and abandoned
characters. In the first place, in order to a man’s being justified, it
is requisite that he should have, not only a good cause in some
particular instance, but a perpetual consistency of righteousness
through life. But the saints, when they implore the judgment of God in
approbation of their innocence, do not present themselves as free from
every charge, and absolutely guiltless; but having fixed their
dependence on his goodness alone, and confiding in his readiness to
avenge the poor who are unlawfully and unjustly afflicted, they
supplicate his regard to the cause in which the innocent are oppressed.
But when they place themselves and their adversaries before the Divine
tribunal, they boast not an innocence, which, on a severe examination,
would be found correspondent to the purity of God; but knowing that
their sincerity, justice, simplicity, and purity, are pleasing and
acceptable to God, in comparison with the malice, wickedness, fraud, and
iniquity of their enemies, they are not afraid to invoke Him to judge
between them. Thus, when David said to Saul, “The Lord render to every
man his righteousness and his faithfulness”[167] he did not mean that
the Lord should examine every individual by himself, and reward him
according to his merits; but he called the Lord to witness the greatness
of his innocence in comparison with the iniquity of Saul. Nor did Paul,
when he gloried in having “the testimony of” his “conscience” that he
had conducted himself in the Church “with simplicity and godly
sincerity,”[168] intend to rely on this before God; but the calumnies of
the impious constrained him to oppose all their slanderous aspersions by
asserting his fidelity and probity, which he knew to be acceptable to
the Divine goodness. For we know what he says in another place: “I am
conscious to myself of nothing; yet am I not hereby justified.”[169]
Because, indeed, he was certain, that the judgment of God far
transcended the narrow comprehension of man. However, therefore, the
pious may vindicate their innocence against the hypocrisy of the
impious, by invoking God to be their witness and judge, yet in their
concerns with God alone, they all with one voice exclaim, “If thou,
Lord, shouldst mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?”[170] Again:
“Enter not into judgment with thy servant, for in thy sight shall no man
living be justified.”[171] And, diffident of their own works, they
gladly sing, “Thy loving-kindness is better than life.”[172]
XV. There are likewise other passages, similar to the preceding, on
which some person may yet insist. Solomon says, “The just man walketh in
his integrity.”[173] Again: “In the way of righteousness there is life;
and in the pathway thereof there is no death.”[174] Thus also Ezekiel
declares, that he who “doth that which is lawful and right, shall surely
live.”[175] We neither deny nor obscure any of these. But let one of the
sons of Adam produce such an integrity. If no one can, they must either
perish from the presence of God, or flee to the asylum of mercy. Nor do
we deny, that to believers their integrity, however imperfect, is a step
toward immortality. But what is the cause of this, unless it be that
when the Lord has admitted any persons into the covenant of his grace,
he does not scrutinize their works according to their intrinsic merit,
but embraces them with paternal benignity? By this we mean, not merely
what is taught by the schoolmen, “that works receive their value from
the grace which accepts them;” for they suppose, that works, otherwise
inadequate to the attainment of salvation by the legal covenant, are
rendered sufficient for this by the Divine acceptance of them. But I
assert, that they are so defiled, both by other transgressions and by
their own blemishes, that they are of no value at all, except as the
Lord pardons both; and this is no other than bestowing on a man
gratuitous righteousness. It is irrelevant to this subject, to allege
those prayers of the apostle, in which he desires such perfection for
believers, that they may be unblamable and irreprovable in the day of
Christ.[176] These passages, indeed, the Celestines formerly perverted,
in order to prove a perfection of righteousness in the present life. We
think it sufficient briefly to reply, with Augustine, “that all the
pious ought, indeed, to aspire to this object, to appear one day
immaculate and guiltless before the presence of God; but since the
highest excellency in this life is nothing more than a progress towards
perfection, we shall never attain it, till, being divested at once of
mortality and sin, we shall fully adhere to the Lord.” Nevertheless, I
shall not pertinaciously contend with any person who chooses to
attribute to the saints the character of perfection, provided he also
defines it in the words of Augustine himself; who says, “When we
denominate the virtue of the saints perfect, to this perfection itself
belongs the acknowledgment of imperfection, both in truth and in
humility.”
Footnote 125:
Deut. vii. 12, 13.
Footnote 126:
Jer. vii. 5-7.
Footnote 127:
Deut. xi. 26; xxx. 15.
Footnote 128:
Gal. ii. 16.
Footnote 129:
Psalm xix. 12.
Footnote 130:
Psalm xxv. 10, 11.
Footnote 131:
Lev. xviii. 5.
Footnote 132:
Rom. x. 5, &c.
Footnote 133:
Acts x. 34, 35.
Footnote 134:
Gal. v. 5.
Footnote 135:
Deut. vii. 9.
Footnote 136:
1 Kings viii. 23.
Footnote 137:
Neh. i. 5.
Footnote 138:
Deut. xxix. 19, 20.
Footnote 139:
2 Sam. xxii. 20, 21.
Footnote 140:
Psalm xv. 1, 2.
Footnote 141:
Isaiah xxxiii. 14, 15.
Footnote 142:
Deut. vi. 25.
Footnote 143:
Deut. xxiv. 13.
Footnote 144:
Psalm cvi. 30, 31.
Footnote 145:
Rom. viii. 3.
Footnote 146:
Luke i. 6.
Footnote 147:
Rom. iv. 3. Gal. iii. 6.
Footnote 148:
Psalm cvi. 31.
Footnote 149:
Deut. xxvii. 26.
Footnote 150:
Job iv. 18; xv. 15; xxv. 5.
Footnote 151:
Rom. iv. 7, 8. Psalm xxxii. 1, 2.
Footnote 152:
Psalm cxii. 1.
Footnote 153:
Prov. xiv. 21.
Footnote 154:
Psalm i. 1.
Footnote 155:
James i. 12.
Footnote 156:
Psalm cvi. 3.
Footnote 157:
Psalm cxix. 1.
Footnote 158:
Matt. v. 3, 5, 7.
Footnote 159:
James ii. 21, 24.
Footnote 160:
James ii. 14.
Footnote 161:
James ii. 21-23. Gen. xv. 6.
Footnote 162:
Rom. ii. 13.
Footnote 163:
Psalm vii. 8.
Footnote 164:
Psalm xvii. 1, 3.
Footnote 165:
Psalm xviii. 21, 23, 24.
Footnote 166:
Psalm xxvi. 1, 4, 9-11.
Footnote 167:
1 Sam. xxvi. 23.
Footnote 168:
2 Cor. i. 12.
Footnote 169:
1 Cor. iv. 4.
Footnote 170:
Psalm cxxx. 3.
Footnote 171:
Psalm cxliii. 2.
Footnote 172:
Psalm lxiii. 3.
Footnote 173:
Prov. xx. 7.
Footnote 174:
Prov. xii. 28.
Footnote 175:
Ez. xxxiii. 14, 15.
Footnote 176:
1 Thess. iii. 13, et alibi.
CHAPTER XVIII.
JUSTIFICATION BY WORKS NOT TO BE INFERRED FROM THE PROMISE OF A REWARD.
Let us now proceed to those passages which affirm that “God will render
to every man according to his deeds;”[177] that “every one may receive
the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it
be good or bad.”[178] “Tribulation and anguish upon every soul that
doeth evil; but glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh
good.”[179] And, “All shall come forth; they that have done good, unto
the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the
resurrection of damnation.”[180] “Come, ye blessed of my Father; for I
was a hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me
drink,” &c.[181] And with these let us also connect those which
represent eternal life as the reward of works, such as the following:
“The recompense of a man’s hands shall be rendered unto him.”[182] “He
that feareth the commandment shall be rewarded.”[183] “Rejoice and be
exceeding glad; for great is your reward in heaven.”[184] “Every one
shall receive his own reward, according to his own labour.”[185] The
declaration, that God will render to every one according to his works,
is easily explained. For that phrase indicates the order of events,
rather than the cause of them. But it is beyond all doubt, that the Lord
proceeds to the consummation of our salvation by these several
gradations of mercy: “Whom he hath predestinated, them he calls; whom he
hath called, he justifies; and whom he hath justified, he finally
glorifies.”[186] Though he receives his children into eternal life,
therefore, of his mere mercy, yet since he conducts them to the
possession of it through a course of good works, that he may fulfil his
work in them in the order he has appointed, we need not wonder if they
are said to be rewarded according to their works, by which they are
undoubtedly prepared to receive the crown of immortality. And for this
reason, they are properly said to “work out their own salvation,”[187]
while, devoting themselves to good works, they aspire to eternal life;
just as in another place they are commanded to “labor for the meat which
perisheth not,” when they obtain eternal life by believing in Christ;
and yet it is immediately added, “which the Son of man shall give unto
you.”[188] Whence it appears that the word _work_ is not opposed to
grace, but refers to human endeavours; and therefore it does not follow,
either that believers are the authors of their own salvation, or that
salvation proceeds from their works. But as soon as they are introduced,
by the knowledge of the gospel and the illumination of the Holy Spirit,
into communion with Christ, eternal life is begun in them. Now, “the
good work which” God “hath begun in” them, “he will perform until the
day of Jesus Christ.”[189] And it is performed, when they prove
themselves to be the genuine children of God by their resemblance to
their heavenly Father in righteousness and holiness.
II. We have no reason to infer from the term _reward_, that good works
are the cause of salvation. First, let this truth be established in our
minds, that the kingdom of heaven is not the stipend of servants, but
the inheritance of children, which will be enjoyed only by those whom
the Lord adopts as his children, and for no other cause than on account
of this adoption. “For the son of the bond-woman shall not be heir with
the son of the free-woman.”[190] And, therefore, in the same passages in
which the Holy Spirit promises eternal life as the reward of works, by
expressly denominating it “an inheritance,” he proves it to proceed from
another cause. Thus Christ enumerates the works which he compensates by
the reward of heaven, when he calls the elect to the possession of it;
but at the same time adds, that it is to be enjoyed by right of
inheritance.[191] So Paul encourages servants, who faithfully discharge
their duty, to hope for a reward from the Lord; but at the same time
calls it “the reward of the inheritance.”[192] We see how they, almost
in express terms, caution us against attributing eternal life to works,
instead of ascribing it to Divine adoption. Why, then, it may be asked,
do they at the same time make mention of works? This question shall be
elucidated by one example from the Scripture. Before the nativity of
Isaac, there had been promised to Abraham a seed in whom all the nations
of the earth were to be blessed, a multiplication of his posterity,
which would equal the stars of heaven and the sands of the sea, and
other similar blessings.[193] Many years after, in consequence of a
Divine command, Abraham prepares to sacrifice his son. After this act of
obedience, he receives this promise: “By myself have I sworn, saith the
Lord, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy
son, thine only son; that in blessing I will bless thee, and in
multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as
the sand which is upon the sea-shore; and thy seed shall possess the
gate of his enemies; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth
be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.”[194] What? did Abraham
by his obedience merit that blessing which had been promised him before
the command was delivered? Here, then, it appears, beyond all doubt,
that the Lord rewards the works of believers with those blessings which
he had already given them before their works were thought of, and while
he had no reason for his beneficence, but his own mercy.
III. Nor does the Lord deceive or trifle with us, when he says that he
will requite works with what he had freely given previously to the
performance of them. For since it is his pleasure that we be employed in
good works, while aspiring after the manifestation or enjoyment of those
things which he has promised, and that they constitute the road in which
we should travel to endeavour to attain the blessed hope proposed to us
in heaven, therefore the fruit of the promises, to the perfection of
which fruit those works conduct us, is justly assigned to them. The
apostle beautifully expressed both those ideas, when he said that the
Colossians applied themselves to the duties of charity, “for the hope
which was laid up for them in heaven, whereof they heard before in the
word, of the truth of the gospel.”[195] For his assertion, that they
knew from the gospel, that there was hope laid up for them in heaven, is
equivalent to a declaration that it depended not on any works, but on
Christ alone; which perfectly accords with the observation of Peter,
that believers “are kept by the power of God through faith unto
salvation, ready to be revealed in the last time.”[196] When it is said
that they must labour for it, it implies, that in order to attain to it,
believers have a race to run, which terminates only with their lives.
But that we might not suppose the reward promised us by the Lord to be
regulated according to the proportion of merit, he proposes a parable,
in which he has represented himself under the character of a
householder, who employs all the persons he meets in the cultivation of
his vineyard; some he hires at the first hour of the day, others at the
second, others at the third, and some even at the eleventh hour; in the
evening he pays them all the same wages.[197] A brief and just
explanation of this parable is given by the ancient writer, whoever he
was, of the treatise “On the Calling of the Gentiles,” which bears the
name of Ambrose. I shall adopt his words in preference to my own. “By
the example of this comparison, (says he,) the Lord has shown a variety
of manifold vocation pertaining to the same grace. They who, having been
admitted into the vineyard at the eleventh hour, are placed on an
equality with them who had laboured the whole day, represent the state
of those whom, to magnify the excellence of grace, God, in his mercy,
has rewarded in the decline of the day, and at the conclusion of life;
not paying them the wages due to their labour, but sending down the
riches of his goodness, in copious effusions, on them whom he has chosen
without works; that even they who have laboured the most, and have
received no more than the last, may understand theirs to be a reward of
grace, not of works.” Lastly, it is also worthy of being observed, that
in those places where eternal life is called a reward of works, it is
not to be understood simply of that communion which we have with God, as
the prelude to a happy immortality, when he embraces us in Christ with
paternal benevolence; but of the possession or fruition of ultimate
blessedness, as the very words of Christ import—“in the world to come,
eternal life.”[198] And in another place, “Come, inherit the kingdom,”
&c.[199] For the same reason, Paul applies the term _adoption_ to the
revelation of adoption, which shall be made in the resurrection; and
afterwards explains it to be “the redemption of our body.”[200]
Otherwise, as alienation from God is eternal death, so when a man is
received into the favour of God so as to enjoy communion with him and
become united to him, he is translated from death to life; which is
solely the fruit of adoption. And if they insist, with their accustomed
pertinacity, on the reward of works, we may retort against them that
passage of Peter, where eternal life is called “the end (or reward) of
faith.”[201]
IV. Let us not, therefore, imagine, that the Holy Spirit by these
promises commends the worthiness of our works, as though they merited
such a reward. For the Scripture leaves us nothing that can exalt us in
the Divine presence. Its whole tendency is rather to repress our
arrogance, and to inspire us with humility, dejection, and contrition.
But such promises assist our weakness, which otherwise would immediately
slide and fall, if it did not sustain itself by this expectation, and
alleviate its sorrows by this consolation. First, let every one reflect,
how difficult it is for a man to relinquish and renounce, not only all
that belongs to him, but even himself. And yet this is the first lesson
which Christ teaches his disciples, that is to say, all the pious.
Afterwards he gives them such tuition during the remainder of their
lives, under the discipline of the cross, that their hearts may not fix
either their desires or their dependence on present advantages. In
short, he generally manages them in such a manner, that whithersoever
they turn their views throughout the world, nothing but despair presents
itself to them on every side; so that Paul says, “If in this life only
we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.”[202] To
preserve them from sinking under these afflictions, they have the
presence of the Lord, who encourages them to raise their heads higher,
and to extend their views further, by assurances that they will find in
him that blessedness which they cannot see in the world. This
blessedness he calls _a reward_, _a recompense_; not attributing any
merit to their works, but signifying that it is a compensation for their
oppressions, sufferings, and disgrace. Wherefore there is no objection
against our following the example of the Scripture in calling eternal
life _a reward_; since in that state the Lord receives his people from
labor into rest; from affliction into prosperity and happiness; from
sorrow into joy; from poverty into affluence; from ignominy into glory;
and commutes all the evils which they have endured for blessings of
superior magnitude. So, likewise, it will occasion no inconvenience, if
we consider holiness of life as the way, not which procures our
admission into the glory of the heavenly kingdom, but through which the
elect are conducted by their God to the manifestation of it; since it is
his good pleasure to glorify them whom he has sanctified. Only let us
not imagine a reciprocal relation of merit and reward, which is the
error into which the sophists fell, for want of considering the end
which we have stated. But how preposterous is it, when the Lord calls
our attention to one end, for us to direct our views to another! Nothing
is clearer, than that the promise of a reward to good works is designed
to afford some consolation to the weakness of our flesh, but not to
inflate our minds with vain-glory. Whoever, therefore, infers from this,
that there is any merit in works, or balances the work against the
reward, errs very widely from the true design of God.
V. Therefore, when the Scripture says, that “the Lord, the righteous
Judge, shall give” to his people “a crown of righteousness,”[203] I not
only reply with Augustine—“To whom could the righteous Judge have given
a crown, if the Father of mercies had never given grace? and how would
it have been an act of righteousness, if not preceded by that grace
which justifies the ungodly? how could these due rewards be rendered,
unless those unmerited blessings were previously bestowed?” but I
further inquire—How could he impute righteousness to our works, unless
his indulgent mercy had concealed their unrighteousness? How could he
esteem them worthy of a reward, unless his infinite goodness had
abolished all their demerit of punishment? Augustine is in the habit of
designating eternal life by the word _grace_, because, when it is given
as the reward of works, it is conferred on the gratuitous gifts of God.
But the Scripture humbles us more, and at the same time exalts us. For
beside prohibiting us to glory in works, because they are the gratuitous
gifts of God, it likewise teaches us that they are always defiled by
some pollutions; so that they cannot satisfy God, if examined according
to the rule of his judgment; but it is also added, to prevent our
despondency, that they please him merely through his mercy. Now, though
Augustine expresses himself somewhat differently from us, yet that there
is no real difference of sentiment will appear from his language to
Boniface. After a comparison between two men, the one of a life holy and
perfect even to a miracle, the other a man of probity and integrity, yet
not so perfect but that many defects might be discovered, he at length
makes this inference: “The latter, whose character appears inferior to
the former, on account of the true faith in God by which he lives, and
according to which he accuses himself in all his delinquencies, and in
all his good works praises God, ascribing the glory to him, the ignominy
to himself, and deriving from him both the pardon of his sins and the
love of virtue; this man, I say, when delivered from this life, removes
into the presence of Christ. Wherefore, but on account of faith? which,
though no man be saved by it without works, (for it is not a reprobate
faith, but such as works by love,) yet produces remission of sins, for
the just lives by faith;[204] but without it, works apparently good are
perverted into sins.” Here he avows, without any obscurity, that for
which we so strenuously contend—that the righteousness of good works
depends on their acceptance by the Divine mercy.
VI. Very similar to the foregoing passages is the import of the
following: “Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness;
that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting
habitations.”[205] “Charge them that are rich in this world, that they
be not high-minded, nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living
God; that they do good, that they be rich in good works; laying up in
store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that
they may lay hold on eternal life.” [206] Here good works are compared
to riches, which we may enjoy in the happiness of eternal life. I reply,
that we shall never arrive at the true meaning of these passages, unless
we advert to the design of the Spirit in such language. If Christ’s
declaration be true, that “where our treasure is, there will our heart
be also,”[207]—as the children of this world are generally intent on the
acquisition of those things which conduce to the comfort of the present
life, so it ought to be the concern of believers, after they have been
taught that this life will ere long vanish like a dream, to transmit
those things which they really wish to enjoy, to that place where they
shall possess a perfect and permanent life. It behoves us, therefore, to
imitate the conduct of those who determine to migrate to any new
situation, where they have chosen to reside during the remainder of
their lives; they send their property before them, without regarding the
inconvenience of a temporary absence from it; esteeming their happiness
the greater in proportion to the wealth which they possess in the place
which they intend for their permanent residence. If we believe heaven to
be our country, it is better for us to transmit our wealth thither, than
to retain it here, where we may lose it by a sudden removal. But how
shall we transmit it? Why, if we communicate to the necessities of the
poor; whatever is bestowed on them, the Lord considers as given to
himself.[208] Whence that celebrated promise, “He that hath pity upon
the poor, lendeth unto the Lord.”[209] Again: “He which soweth
bountifully shall reap also bountifully.”[210] For all things that are
bestowed on our brethren in a way of charity, are so many deposits in
the hand of the Lord; which he, as a faithful depositary, will one day
restore with ample interest. Are our acts of duty, then, it will be
asked, so valuable in the sight of God, that they are like riches
reserved in his hand for us? And who can be afraid to assert this, when
the Scripture so frequently and plainly declares it? But if any one,
from the mere goodness of God, would infer the merit of works, these
testimonies will afford no countenance to such an error. For we can
infer nothing from them except the indulgence which God in his mercy is
disposed to show us, since, in order to animate us to rectitude of
conduct, though the duties we perform are unworthy of the least notice
from him, yet he suffers not one of them to go unrewarded.
VII. But they insist more on the words of the apostle, who, to console
the Thessalonians under their tribulations, tells them that the design
of their infliction is, “that they may be counted worthy of the kingdom
of God, for which they also suffer. Seeing,” says he, “it is a righteous
thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you; and
to you who are troubled, rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be
revealed from heaven.”[211] And the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews
says, “God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love,
which ye have showed toward his name, in that ye have ministered to the
saints.”[212] To the first passage I reply, That it indicates no
worthiness of merit; but since it is the will of God the Father, that
those whom he has chosen as his children be conformed to Christ his
first begotten Son;[213] as it was necessary for him first to suffer and
then to enter into the glory destined for him;[214] so “we must through
much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.”[215] The tribulations,
therefore, which we suffer for the name of Christ, are, as it were,
certain marks impressed on us by which God usually distinguishes the
sheep of his flock. For this reason, then, we are accounted worthy of
the kingdom of God, because we bear in our body the marks of our Lord
and Master,[216] which are the badges of the children of God. The same
sentiment is conveyed in the following passages: “Bearing about in the
body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be
made manifest in our body.”[217] “Being made conformable unto his death,
if by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.”[218]
The reason which the apostle subjoins tends not to establish any merit,
but to confirm the hope of the kingdom of God; as though he had said, As
it is consistent with the judgment of God to avenge on your enemies
those vexations with which they have harassed you, so it is also to
grant you respite and repose from those vexations. Of the other passage,
which represents it as becoming the righteousness of God not to forget
our services, so as almost to imply that he would be unrighteous if he
did forget them, the meaning is, that in order to arouse our indolence,
God has assured us that the labour which we undergo for the glory of his
name shall not be in vain. And we should always remember that this
promise, as well as all others, would be fraught with no benefit to us,
unless it were preceded by the gratuitous covenant of mercy, on which
the whole certainty of our salvation must depend. But relying on that
covenant, we may securely confide, that our services, however unworthy,
will not go without a reward from the goodness of God. To confirm us in
that expectation, the apostle asserts that God is not unrighteous, but
will perform the promise he has once made. This righteousness,
therefore, refers rather to the truth of the Divine promise, than to the
equity of rendering to us any thing that is our due. To this purpose
there is a remarkable observation of Augustine; and as that holy man has
not hesitated frequently to repeat it as deserving of remembrance, so I
deem it not unworthy of a constant place in our minds. “The Lord,” says
he, “is faithful, who has made himself our debtor, not by receiving any
thing from us, but by promising all things to us.”
VIII. Our Pharisees adduce the following passages of Paul: “Though I
have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity,
I am nothing.” Again: “Now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three;
but the greatest of these is charity.”[219] Again: “Above all these
things, put on charity, which is the bond of perfectness.”[220] From the
first two passages they contend that we are justified rather by charity
than by faith; that is, by the superior virtue, as they express it. But
this argument is easily overturned. For we have already shown, that what
is mentioned in the first passage, has no reference to true faith. The
second we explain to signify true faith, than which he calls charity
greater, not as being more meritorious, but because it is more fruitful,
more extensive, more generally serviceable, and perpetual in its
duration; whereas the use of faith is only temporary. In respect of
excellence, the preëminence must be given to the love of God, which is
not in this place the subject of Paul’s discourse. For the only point
which he urges is, that with reciprocal charity we mutually edify one
another in the Lord. But let us suppose that charity excels faith in all
respects, yet what person possessed of sound judgment, or even of the
common exercise of reason, would argue from this that it has a greater
concern in justification? The power of justifying, attached to faith,
consists not in the worthiness of the act. Our justification depends
solely on the mercy of God and the merit of Christ, which when faith
apprehends, it is said to justify us. Now, if we ask our adversaries in
what sense they attribute justification to charity, they will reply,
that because it is a duty pleasing to God, the merit of it, being
accepted by the Divine goodness, is imputed to us for righteousness.
Here we see how curiously their argument proceeds. We assert that faith
justifies, not by procuring us a righteousness through its own merit,
but as the instrument by which we freely obtain the righteousness of
Christ. These men, passing over in silence the mercy of God, and making
no mention of Christ, in whom is the substance of righteousness, contend
that we are justified by the virtue of charity, because it is more
excellent than faith; just as though any one should insist that a king,
in consequence of his superior rank, is more expert at making a shoe
than a shoemaker. This one argument affords an ample proof that all the
Sorbonic schools are destitute of the least experience of justification
by faith. But if any wrangler should yet inquire, why we understand Paul
to use the word _faith_ in different acceptations in the same discourse,
I am prepared with a substantial reason for such an interpretation. For
since those gifts which Paul enumerates, are in some respect connected
with faith and hope, because they relate to the knowledge of God, he
summarily comprises them all under those two words; as though he had
said, The end of prophecy, and of tongues, of knowledge, and of the gift
of interpretation, is to conduct us to the knowledge of God. But we know
God in this life only by hope and faith. Therefore, when I mention faith
and hope, I comprehend all these things under them. “And now abideth
faith, hope, charity, these three;” that is, all gifts, whatever may be
their variety, are referred to these. “But the greatest of these is
charity.” From the third passage they infer, that if “charity is the
bond of perfectness,” it is therefore the bond of righteousness, which
is no other than perfection. Now, to refrain from observing that what
Paul calls _perfectness_, is the mutual connection which subsists
between the members of a well-constituted church, and to admit that
charity constitutes our perfection before God; yet what new advantage
will they gain? On the contrary, I shall always object, that we never
arrive at that perfection, unless we fulfil all the branches of charity;
and hence I shall infer, that since all men are at an immense distance
from complete charity, they are destitute of all hope of perfection.
IX. I have no inclination to notice all the passages of Scripture, which
the folly of the modern Sorbonists seizes as they occur, and without any
reason employs against us. For some of them are so truly ridiculous,
that I could not even mention them, unless I wished to be accounted a
fool. I shall therefore conclude this subject after having explained a
sentence uttered by Christ, with which they are wonderfully pleased. To
a lawyer, who asked him what was necessary to salvation, he replied, “If
thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.”[221] What can we wish
more, say they, when the Author of grace himself commands to obtain the
kingdom of heaven by an observance of the commandments? As though it
were not evident, that Christ adapted his replies to those with whom he
conversed. Here a doctor of the law inquires the method of obtaining
happiness, and that not simply, but what men must _do_ in order to
attain it. Both the character of the speaker and the inquiry itself
induced the Lord to make this reply. The inquirer, persuaded of the
righteousness of the law, possessed a blind confidence in his works.
Besides, he only inquired what were those works of righteousness by
which salvation might be procured. He is therefore justly referred to
the law, which contains a perfect mirror of righteousness. We also
explicitly declare, that if life be sought by works, it is indispensably
requisite to keep the commandments. And this doctrine is necessary to be
known by Christians; for how should they flee for refuge to Christ, if
they did not acknowledge themselves to have fallen from the way of life
upon the precipice of death? And how could they know how far they have
wandered from the way of life, without a previous knowledge of what that
way of life is? It is then, therefore, that Christ is presented to them
as the asylum of salvation, when they perceive the vast difference
between their own lives and the Divine righteousness, which consists in
the observance of the law. The sum of the whole is, that if we seek
salvation by works, we must keep the commandments, by which we are
taught perfect righteousness. But to stop here, would be failing in the
midst of our course; for to keep the commandments is a task to which
none of us are equal. Being excluded, then, from the righteousness of
the law, we are under the necessity of resorting to some other refuge,
namely, to faith in Christ. Wherefore, as the Lord, knowing this doctor
of the law to be inflated with a vain confidence in his works, recalls
his attention to the law, that it may teach him his own character as a
sinner, obnoxious to the tremendous sentence of eternal death, so, in
another place, addressing those who have already been humbled under this
knowledge, he omits all mention of the law, and consoles them with a
promise of grace—“Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden,
and I will give you rest; and ye shall find rest unto your souls.”[222]
X. At length, after our adversaries have wearied themselves with
perversions of Scripture, they betake themselves to subtleties and
sophisms. They cavil, that faith is in some places called a work,[223]
and hence they infer that we improperly oppose faith to works. As though
faith procured righteousness for us by its intrinsic merit, as an act of
obedience to the Divine will, and not rather because, by embracing the
Divine mercy, it seals to our hearts the righteousness of Christ, which
that mercy offers to us in the preaching of the gospel. The reader will
pardon me for not dwelling on the confutation of such follies; for they
require nothing to refute them but their own weakness. But I wish
briefly to answer one objection, which has some appearance of reason, to
prevent its being the source of any difficulty to persons who have had
but little experience. Since common sense dictates that opposites are
subject to similar rules, and as all sins are imputed to us for
unrighteousness, they maintain it to be reasonable, on the other hand,
that all good works should be imputed to us for righteousness. Those who
reply, that the condemnation of men proceeds from unbelief alone, and
not from particular sins, do not satisfy me. I agree with them, that
incredulity is the fountain and root of all evils. For it is the
original defection from God, which is afterwards followed by particular
transgressions of the law. But as they appear to fix one and the same
rule for good and evil works in forming a judgment of righteousness or
unrighteousness, here I am obliged to dissent from them. For the
righteousness of works is the perfect obedience of the law. We cannot
therefore be righteous by works, unless we follow this straight line
throughout the whole of our lives. The first deviation from it is a
lapse into unrighteousness. Hence it appears that righteousness arises
not from one or a few works, but from an inflexible and indefatigable
observance of the Divine will. But the rule of judging of
unrighteousness is very different. For he who has committed fornication
or theft, is for one transgression liable to the sentence of death,
because he has offended against the divine Majesty. These disputants of
ours, therefore, fall into an error for want of adverting to the
decision of James, that “whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet
offend in one point, he is guilty of all.” For he that said, “Do not
commit adultery,” said also, “Do not kill,” &c.[224] It ought not,
therefore, to be deemed absurd, when we say, that death is the reward
justly due to every sin, because they are all and every one deserving of
the indignation and vengeance of God. But it will be a weak argument to
infer, on the contrary, that one good work will reconcile a man to God,
whose wrath he has incurred by a multitude of sins.
Footnote 177:
Rom. ii. 6. Matt. xvi. 27.
Footnote 178:
2 Cor. v. 10.
Footnote 179:
Rom. ii. 9, 10.
Footnote 180:
John v. 29.
Footnote 181:
Matt. xxv. 34-36.
Footnote 182:
Prov. xii. 14.
Footnote 183:
Prov. xiii. 13.
Footnote 184:
Matt. v. 12. Luke vi. 23.
Footnote 185:
1 Cor. iii. 8.
Footnote 186:
Rom. viii. 30.
Footnote 187:
Phil. ii. 12.
Footnote 188:
John vi. 27.
Footnote 189:
Phil. i. 6.
Footnote 190:
Gal. iv. 30.
Footnote 191:
Matt. xxv. 34.
Footnote 192:
Col. iii. 24.
Footnote 193:
Gen. xii. 2, 3; xiii. 16; xv. 5.
Footnote 194:
Gen. xxii. 16-18.
Footnote 195:
Col. i. 4, 5.
Footnote 196:
1 Peter i. 5.
Footnote 197:
Matt. xx. 1, &c.
Footnote 198:
Mark x. 30.
Footnote 199:
Matt. xxv. 34.
Footnote 200:
Rom. viii. 23.
Footnote 201:
1 Peter i. 9.
Footnote 202:
1 Cor. xv. 19.
Footnote 203:
2 Tim. iv. 8.
Footnote 204:
Heb. x. 38.
Footnote 205:
Luke xvi. 9.
Footnote 206:
1 Tim. vi. 17-19.
Footnote 207:
Matt. vi. 21.
Footnote 208:
Matt. xxv. 40.
Footnote 209:
Prov. xix. 17.
Footnote 210:
2 Cor. ix. 6.
Footnote 211:
2 Thess. i. 5-7.
Footnote 212:
Heb. vi. 10.
Footnote 213:
Rom. viii. 29.
Footnote 214:
Luke xxiv. 26.
Footnote 215:
Acts xiv. 22.
Footnote 216:
Gal. vi. 17.
Footnote 217:
2 Cor. iv. 10.
Footnote 218:
Phil. iii. 10, 11.
Footnote 219:
1 Cor. xiii. 2, 13.
Footnote 220:
Col. iii. 14.
Footnote 221:
Matt. xix. 17.
Footnote 222:
Matt. xi. 28, 29.
Footnote 223:
John vi. 29.
Footnote 224:
James ii. 10, 11.
CHAPTER XIX.
ON CHRISTIAN LIBERTY.
We have now to treat of Christian liberty, an explanation of which ought
not to be omitted in a treatise which is designed to comprehend a
compendious summary of evangelical doctrine. For it is a subject of the
first importance, and unless it be well understood, our consciences
scarcely venture to undertake any thing without doubting, experience in
many things hesitation and reluctance, and are always subject to
fluctuations and fears. But especially it is an appendix to
justification, and affords no small assistance towards the knowledge of
its influence. Hence they who sincerely fear God will experience the
incomparable advantage of that doctrine, which impious scoffers pursue
with their railleries; because in the spiritual intoxication with which
they are seized, they allow themselves the most unbounded impudence.
Wherefore this is the proper time to introduce the subject; and though
we have slightly touched upon it on some former occasions, yet it was
useful to defer the full discussion of it to this place; because, as
soon as any mention is made of Christian liberty, then either inordinate
passions rage, or violent emotions arise, unless timely opposition be
made to those wanton spirits, who most nefariously corrupt things which
are otherwise the best. For some, under the pretext of this liberty,
cast off all obedience to God, and precipitate themselves into the most
unbridled licentiousness; and some despise it, supposing it to be
subversive of all moderation, order, and moral distinctions. What can we
do in this case, surrounded by such difficulties? Shall we entirely
discard Christian liberty, and so preclude the occasion of such dangers?
But, as we have observed, unless this be understood, there can be no
right knowledge of Christ, or of evangelical truth, or of internal peace
of mind. We should rather exert ourselves to prevent the suppression of
such a necessary branch of doctrine, and at the same time to obviate
those absurd objections which are frequently deduced from it.
II. Christian liberty, according to my judgment, consists of three
parts. The first part is, that the consciences of believers, when
seeking an assurance of their justification before God, should raise
themselves above the law, and forget all the righteousness of the law.
For since the law, as we have elsewhere demonstrated, leaves no man
righteous, either we must be excluded from all hope of justification, or
it is necessary for us to be delivered from it, and that so completely
as not to have any dependence on works. For he who imagines, that in
order to obtain righteousness he must produce any works, however small,
can fix no limit or boundary, but renders himself a debtor to the whole
law. Avoiding, therefore, all mention of the law, and dismissing all
thought of our own works, in reference to justification, we must embrace
the Divine mercy alone, and turning our eyes from ourselves, fix them
solely on Christ. For the question is, not how we can be righteous, but
how, though unrighteous and unworthy, we can be considered as righteous.
And the conscience that desires to attain any certainty respecting this,
must give no admission to the law. Nor will this authorize any one to
conclude, that the law is of no use to believers, whom it still
continues to instruct and exhort, and stimulate to duty, although it has
no place in their consciences before the tribunal of God. For these two
things, being very different, require to be properly and carefully
distinguished by us. The whole life of Christians ought to be an
exercise of piety, since they are called to sanctification.[225] It is
the office of the law to remind them of their duty, and thereby to
excite them to the pursuit of holiness and integrity. But when their
consciences are solicitous how God may be propitiated, what answer they
shall make, and on what they shall rest their confidence, if called to
his tribunal, there must then be no consideration of the requisitions of
the law, but Christ alone must be proposed for righteousness, who
exceeds all the perfection of the law.
III. On this point turns almost the whole argument of the Epistle to the
Galatians. For that they are erroneous expositors, who maintain, that
Paul there contends only for liberty from ceremonies, may be proved from
the topics of his reasoning. Such as these: “Christ hath redeemed us
from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us.”[226] Again:
“Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us
free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I
Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you
nothing. Every man that is circumcised is a debtor to do the whole law.
Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified
by the law; ye are fallen from grace.”[227] These passages certainly
comprehend something more exalted than a freedom from ceremonies. I
confess, indeed, that Paul is there treating of ceremonies, because he
is contending with the false apostles, who attempted to introduce again
into the Christian Church the ancient shadows of the law, which had been
abolished by the advent of Christ. But for the decision of this question
it was necessary to discuss some higher topics, in which the whole
controversy lay. First, because the brightness of the gospel was
obscured by those Jewish shadows, he shows that in Christ we have a
complete exhibition of all those things which were adumbrated by the
ceremonies of Moses. Secondly, because these impostors instilled into
the people the very pernicious opinion, that this ceremonial obedience
was sufficient to merit the Divine favour, he principally contends, that
believers ought not to suppose that they can obtain righteousness before
God by any works of the law, much less by those inferior elements. And
he at the same time teaches, that from the condemnation of the law,
which otherwise impends over all men, they are delivered by the cross of
Christ, that they may rely with perfect security on him alone—a topic
which properly belongs to our present subject. Lastly, he asserts the
liberty of the consciences of believers, which ought to be laid under no
obligation in things that are not necessary.
IV. The second part of Christian liberty, which is dependent on the
first, is, that their consciences do not observe the law, as being under
any legal obligation; but that, being liberated from the yoke of the
law, they yield a voluntary obedience to the will of God. For being
possessed with perpetual terrors, as long as they remain under the
dominion of the law, they will never engage with alacrity and
promptitude in the service of God, unless they have previously received
this liberty. We shall more easily and clearly discover the design of
these things from an example. The precept of the law is, “Thou shalt
love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and
with all thy might.”[228] That this command may be fulfilled, our soul
must be previously divested of every other perception and thought, our
heart must be freed from all desires, and our might must be collected
and contracted to this one point. Those who, compared with others, have
made a very considerable progress in the way of the Lord, are yet at an
immense distance from this perfection. For though they love God with
their soul, and with sincere affection of heart, yet they have still
much of their heart and soul occupied by carnal desires, which retard
their progress towards God. They do indeed press forward with strong
exertions, but the flesh partly debilitates their strength, and partly
attracts it to itself. What can they do in this case, when they perceive
that they are so far from observing the law? They wish, they aspire,
they endeavour, but they do nothing with the perfection that is
required. If they advert to the law, they see that every work they
attempt or meditate is accursed. Nor is there the least reason for any
person to deceive himself, by concluding that an action is not
necessarily altogether evil, because it is imperfect, and that therefore
the good part of it is accepted by God. For the law, requiring perfect
love, condemns all imperfection, unless its rigour be mitigated. Let him
consider his work, therefore, which he wished to be thought partly good,
and he will find that very work to be a transgression of the law,
because it is imperfect.
V. See how all our works, if estimated according to the rigour of the
law, are subject to its curse. How, then, could unhappy souls apply
themselves with alacrity to any work for which they could expect to
receive nothing but a curse? On the contrary, if they are liberated from
the severe exaction of the law, or rather from the whole of its rigour,
and hear God calling them with paternal gentleness, then with
cheerfulness and prompt alacrity they will answer to his call and follow
his guidance. In short, they who are bound by the yoke of the law, are
like slaves who have certain daily tasks appointed by their masters.
They think they have done nothing, and presume not to enter into the
presence of their masters without having finished the work prescribed to
them. But children, who are treated by their parents in a more liberal
manner, hesitate not to present to them their imperfect, and in some
respects faulty works, in confidence that their obedience and
promptitude of mind will be accepted by them, though they have not
performed all that they wished. Such children ought we to be, feeling a
certain confidence that our services, however small, rude, and
imperfect, will be approved by our most indulgent Father. This he also
confirms to us by the prophet: “I will spare them,” saith he, “as a man
spareth his own son that serveth him;”[229] where it is evident, from
the mention of _service_, that the word _spare_ is used to denote
indulgence, or an overlooking of faults. And we have great need of this
confidence, without which all our endeavours will be vain; for God
considers us as serving him in none of our works, but such as are truly
done by us to his honour. But how can this be done amidst those terrors,
where it is a matter of doubt whether our works offend God or honour
him?
VI. This is the reason why the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews
refers to faith, and estimates only by faith, all the good works which
are recorded of the holy patriarchs.[230] On this liberty there is a
remarkable passage in the Epistle to the Romans, where Paul reasons that
sin ought not to have dominion over us, because we are not under the
law, but under grace.[231] For after he had exhorted believers, “Let not
sin, therefore, reign in your mortal body; neither yield ye your members
as instruments of unrighteousness; but yield yourselves unto God, as
those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of
righteousness unto God,”[232]—they might, on the contrary, object that
they yet carried about with them the flesh full of inordinate desires,
and that sin dwelt in them; but he adds the consolation furnished by
their liberty from the law; as though he had said, Although you do not
yet experience sin to be destroyed, and righteousness living in you in
perfection, yet you have no cause for terror and dejection of mind, as
if God were perpetually offended on account of your remaining sin;
because by grace you are emancipated from the law, that your works may
not be judged according to that rule. But those, who infer that we may
commit sin because we are not under the law, may be assured that they
have no concern with this liberty, the end of which is to animate us to
virtue.
VII. The third part of Christian liberty teaches us, that we are bound
by no obligation before God respecting external things, which in
themselves are indifferent; but that we may indifferently sometimes use,
and at other times omit them. And the knowledge of this liberty also is
very necessary for us; for without it we shall have no tranquillity of
conscience, nor will there be any end of superstitions. Many in the
present age think it a folly to raise any dispute concerning the free
use of meats, of days, and of habits, and similar subjects, considering
these things as frivolous and nugatory; but they are of greater
importance than is generally believed. For when the conscience has once
fallen into the snare, it enters a long and inextricable labyrinth, from
which it is afterwards difficult to escape; if a man begin to doubt the
lawfulness of using flax in sheets, shirts, handkerchiefs, napkins, and
table cloths, neither will he be certain respecting hemp, and at last he
will doubt of the lawfulness of using tow; for he will consider with
himself whether he cannot eat without table cloths or napkins, whether
he cannot do without handkerchiefs. If any one imagine delicate food to
be unlawful, he will ere long have no tranquillity before God in eating
brown bread and common viands, while he remembers that he might support
his body with meat of a quality still inferior. If he hesitate
respecting good wine, he will afterwards be unable with any peace of
conscience to drink the most vapid; and at last he will not presume even
to touch purer and sweeter water than others. In short, he will come to
think it criminal to step over a twig that lies across his path. For
this is the commencement of no trivial controversy; but the dispute is
whether the use of certain things be agreeable to God, whose will ought
to guide all our resolutions and all our actions. The necessary
consequence is, that some are hurried by despair into a vortex of
confusion, from which they see no way of escape; and some, despising
God, and casting off all fear of him, make a way of ruin for themselves.
For all, who are involved in such doubts, which way soever they turn
their views, behold something offensive to their consciences presenting
itself on every side.
VIII. “I know,” says Paul, “that there is nothing unclean of itself; but
to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is
unclean.”[233] In these words he makes all external things subject to
our liberty, provided that our minds have regard to this liberty before
God. But if any superstitious notion cause us to scruple, those things
which were naturally pure become contaminated to us. Wherefore he
subjoins, “Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that which he
alloweth. And he that doubteth is condemned if he eat, because he eateth
not of faith; for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.”[234] Are not they,
who in these perplexities show their superior boldness by the security
of their presumption, guilty of departing from God? whilst they who are
deeply affected with the true fear of God, when they are even
constrained to admit many things to which their own consciences are
averse, are filled with terror and consternation. No persons of this
description receive any of the gifts of God with thanksgiving, by which
alone Paul, nevertheless, declares them to be all sanctified to our
use.[235] I mean a thanksgiving proceeding from a mind which
acknowledges the beneficence and goodness of God in the blessings he
bestows. For many of them, indeed, apprehend the good things which they
use to be from God, whom they praise in his works; but not being
persuaded that they are _given_ to them, how could they give thanks to
God as the giver of them? We see, in short, the tendency of this
liberty, which is, that without any scruple of conscience or
perturbation of mind, we should devote the gifts of God to that use for
which he has given them; by which confidence our souls may have peace
with him, and acknowledge his liberality towards us. For this
comprehends all ceremonies, the observation of which is left free, that
the conscience may not be bound by any obligation to observe them, but
may remember that by the goodness of God it may use them, or abstain
from them, as shall be most conducive to edification.
IX. Now, it must be carefully observed, that Christian liberty is in all
its branches a spiritual thing; all the virtue of which consists in
appeasing terrified consciences before God, whether they are disquieted
and solicitous concerning the remission of their sins, or are anxious to
know if their works, which are imperfect and contaminated by the
defilements of the flesh, be acceptable to God; or are tormented
concerning the use of things that are indifferent. Wherefore they are
guilty of perverting its meaning, who either make it the pretext of
their irregular appetites, that they may abuse the Divine blessings to
the purposes of sensuality, or who suppose that there is no liberty but
what is used before men, and therefore in the exercise of it totally
disregard their weak brethren. The former of these sins is the more
common in the present age. There is scarcely any one, whom his wealth
permits to be sumptuous, who is not delighted with luxurious splendour
in his entertainments, in his dress, and in his buildings; who does not
desire a preëminence in every species of luxury; who does not strangely
flatter himself on his elegance. And all these things are defended under
the pretext of Christian liberty. They allege that they are things
indifferent; this I admit, provided they be indifferently used. But
where they are too ardently coveted, proudly boasted, or luxuriously
lavished, these things, of themselves otherwise indifferent, are
completely polluted by such vices. This passage of Paul makes an
excellent distinction respecting things which are indifferent: “Unto the
pure all things are pure; but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving
is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.”[236]
For why are curses denounced on rich men, who “receive their
consolation,” who are “satiated,” who “now laugh,” who “lie on beds of
ivory,” who “join field to field,” who “have the harp, and the lyre, and
the tabret, and wine in their feasts?”[237] Ivory and gold, and riches
of all kinds, are certainly blessings of Divine Providence, not only
permitted, but expressly designed for the use of men; nor are we any
where prohibited to laugh, or to be satiated with food, or to annex new
possessions to those already enjoyed by ourselves or by our ancestors,
or to be delighted with musical harmony, or to drink wine. This indeed
is true; but amidst an abundance of all things, to be immersed in
sensual delights, to inebriate the heart and mind with present
pleasures, and perpetually to grasp at new ones,—these things are very
remote from a legitimate use of the Divine blessings. Let them banish,
therefore, immoderate cupidity, excessive profusion, vanity, and
arrogance; that with a pure conscience they may make a proper use of the
gifts of God. When their hearts shall be formed to this sobriety, they
will have a rule for the legitimate enjoyment of them. On the contrary,
without this moderation, even common and ordinary pleasures are
chargeable with excess. For it is truly observed, that a proud heart
frequently dwells under coarse and ragged garments, and that simplicity
and humility are sometimes concealed under purple and fine linen. Let
all men, in their respective stations, whether of poverty, of
competence, or of splendour, live in the remembrance of this truth, that
God confers his blessings on them for the support of life, not for
luxury; and let them consider this as the law of Christian liberty, that
they learn the lesson which Paul had learned, when he said, “I have
learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content. I know both
how to be abased, and I know how to abound: every where and in all
things I am instructed, both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound
and to suffer need.”[238]
X. Many persons err likewise in this respect, that, as if their liberty
would not be perfectly secure unless witnessed by men, they make an
indiscriminate and imprudent use of it—a disorderly practice, which
occasions frequent offence to their weak brethren. There are some to be
found, in the present day, who imagine their liberty would be abridged,
if they were not to enter on the enjoyment of it by eating animal food
on Friday. Their eating is not the subject of my reprehension; but their
minds require to be divested of this false notion; for they ought to
consider, that they obtain no advantage from their liberty before men,
but with God; and that it consists in abstinence as well as in use. If
they apprehend it to be immaterial in God’s view, whether they eat
animal food or eggs, whether their garments be scarlet or black, it is
quite sufficient. The conscience, to which the benefit of this liberty
was due, is now emancipated. Therefore, though they abstain from flesh,
and wear but one color, during all the rest of their lives, this is no
diminution of their freedom. Nay, because they are free, they therefore
abstain with a free conscience. But they fall into a very pernicious
error in disregarding the infirmity of their brethren, which it becomes
us to bear, so as not rashly to do any thing which would give them the
least offence. But it will be said, that it is sometimes right to assert
our liberty before men. This I confess; yet the greatest caution and
moderation must be observed, lest we cast off all concern for the weak,
whom God has so strongly recommended to our regards.
XI. I shall now, therefore, make some observations concerning offences;
how they are to be discriminated, what are to be avoided, and what are
to be disregarded; whence we may afterwards determine what room there is
for our liberty in our intercourse with mankind. I approve of the common
distinction between an offence given and an offence taken, since it is
plainly countenanced by Scripture, and is likewise sufficiently
significant of the thing intended to be expressed. If you do any thing
at a wrong time or place, or with an unseasonable levity, or wantonness,
or temerity, by which the weak and inexperienced are offended, it must
be termed an offence given by you; because it arises from your fault.
And an offence is always said to be given in any action, the fault of
which proceeds from the performer of that action. An offence taken is,
when any transaction, not otherwise unseasonable or culpable, is,
through malevolence, or some perverse disposition, construed into an
occasion of offence. For in this instance the offence is not given, but
taken without reason by such perverseness of construction. The first
species of offence affects none but the weak; the second is created by
moroseness of temper, and Pharisaical superciliousness. Wherefore we
shall denominate the former, the offence of the weak, the latter, that
of Pharisees; and we shall so temper the use of our liberty, that it
ought to submit to the ignorance of weak brethren, but not at all to the
austerity of Pharisees. For our duty to the weak, Paul fully shows in
many places. “Him that is weak in the faith receive ye.” Again: “Let us
not therefore judge one another any more; but judge this rather, that no
man put a stumbling-block or an occasion to fall in his brother’s
way;”[239] and much more to the same import, which were better examined
in its proper connection than recited here. The sum of all is, that “we,
then, that are strong, ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and
not to please ourselves. Let every one of us please his neighbour for
his good to edification.”[240] In another place: “But take heed lest by
any means this liberty of yours become a stumbling-block to them that
are weak.”[241] Again: “Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat;
asking no questions for conscience’ sake; conscience, I say, not thine
own, but of the other.” In short, “Give none offence, neither to the
Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the Church of God.”[242] In another
place also: “Brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not
liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one
another.”[243] The meaning of this is, that our liberty is not given us
to be used in opposition to our weak neighbours, to whom charity obliges
us to do every possible service; but rather in order that, having peace
with God in our minds, we may also live peaceably among men. But how
much attention should be paid to an offence taken by Pharisees, we learn
from our Lord’s injunction, “Let them alone; they be blind leaders of
the blind.”[244] The disciples had informed him, that the Pharisees were
offended with his discourse. He replies that they are to be let alone,
and their offence disregarded.
XII. But the subject is still pending in uncertainty, unless we know
whom we are to account weak, and whom we are to consider as Pharisees;
without which distinction, I see no use of liberty in the midst of
offences, but such as must be attended with the greatest danger. But
Paul appears to me to have very clearly decided, both by doctrine and
examples, how far our liberty should be either moderated or asserted on
the occurrence of offences. When he made Timothy his associate, he
circumcised him;[245] but could not be induced to circumcise Titus.[246]
Here was a difference in his proceedings, but no change of mind or of
purpose. In the circumcision of Timothy, “though he was free from all
men, yet he made himself servant unto all;” and says he, “Unto the Jews
I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under
the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the
law: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save
some.”[247] Thus we have a proper moderation of liberty, if it may be
indifferently restricted with any advantage. His reason for resolutely
refraining from circumcising Titus, he declares in the following words:
“But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be
circumcised; and that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who
came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus,
that they might bring us into bondage; to whom we gave place by
subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might
continue with you.”[248] We also are under the necessity of vindicating
our liberty, if it be endangered in weak consciences by the iniquitous
requisitions of false apostles. We must at all times study charity, and
keep in view the edification of our neighbour. “All things (says Paul)
are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are
lawful for me, but all things edify not. Let no man seek his own, but
every man another’s.”[249] Nothing can be plainer than this rule, that
our liberty should be used, if it conduces to our neighbour’s
edification; but that if it be not beneficial to our neighbour, it
should be abridged. There are some, who pretend to imitate the prudence
of Paul in refraining from the exercise of liberty, while they are doing
any thing but exercising the duties of charity. For to promote their own
tranquillity, they wish all mention of liberty to be buried; whereas it
is no less advantageous to our neighbours sometimes to use our liberty
to their benefit and edification, than at other times to moderate it for
their accommodation. But a pious man considers this liberty in external
things as granted him in order that he may be the better prepared for
all the duties of charity.
XIII. But whatever I have advanced respecting the avoidance of offences,
I wish to be referred to indifferent and unimportant things; for
necessary duties must not be omitted through fear of any offence: as our
liberty should be subject to charity, so charity itself ought to be
subservient to the purity of faith. It becomes us, indeed, to have
regard to charity; but we must not offend God for the love of our
neighbour. We cannot approve the intemperance of those who do nothing
but in a tumultuous manner, and who prefer violent measures to lenient
ones. Nor must we listen to those, who, while they show themselves the
leaders in a thousand species of impiety, pretend that they are obliged
to act in such a manner, that they may give no offence to their
neighbours; as though they are not at the same time fortifying the
consciences of their neighbours in sin; especially since they are always
sticking in the same mire without any hope of deliverance. And whether
their neighbour is to be instructed by doctrine or by example, they
maintain that he ought to be fed with milk, though they are infecting
him with the worst and most pernicious notions. Paul tells the
Corinthians, “I have fed you with milk;”[250] but if the Popish mass had
been then introduced among them, would he have united in that pretended
sacrifice in order to feed them with milk? Certainly not; for milk is
not poison. They are guilty of falsehood, therefore, in saying that they
feed those whom they cruelly murder under the appearance of such
flatteries. But admitting that such dissimulation is to be approved for
a time, how long will they feed their children with the same milk? For
if they never grow, so as to be able to bear even some light meat, it is
a clear proof that they were never fed with milk. I am prevented from
pushing this controversy with them any further at present, by two
reasons—first, because their absurdities scarcely deserve a refutation,
being justly despised by all men of sound understanding; secondly,
having done this at large in particular treatises, I am unwilling to
travel the same ground over again. Only let the readers remember, that
with whatever offences Satan and the world may endeavour to divert us
from the ordinances of God, or to retard our pursuit of what he enjoins,
yet we must nevertheless strenuously advance; and moreover, that
whatever dangers threaten us, we are not at liberty to deviate even a
hair’s breadth from his command, and that it is not lawful under any
pretext to attempt any thing but what he permits.
XIV. Now, since the consciences of believers, being privileged with the
liberty which we have described, have been delivered by the favour of
Christ from all necessary obligation to the observance of those things
in which the Lord has been pleased they should be left free, we conclude
that they are exempt from all human authority. For it is not right that
Christ should lose the acknowledgments due to such kindness, or our
consciences the benefit of it. Neither is that to be accounted a trivial
thing, which we see cost Christ so much; which he estimated not with
gold or silver, but with his own blood;[251] so that Paul hesitates not
to assert, that his death is rendered vain, if we suffer our souls to be
in subjection to men.[252] For his sole object in some chapters of his
Epistle to the Galatians is to prove that Christ is obscured, or rather
abolished, with respect to us, unless our consciences continue in their
liberty; from which they are certainly fallen, if they can be insnared
in the bonds of laws and ordinances at the pleasure of men.[253] But as
it is a subject highly worthy of being understood, so it needs a more
diffuse and perspicuous explanation. For as soon as a word is mentioned
concerning the abrogation of human establishments, great tumults are
excited, partly by seditious persons, partly by cavillers; as though all
obedience of men were at once subverted and destroyed.
XV. To prevent any one from falling into this error, let us therefore
consider, in the first place, that man is under two kinds of
government—one spiritual, by which the conscience is formed to piety and
the service of God; the other political, by which a man is instructed in
the duties of humanity and civility, which are to be observed in an
intercourse with mankind. They are generally, and not improperly,
denominated the spiritual and the temporal jurisdiction; indicating that
the former species of government pertains to the life of the soul, and
that the latter relates to the concerns of the present state; not only
to the provision of food and clothing, but to the enactment of laws to
regulate a man’s life among his neighbours by the rules of holiness,
integrity, and sobriety. For the former has its seat in the interior of
the mind, whilst the latter only directs the external conduct: one may
be termed a spiritual kingdom, and the other a political one. But these
two, as we have distinguished them, always require to be considered
separately; and while the one is under discussion, the mind must be
abstracted from all consideration of the other. For man contains, as it
were, two worlds, capable of being governed by various rulers and
various laws. This distinction will prevent what the gospel inculcates
concerning spiritual liberty from being misapplied to political
regulations; as though Christians were less subject to the external
government of human laws, because their consciences have been set at
liberty before God; as though their freedom of spirit necessarily
exempted them from all carnal servitude. Again, because even in those
constitutions which seem to pertain to the spiritual kingdom, there may
possibly be some deception, it is necessary to discriminate between
these also; which are to be accounted legitimate, as according with the
Divine word, and which, on the contrary, ought not to be received among
believers. Of civil government I shall treat in another place. Of
ecclesiastical laws also I forbear to speak at present; because a full
discussion of them will be proper in the Fourth Book, where we shall
treat of the power of the Church. But we shall conclude the present
argument in the following manner: The question, which, as I have
observed, is in itself not very obscure or intricate, greatly perplexes
many, because they do not distinguish with sufficient precision between
the external jurisdiction and the court of conscience. The difficulty is
increased by Paul’s injunction to obey magistrates “not only for wrath,
but also for conscience’ sake;”[254] from which it should follow, that
the conscience also is bound by political laws. But if this were true,
it would supersede all that we have already said, or are now about to
say, respecting spiritual government. For the solution of this
difficulty, it will be of use, first, to know what conscience is. And
the definition of it must be derived from the etymology of the word. For
as, when men apprehend the knowledge of things in the mind and
understanding, they are thence said _scire_, “to know,” whence is
derived the word _scientia_, “science” or “knowledge;” so when they have
a sense of Divine justice, as an additional witness, which permits them
not to conceal their sins, or to elude accusation at the tribunal of the
supreme Judge, this sense is termed _conscientia_, “conscience.” For it
is a kind of medium between God and man; because it does not suffer a
man to suppress what he knows within himself, but pursues him till it
brings him to conviction. This is what Paul means by “their conscience
also bearing witness, and their thoughts accusing, or else excusing, one
another.”[255] Simple knowledge might remain, as it were, confined
within a man. This sentiment, therefore, which places man before the
Divine tribunal, is appointed, as it were, to watch over man, to observe
and examine all his secrets, that nothing may remain enveloped in
darkness. Hence the old proverb, Conscience is as a thousand witnesses.
For the same reason Peter speaks of “the answer of a good conscience
towards God,”[256] to express our tranquillity of mind, when, persuaded
of the favour of Christ, we present ourselves with boldness in the
presence of God. And the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews expresses
absolution or freedom from every future charge of sin, by “having no
more conscience of sin.”[257]
XVI. Therefore, as works respect men, so conscience regards God; so that
a good conscience is no other than inward integrity of heart. In which
sense Paul says, that “the end of the commandment is charity, out of a
pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned.”[258]
Afterwards also, in the same chapter, he shows how widely it differs
from understanding, saying, that “some, having put away a good
conscience, concerning faith have made shipwreck.”[259] For these words
indicate that it is a lively inclination to the service of God, and a
sincere pursuit of piety and holiness of life. Sometimes, indeed, it is
likewise extended to men; as when the same apostle declares, “Herein do
I exercise myself, to have always a conscience void of offence toward
God and toward men.”[260] But the reason of this assertion is, that the
fruits of a good conscience reach even to men. But in strict propriety
of speech it has to do with God alone, as I have already observed. Hence
it is that a law, which simply binds a man without relation to other
men, or any consideration of them, is said to bind the conscience. For
example, God not only enjoins the preservation of the mind chaste and
pure from every libidinous desire, but prohibits all obscenity of
language and external lasciviousness. The observance of this law is
incumbent on my conscience, though there were not another man existing
in the world. Thus he who transgresses the limits of temperance, not
only sins by giving a bad example to his brethren, but contracts guilt
on his conscience before God. Things in themselves indifferent are to be
guided by other considerations. It is our duty to abstain from them, if
they tend to the least offence, yet without violating our liberty of
conscience. So Paul speaks concerning meat consecrated to idols: “If any
man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice to idols, eat not for
conscience’ sake; conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the
other.”[261] A pious man would be guilty of sin, who, being previously
admonished, should, nevertheless, eat such meat. But though, with
respect to his brother, abstinence is necessary for him, as it is
enjoined by God, yet he ceases not to retain liberty of conscience. We
see, then, how this law, though it binds the external action, leaves the
conscience free.
Footnote 225:
Ephes. i. 4. 1 Thess. iv. 3, 7.
Footnote 226:
Gal. iii. 13.
Footnote 227:
Gal. v. 1-4.
Footnote 228:
Deut. vi. 5.
Footnote 229:
Mal. iii. 17.
Footnote 230:
Heb. xi. 2.
Footnote 231:
Rom. vi. 14.
Footnote 232:
Rom. vi. 12, 13.
Footnote 233:
Rom. xiv. 14.
Footnote 234:
Rom. xiv. 22, 23.
Footnote 235:
1 Tim. iv. 5.
Footnote 236:
Titus i. 15.
Footnote 237:
Luke vi. 24, 25. Amos vi. 1, &c. Isaiah v. 8, &c.
Footnote 238:
Phil. iv. 11, 12.
Footnote 239:
Rom. xiv. 1, 13.
Footnote 240:
Rom. xv. 1, 2.
Footnote 241:
1 Cor. viii. 9.
Footnote 242:
1 Cor x. 25, 29, 32.
Footnote 243:
Gal. v. 13.
Footnote 244:
Matt. xv. 14.
Footnote 245:
Acts xvi. 3.
Footnote 246:
Gal. ii. 3.
Footnote 247:
1 Cor. ix. 19, 20, 22.
Footnote 248:
Gal. ii. 3-5.
Footnote 249:
1 Cor. x. 23, 24.
Footnote 250:
1 Cor. iii. 2.
Footnote 251:
1 Peter i. 18, 19.
Footnote 252:
Gal. v. 1, 4.
Footnote 253:
1 Cor. vii. 23.
Footnote 254:
Rom. xiii. 1, 5.
Footnote 255:
Rom. ii. 15.
Footnote 256:
1 Peter iii. 21.
Footnote 257:
Heb. x. 2.
Footnote 258:
1 Tim. i. 5.
Footnote 259:
1 Tim. i. 19.
Footnote 260:
Acts xxiv. 16.
Footnote 261:
1 Cor. x. 28, 29.
CHAPTER XX.
ON PRAYER, THE PRINCIPAL EXERCISE OF FAITH, AND THE MEDIUM OF OUR DAILY
RECEPTION OF DIVINE BLESSINGS.
From the subjects already discussed, we clearly perceive how utterly
destitute man is of every good, and in want of all the means of
salvation. Wherefore, if he seek for relief in his necessities, he must
go out of himself, and obtain it from some other quarter. It has been
subsequently stated, that the Lord voluntarily and liberally manifests
himself in his Christ, in whom he offers us all felicity instead of our
misery, and opulence instead of our poverty; in whom he opens to our
view the treasures of heaven, that our faith may be wholly engaged in
the contemplation of his beloved Son, that all our expectation may
depend upon him, and that in him all our hope may rest and be fully
satisfied. This, indeed, is that secret and recondite philosophy, which
cannot be extracted from syllogisms; but is well understood by those
whose eyes God has opened, that in his light they may see light. But
since we have been taught by faith to acknowledge, that whatever we want
for the supply of our necessities is in God and our Lord Jesus Christ,
in whom it has pleased the Father all the fulness of his bounty should
dwell, that we may all draw from it, as from a most copious fountain, it
remains for us to seek in him, and by prayers to implore of him, that
which we have been informed resides in him. Otherwise to know God as the
Lord and Giver of every good, who invites us to supplicate him, but
neither to approach him nor to supplicate him, would be equally
unprofitable, as for a man to neglect a treasure discovered to him
buried in the earth. Wherefore the apostle, to show that true faith
cannot but be engaged in calling upon God, has laid down this
order—that, as faith is produced by the gospel, so by faith our hearts
are brought to invoke the name of the Lord.[262] And this is the same as
he had a little before said, that the “Spirit of adoption,” who seals
the testimony of the gospel in our hearts, encourages our spirits, so
that they venture to pour out their desires before God, excite
“groanings that cannot be uttered,” and cry with confidence, “Abba,
Father.”[263] This last subject, therefore, having been before only
cursorily mentioned and slightly touched, requires now to be treated
more at large.
II. By means of prayer, then, we penetrate to those riches which are
reserved with our heavenly Father for our use. For between God and men
there is a certain communication; by which they enter into the sanctuary
of heaven, and in his immediate presence remind him of his promises, in
order that his declarations, which they have implicitly believed, may in
time of necessity be verified in their experience. We see, therefore,
that nothing is revealed to us, to be expected from the Lord, for which
we are not likewise enjoined to pray; so true is it, that prayer digs
out those treasures, which the gospel of the Lord discovers to our
faith. Now, the necessity and various utility of the exercise of prayer
no language can sufficiently explain. It is certainly not without reason
that our heavenly Father declares, that the only fortress of salvation
consists in invocation of his name; by which we call to our aid the
presence of his providence, which watches over all our concerns; of his
power, which supports us when weak and ready to faint; and of his
goodness, which receives us into favour, though miserably burdened with
sins; in which, finally, we call upon him to manifest his presence with
us in all his attributes. Hence our consciences derive peculiar peace
and tranquillity; for when the affliction which oppressed us is
represented to the Lord, we feel abundant composure even from this
consideration—that none of our troubles are concealed from him, whom we
know to possess both the greatest readiness and the greatest ability to
promote our truest interest.
III. But some will say, Does he not, without information, know both our
troubles and our necessities; so that it may appear unnecessary to
solicit him with our prayers, as if he were inattentive or sleeping,
till aroused by our voice? But such reasoners advert not to the Lord’s
end in teaching his people to pray; for he has appointed it not so much
for his own sake as for ours. It is his pleasure indeed, as is highly
reasonable, that his right be rendered to him, by their considering him
as the Author of all that is desired and found useful by men, and by
their acknowledgments of this in their prayers. But the utility of this
sacrifice, by which he is worshipped, returns to us. The greater the
confidence, therefore, with which the ancient saints gloried in the
Divine benefits to themselves and others, with so much the more
earnestness were they incited to pray. The single example of Elijah
shall suffice, who, though certain of God’s design, having already with
sufficient authority promised rain to king Ahab, yet anxiously prays
between his knees, and sends his servant seven times to look for
it;[264] not with an intention to discredit the Divine oracle, but under
a conviction of his duty to prevent his faith becoming languid and
torpid, by pouring out his prayers before God. Wherefore, although, when
we are stupid and insensible to our own miseries, he vigilantly watches
and guards us, and sometimes affords us unsolicited succour, yet it
highly concerns us assiduously to supplicate him, that our heart may be
always inflamed with a serious and ardent desire of seeking, loving, and
worshipping him, while we accustom ourselves in all our necessities to
resort to him as our sheet anchor. Further, that no desire or wish,
which we should be ashamed for him to know, may enter our minds; when we
learn to present our wishes, and so to pour out our whole heart in his
presence. Next, that we may be prepared to receive his blessings with
true gratitude of soul, and even with grateful acknowledgments; being
reminded by our praying that they come from his hand. Moreover, that
when we have obtained what we sought, the persuasion that he has
answered our requests may excite us to more ardent meditations on his
goodness, and produce a more joyful welcome of those things which we
acknowledge to be the fruits of our prayers. Lastly, that use and
experience itself may yield our minds a confirmation of his providence
in proportion to our imbecility, while we apprehend that he not only
promises never to forsake us, and freely opens a way of access for our
addressing him in the very moment of necessity; but that his hand is
always extended to assist his people, whom he does not feed with mere
words, but supports with present aid. On these accounts our most
merciful Father, though liable to no sleep or languor, yet frequently
appears as if he were sleepy or languid, in order to exercise us, who
are otherwise slothful and inactive, in approaching, supplicating, and
earnestly importuning him to our own advantage. It is extremely absurd,
therefore, in them who, with a view to divert the minds of men from
praying to God, pretend that it is useless for us by our interruptions
to weary the Divine Providence, which is engaged in the conservation of
all things; whereas the Lord declares, on the contrary, that he “is nigh
to all that call upon him in truth.”[265] And equally nugatory is the
objection of others, that it is superfluous to petition for those things
which the Lord is ready voluntarily to bestow; whereas even those very
things, which flow to us from his spontaneous liberality, he wishes us
to consider as granted to our prayers. This is evinced by that memorable
passage in the Psalms, as well as by many other correspondent
texts,—“The eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous, and his ears are
open unto their cry;”[266] which celebrates the Divine Providence as
spontaneously engaged to accomplish the salvation of believers; yet does
not omit the exercise of faith, by which sloth is expelled from the
minds of men. The eyes of God, then, are vigilant to succour the
necessity of the blind; but he is likewise willing to hear our groans,
to give a better proof of his love towards us. And thus it is equally
true, that “he that keepeth Israel neither slumbers nor sleeps,” and yet
that he remains, as it were, forgetful of us, while he beholds us
slothful and dumb.
IV. Now, for conducting prayer in a right and proper manner, the first
rule is, that our heart and mind be composed to a suitable frame,
becoming those who enter into conversation with God. This state of mind
we shall certainly attain, if, divested of all carnal cares and
thoughts, that tend to divert and seduce it from a right and clear view
of God, it not only devotes itself entirely to the solemn exercise, but
is likewise as far as possible elevated and carried above itself. Nor do
I here require a mind so disengaged as to be disturbed by no solicitude;
since there ought, on the contrary, most anxiously to be kindled within
us a fervency of prayer, (as we see the holy servants of God discover
great solicitude, and even anguish, when they say they utter their
complaints to the Lord from the deep abysses of affliction and the very
jaws of death.) But I maintain the necessity of dismissing all foreign
and external cares, by which the wandering mind may be hurried hither
and thither, and dragged from heaven down to earth. It ought to be
elevated above itself, that it may not intrude into the Divine presence
any of the imaginations of our blind and foolish reason, nor confine
itself within the limits of its own vanity, but rise to purity worthy of
God.
V. Both these things are highly worthy of observation—first, that
whoever engages in prayer, should apply all his faculties and attention
to it, and not be distracted, as is commonly the case, with wandering
thoughts; nothing being more contrary to a reverence for God than such
levity, which indicates a licentious spirit, wholly unrestrained by
fear. In this case our exertions must be great in proportion to the
difficulty we experience. For no man can be so intent on praying, but he
may perceive many irregular thoughts intruding on him, and either
interrupting, or by some oblique digression retarding, the course of his
devotions. But here let us consider what an indignity it is, when God
admits us to familiar intercourse with him, to abuse such great
condescension by a mixture of things sacred and profane, while our
thoughts are not confined to him by reverential awe; but as if we were
conversing with a mean mortal, we quit him in the midst of our prayer,
and make excursions on every side. We may be assured, therefore, that
none are rightly prepared for the exercise of prayer, but those who are
so affected by the Divine Majesty as to come to it divested of all
earthly cares and affections. And this is indicated by the ceremony of
lifting up the hands, that men may remember that they are at a great
distance from God, unless they lift up their thoughts on high. As it is
also expressed in the psalm, “Unto thee do I lift up my soul.”[267] And
the Scripture frequently uses this mode of expression, “to lift up one’s
prayer;” that they, who desire to be heard by God, may not sink into
lethargic inactivity. To sum up the whole, the greater the liberality of
God towards us, in gently inviting us to disburden ourselves of our
cares by casting them on him, the less excusable are we, unless his
signal and incomparable favour preponderate with us beyond every thing
else, and attract us to him in a serious application of all our
faculties and attention to the duty of prayer; which cannot be done
unless our mind by strenuous exertion rise superior to every impediment.
Our second proposition is, that we must pray for no more than God
permits. For though he enjoins us to pour out our hearts before
him,[268] yet he does not carelessly give the reins to affections of
folly and depravity; and when he promises to “fulfil the desire”[269] of
believers, he does not go to such an extreme of indulgence, as to
subject himself to their caprice. But offences against both these rules
are common and great; for most men not only presume, without modesty or
reverence, to address God concerning their follies, and impudently to
utter at his tribunal whatever has amused them in their reveries or
dreams, but so great is their folly or stupidity, that they dare to
obtrude upon God all their foulest desires, which they would be
exceedingly ashamed to reveal to men. Some heathens have ridiculed and
even detested this presumption, but the vice itself has always
prevailed; and hence it was that the ambitious chose Jupiter as their
patron; the avaricious, Mercury; the lovers of learning, Apollo and
Minerva; the warlike, Mars; and the libidinous, Venus; just as in the
present age (as I have lately hinted) men indulge a greater license to
their unlawful desires in their prayers, than if they were conversing in
a jocular manner with their equals. God suffers not his indulgence to be
so mocked, but asserts his power, and subjects our devotions to his
commands. Therefore we ought to remember this passage in John: “This is
the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according
to his will, he heareth us.”[270] But as our abilities are very unequal
to such great perfection, we must seek some remedy to relieve us. As the
attention of the mind ought to be fixed on God, so it is necessary that
it should be followed by the affection of the heart. But they both
remain far below this elevation; or rather, to speak more consistently
with truth, they grow weary and fail in the ascent, or are carried a
contrary course. Therefore, to assist this imbecility, God gives us the
Spirit, to be the director of our prayers, to suggest what is right, and
to regulate our affections. For “the Spirit helpeth our infirmities; for
we know not what we should pray for as we ought; but the Spirit itself
maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered;”[271]
not that he really prays or groans; but he excites within us confidence,
desires, and sighs, to the conception of which our native powers were
altogether inadequate. Nor is it without reason that Paul terms those
“groanings,” which arise from believers under the influence of the
Spirit, “unutterable;” because they who are truly engaged in prayers,
are not ignorant that they are so perplexed with dubious anxieties, that
they can scarcely decide what it is expedient to utter; and even while
they are attempting to lisp, they stammer and hesitate; whence it
follows that the ability of praying rightly is a peculiar gift. These
things are not said in order that we may indulge our own indolence,
resigning the office of prayer to the Spirit of God, and growing torpid
in that negligence to which we are too prone; according to the impious
errors of some, that we should wait in indolent supineness till he call
our minds from other engagements and draw them to himself; but rather
that, wearied with our sloth and inactivity, we may implore such
assistance of the Spirit. Nor does the apostle, when he exhorts us to
“pray in the Holy Ghost,”[272] encourage us to remit our vigilance;
signifying, that the inspiration of the Spirit operates in the formation
of our prayers, so as not in the least to impede or retard our own
exertions; since it is the will of God to prove in this instance the
efficacious influence of faith on our hearts.
VI. Let this be the second rule: That in our supplications we should
have a real and permanent sense of our indigence, and seriously
considering our necessity of all that we ask, should join with the
petitions themselves a serious and ardent desire of obtaining them. For
multitudes carelessly recite a form of prayer, as though they were
discharging a task imposed on them by God; and though they confess that
this is a remedy necessary for their calamities, since it would be
certain destruction to be destitute of the Divine aid which they
implore, yet that they perform this duty merely in compliance with
custom, is evident from the coldness of their hearts, and their
inattention to the nature of their petitions. They are led to this by
some general and confused sense of their necessity, which nevertheless
does not excite them to implore a relief for their great need as a case
of present urgency. Now, what can we imagine more odious or execrable to
God than this hypocrisy, when any man prays for the pardon of sins, who
at the same time thinks he is not a sinner, or at least does not think
that he is a sinner? which is an open mockery of God himself. But such
depravity, as I have before observed, pervades the whole human race,
that as a matter of form they frequently implore of God many things
which they either expect to receive from some other source independent
of his goodness, or imagine themselves already to possess. The crime of
some others appears to be smaller, but yet too great to be tolerated;
who, having only imbibed this principle, that God must be propitiated by
devotions, mutter over their prayers without meditation. But believers
ought to be exceedingly cautious, never to enter into the presence of
God to present any petition, without being inflamed with a fervent
affection of soul, and feeling an ardent desire to obtain it from him.
Moreover, although in those things which we request only for the Divine
glory, we do not at the first glance appear to regard our own necessity,
yet it is incumbent on us to pray for them with equal fervour and
vehemence of desire. As when we pray that his name may be hallowed, or
sanctified, we ought (so to speak) ardently to hunger and thirst for
that sanctification.
VII. If any man object, that we are not always urged to pray by the same
necessity, this I grant, and this distinction is usefully represented to
us by James: “Is any among you afflicted? let him pray. Is any merry?
let him sing psalms.”[273] Common sense itself therefore dictates, that
because of our extreme indolence, we are the more vigorously stimulated
by God to earnestness in prayer according to the exigencies of our
condition. And this David calls “a time when God may be found,”[274]
because (as he teaches in many other places) the more severely we are
oppressed by troubles, disasters, fears, and other kinds of temptations,
we have the greater liberty of access to God, as though he then
particularly invited us to approach him. At the same time, it is equally
true that we ought to be, as Paul says, “praying always,”[275] because,
how great soever we may believe the prosperity of our affairs, and
though we are surrounded on every side by matter of joy, yet there is no
moment of time in which our necessity does not furnish incitements to
prayer. Does any one abound in wine and corn? Since he cannot enjoy a
morsel of bread but by the continual favour of God, his cellars or barns
afford no objection to his praying for daily bread. Now, if we reflect
how many dangers threaten us every moment, fear itself will teach us
that there is no time in which prayer is unsuitable to us. Yet this may
be discovered still better in spiritual concerns. For when will so many
sins, of which we are conscious, suffer us to remain in security,
without humbly deprecating both the guilt and the punishment? When will
temptations grant us a truce, so that we need not be in haste to obtain
assistance? Besides, an ardent desire of the Divine kingdom and glory
ought irresistibly to attract us, not by intervals, but without
intermission, rendering every season equally suitable. It is not in
vain, therefore, that assiduity in prayer is so frequently enjoined. I
speak not yet of perseverance, which shall be mentioned hereafter; but
the scriptural admonitions to “pray without ceasing” are so many
reproofs of our sloth; because we feel not our need of this care and
diligence. This rule precludes and banishes from prayer, hypocrisy,
subtilty, and falsehood. God promises that he will be near to all who
call upon him in truth, and declares he will be found by those who seek
him with their whole heart. But to this, persons pleased with their own
impurity never aspire. Legitimate prayer, therefore, requires
repentance. Whence it is frequently said in the Scriptures, that God
hears not the wicked, and that their prayers are an abomination; as are
also their sacrifices; for it is reasonable, that they who shut up their
own hearts, should find the ears of God closed against them; and God
should be inflexible to them who provoke his rigour by their obduracy.
In Isaiah, he threatens thus: “When ye make many prayers, I will not
hear: your hands are full of blood.”[276] Again in Jeremiah: “I
protested, yet they inclined not their ear. Therefore, though they shall
cry unto me, I will not hearken unto them.”[277] Because he considers
himself grossly insulted by the wicked boasting of his covenant, while
they are continually dishonouring his sacred name. Wherefore he
complains, in Isaiah, “This people draw near me with their mouth, but
have removed their heart far from me.”[278] He does not restrict this
solely to prayer; but asserts his abhorrence of hypocrisy in every
branch of his worship. Which is the meaning of this passage in James:
“Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it
upon your lusts.”[279] It is true, indeed, (as we shall presently again
see,) that the prayers of the faithful depend not on their personal
worthiness; yet this does not supersede the admonition of John:
“Whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his
commandments;”[280] because an evil conscience shuts the gate against
us. Whence it follows, that none pray aright, and that no others are
heard, but the sincere worshippers of God. Whosoever therefore engages
in prayer, should be displeased with himself on account of his sins, and
assume, what he cannot do without repentance, the character and
disposition of a beggar.
VIII. To these must be added a third rule—That whoever presents himself
before God for the purpose of praying to him, must renounce every idea
of his own glory, reject all opinion of his own merit, and, in a word,
relinquish all confidence in himself, giving, by this humiliation of
himself, all the glory entirely to God; lest, arrogating any thing,
though ever so little, to ourselves, we perish from his presence in
consequence of our vanity. Of this submission, which prostrates every
high thought, we have frequent examples in the servants of God; of whom
the most eminent for holiness feel the greatest consternation on
entering into the presence of the Lord. Thus Daniel, whom the Lord
himself has so highly commended, said, “We do not present our
supplications before thee for our righteousness, but for thy great
mercies. O Lord, hear; O Lord, forgive; O Lord, hearken and do; defer
not, for thine own sake, O my God; for thy city and thy people are
called by thy name.”[281] Nor does he, as is generally the case,
confound himself with the multitude, as one of the people; but makes a
separate confession of his own guilt, resorting as a suppliant to the
asylum of pardon; as he expressly declares, “Whilst I was confessing my
sin, and the sin of my people.”[282] We are taught the same humility
also by the example of David: “Enter not into judgment with thy servant;
for in thy sight shall no man living be justified.”[283] In this manner
Isaiah prays: “Behold, thou art wroth; for we have sinned: in thy ways
is continuance, and we shall be saved. For we are all as an unclean
thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do
fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
And there is none that calleth upon thy name, that stirreth up himself
to take hold of thee; for thou hast hid thy face from us, and hast
consumed us, because of our iniquities. But now, O Lord, thou art our
Father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of
thy hand. Be not wroth very sore, O Lord, neither remember iniquity for
ever; behold, see, we beseech thee, we are all thy people.”[284]
Observe, they have no dependence but this; that considering themselves
as God’s children, they despair not of his future care of them. Thus
Jeremiah: “Though our iniquities testify against us, do thou it for thy
name’s sake.”[285] For that is equally consistent with the strictest
truth and holiness, which was written by an uncertain author, but is
ascribed to the prophet Baruch: “A soul sorrowful and desolate for the
greatness of its sin, bowed down and infirm, a hungry soul and fainting
eyes give glory to thee, O Lord. Not according to the righteousnesses of
our fathers do we pour out our prayers in thy sight, and ask mercy
before thy face, O Lord, our God; but because thou art merciful, have
mercy upon us, for we have sinned against thee.”[286]
IX. Finally, the commencement and even introduction to praying rightly
is a supplication for pardon with an humble and ingenuous confession of
guilt. For neither is there any hope that even the holiest of men can
obtain any blessing of God till he be freely reconciled to him, nor is
it possible for God to be propitious to any, but those whom he pardons.
It is no wonder, then, if believers with this key open to themselves the
gate of prayer; as we learn from many places in the Psalms. For David,
when requesting another thing, says, “Remember not the sins of my youth,
nor my transgressions: according to thy mercy remember thou me, for thy
goodness’ sake, O Lord.” Again: “Look upon mine affliction and my pain;
and forgive all my sins.”[287] Where we likewise perceive, that it is
not sufficient for us to call ourselves to a daily account for recent
sins, unless we remember those which might seem to have been long buried
in oblivion. For the same Psalmist, in another place,[288] having
confessed one grievous crime, takes occasion thence to revert to his
mother’s womb, where he had contracted his original pollution; not in
order to extenuate his guilt by the corruption of his nature, but that,
accumulating all the sins of his life, he may find God the more ready to
listen to his prayers in proportion to the severity of his
self-condemnation. But though the saints do not always in express terms
pray for remission of sins, yet if we diligently examine their prayers
recited in the Scriptures, it will easily appear, as I assert, that they
derived their encouragement to pray from the mere mercy of God, and so
always began by deprecating his displeasure; for if every man examine
his own conscience, he is so far from presuming familiarly to
communicate his cares to God, that he trembles at every approach to him,
except in a reliance on his mercy and forgiveness. There is also,
indeed, another special confession, when they wish for an alleviation of
punishments, which is tacitly praying for the pardon of their sins;
because it were absurd to desire the removal of an effect, while the
cause remains. For we must beware of imitating foolish patients, who are
only solicitous for the cure of the symptoms, but neglect the radical
cause of the disease. Besides, we should first seek for God to be
propitious to us, previously to any external testimonies of his favour;
because it is his own will to observe this order, and it would be of
little advantage to us to receive benefits from him, unless a discovery
to the conscience of his being appeased towards us rendered him
altogether amiable in our view. Of this we are likewise apprized by the
reply of Christ; for when he had determined to heal a paralytic person,
he said, “Thy sins be forgiven thee;”[289] thereby calling our attention
to that which ought to be the chief object of desire, that God may
receive us into his favour, and then, by affording us assistance,
discover the effect of reconciliation. But beside the special confession
of present guilt, in which believers implore the pardon of every sin and
the remission of every punishment, that general preface, which
conciliates a favourable attention to our prayers, is never to be
omitted; because, unless they be founded on God’s free mercy, they will
all be unavailing. To this topic we may refer that passage of John—“If
we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and
to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”[290] Wherefore, under the law,
prayers are required to be consecrated by an atonement of blood, to
render them acceptable, and to remind the people that they were unworthy
of so great and honourable a privilege, till, purified from their
pollutions, they should derive confidence in prayer from the mere mercy
of God.
X. But when the saints sometimes appear to urge their own righteousness
as an argument in their supplications with God,—as when David says,
“Preserve my soul; for I am holy;”[291] and Hezekiah, “I beseech thee, O
Lord, remember now how I have walked before thee in truth, and have done
that which is good in thy sight,”[292]—their only design in such modes
of expression is, from their regeneration to prove themselves to be
servants and sons of God, to whom he declares he will be propitious. He
tells us by the Psalmist, (as we have already seen,) that “his eyes are
upon the righteous, and that his ears are open unto their cry;”[293] and
again, by the apostle, that “whatsoever we ask, we receive of him,
because we keep his commandments;”[294] in which passages he does not
determine the value of prayer according to the merit of works; but
intends by them to establish the confidence of those who are conscious
to themselves, as all believers ought to be, of unfeigned integrity and
innocence. For the observation in John, made by the blind man who
received his sight, that “God heareth not sinners,”[295] is a principle
of Divine truth, if we understand the word _sinners_, in the common
acceptation of Scripture, to signify those who are all asleep and
content in their sins, without any desire of righteousness; since no
heart can ever break out into a sincere invocation of God, unaccompanied
with aspirations after piety. To such promises, therefore, correspond
those declarations of the saints, in which they introduce the mention of
their own purity or innocence, that they may experience a manifestation
to themselves of what is to be expected by all the servants of God.
Besides, they are generally found in the use of this species of prayer,
when before the Lord they compare themselves with their enemies, from
whose iniquity they desire him to deliver them. Now, in this comparison,
we need not wonder, if they produce their righteousness and simplicity
of heart, in order to prevail upon him by the justice of their cause to
yield the more ready assistance. We object not, therefore, to the pious
heart of a good man making use before the Lord of the consciousness of
his own purity for his confirmation in the promises which the Lord has
given for the consolation and support of his true worshippers; but his
confidence of success we wish to be independent of every consideration
of personal merit, and to rest solely on the Divine clemency.
XI. The fourth and last rule is, That thus prostrate with true humility,
we should nevertheless be animated to pray by the certain hope of
obtaining our requests. It is indeed an apparent contradiction, to
connect a certain confidence of God’s favour with a sense of his
righteous vengeance; though these two things are perfectly consistent,
if persons oppressed by their own guilt be encouraged solely by the
Divine goodness. For as we have before stated, that repentance and
faith, of which one terrifies, and the other exhilarates, are
inseparably connected, so their union is necessary in prayer. And this
agreement is briefly expressed by David: “I will come (says he) into thy
house in the multitude of thy mercy; and in thy fear will I worship
toward thy holy temple.”[296] Under the “goodness of God,” he
comprehends faith, though not to the exclusion of fear; for his majesty
not only commands our reverence, but our own unworthiness makes us
forget all pride and security, and fills us with fear. I do not mean a
confidence which delivers the mind from all sense of anxiety, and
soothes it into pleasant and perfect tranquillity; for such a placid
satisfaction belongs to those whose prosperity is equal to their wishes,
who are affected by no care, corroded by no desire, and alarmed by no
fear. And the saints have an excellent stimulus to calling upon God,
when their necessities and perplexities harass and disquiet them, and
they are almost despairing in themselves, till faith opportunely
relieves them; because, amidst such troubles, the goodness of God is so
glorious in their view, that though they groan under the pressure of
present calamities, and are likewise tormented with the fear of greater
in future, yet a reliance on it alleviates the difficulty of bearing
them, and encourages a hope of deliverance. The prayers of a pious man,
therefore, must proceed from both these dispositions, and must also
contain and discover them both; though he must groan under present
evils, and is anxiously afraid of new ones, yet at the same time he must
resort for refuge to God, not doubting his readiness to extend the
assistance of his hand. For God is highly incensed by our distrust, if
we supplicate him for blessings which we have no expectation of
receiving. There is nothing, therefore, more suitable to the nature of
prayers, than that they be conformed to this rule—not to rush forward
with temerity, but to follow the steps of faith. To this principle
Christ calls the attention of us all in the following passage: “I say
unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye
receive them, and ye shall have them.”[297] This he confirms also in
another place: “Whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall
receive.”[298] With which James agrees: “If any of you lack wisdom, let
him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not.
But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering.”[299] Where, by opposing
“faith” to “wavering,” he very aptly expresses its nature. And equally
worthy of attention is what he adds, that they avail nothing, who call
upon God in perplexity and doubt, and are uncertain in their minds
whether they shall be heard or not; whom he even compares to waves,
which are variously tossed and driven about with the wind. Whence he
elsewhere calls a legitimate prayer “the prayer of faith.”[300] Besides,
when God so frequently affirms, that he will give to every man according
to his faith, he implies that we can obtain nothing without faith.
Finally, it is faith that obtains whatever is granted in answer to
prayer. This is the meaning of that famous passage of Paul, to which
injudicious men pay little attention: “How shall they call on him, in
whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in him, of whom
they have not heard? So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the
word of God.”[301] For by a regular deduction of prayer originally from
faith, he evidently contends, that God cannot be sincerely invoked by
any, but those to whom his clemency and gentleness have been revealed
and familiarly discovered by the preaching of the gospel.
XII. This necessity our adversaries never consider. Therefore, when we
inculcate on believers a certain confidence of mind that God is
propitious and benevolent towards them, they consider us as advancing
the greatest of all absurdities. But if they were in the habit of true
prayer, they would certainly understand, that there can be no proper
invocation of God without such a strong sense of the Divine benevolence.
But since no man can fully discover the power of faith without an
experience of it in his heart, what advantage can arise from disputing
with such men, who plainly prove that they never had any other than a
vain imagination? For the value and necessity of that assurance which we
require, is chiefly learned by prayer; and he who does not perceive
this, betrays great stupidity of conscience. Leaving, then, this class
of blinded mortals, let us ever abide by the decision of Paul, that God
cannot be called upon, but by those who receive from the gospel a
knowledge of his mercy, and a certain persuasion that it is prepared for
them. For what kind of an address would this be? “O Lord, I am truly in
doubt, whether thou be willing to hear me; but since I am oppressed with
anxiety, I flee to thee, that if I be worthy thou mayest assist me.”
This does not resemble the solicitude of the saints, whose prayers we
read in the Scriptures. Nor is it agreeable to the teaching of the Holy
Spirit by the apostle, who commands us “to come boldly to the throne of
grace, that we may find grace;”[302] and informs us, that “we have
boldness and access, with confidence, by the faith of Christ.”[303] This
assurance of obtaining what we implore, therefore, which is both
commanded by the Lord himself, and taught by the example of the saints,
it becomes us to hold fast with all our might, if we would pray to any
good purpose. For that prayer alone is accepted by God, which arises (if
I may use the expression) from such a presumption of faith, and is
founded on an undaunted assurance of hope. He might, indeed, have
contented himself with the simple mention of “faith;” yet he has not
only added “confidence,” but furnished that confidence with liberty or
“boldness” to distinguish by this criterion between us and unbelievers,
who do indeed pray to God in common with us, but entirely at an
uncertainty. For which reason, the whole Church prays in the psalm, “Let
thy mercy, O Lord, be upon us, according as we hope in thee.”[304] The
Psalmist elsewhere introduces the same idea: “This I know; for God is
for me.”[305] Again: “In the morning will I direct my prayer unto thee,
and will look up.”[306] For from these words we gather, that prayers are
but empty sounds, if unattended by hope, from which, as from a
watch-tower, we quietly look out for God. With which corresponds the
order of Paul’s exhortation; for before exhorting believers to “pray
always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit,” he first directs
them to “take the shield of faith, the helmet of salvation, and the
sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.”[307] Now, let the reader
recollect, what I have before asserted, that faith is not at all
weakened by being connected with an acknowledgment of our misery,
poverty, and impurity. For believers feel themselves oppressed by a
grievous load of sins, while destitute of every thing which could
conciliate the favour of God, and burdened with much guilt, which might
justly render him an object of their dread; yet they cease not to
present themselves before him; nor does this experience terrify them
from resorting to him, since there is no other way of access to him. For
prayer was instituted, not that we might arrogantly exalt ourselves in
the presence of God, or form a high opinion of any thing of our own; but
that we might confess our guilt to him, and deplore our miseries with
the familiarity of children confiding their complaints to their parents.
The immense accumulation of our distresses should operate as so many
incitements to urge us to pray; as we are taught likewise by the example
of the Psalmist: “Heal my soul; for I have sinned against thee.”[308] I
confess, indeed, that the operation of such incentives would be fatal,
were it not for the Divine aid; but our most benevolent Father, in his
incomparable mercy, has afforded a timely remedy, that allaying all
perturbation, alleviating all cares, and dispelling all fears, he might
gently allure us to himself, and facilitate our approach to him, by the
removal of every obstacle and every doubt.
XIII. And in the first place, when he enjoins us to pray, the
commandment itself implies a charge of impious contumacy, if we disobey
it. No command can be more precise than that in the psalm: “Call upon me
in the day of trouble.”[309] But as the Scripture recommends no one of
the duties of piety more frequently, it is unnecessary to dwell any
longer upon it. “Ask, (says our Lord,) and it shall be given you; knock,
and it shall be opened unto you.”[310] To this precept, however, there
is also annexed a promise, which is very necessary; for though all men
acknowledge obedience to be due to a precept, yet the greater part of
them would neglect the calls of God, if he did not promise to be
propitious to them, and even to advance to meet them. These two
positions being proved, it is evident that all those who turn their
backs on God, or do not directly approach him, are not only guilty of
disobedience and rebellion, but also convicted of unbelief; because they
distrust the promises; which is the more worthy of observation, since
hypocrites, under the pretext of humility and modesty, treat the command
of God with such haughty contempt as to give no credit to his kind
invitation, and even defraud him of a principal part of his worship. For
after having refused sacrifices, in which all holiness then appeared to
consist, he declares the principal and most acceptable part of his
service to be, “calling upon him in the day of trouble.” Wherefore, when
he requires what is due to him, and animates us to a cheerful obedience,
there are no pretexts for diffidence or hesitation sufficiently specious
to excuse us. The numerous texts of Scripture, therefore, which enjoin
us to call upon God, are as so many banners placed before our eyes to
inspire us with confidence. It were temerity to rush into the presence
of God, without a previous invitation from him. He therefore opens a way
for us by his own word: “I will say, It is my people; and they shall
say, The Lord is my God.”[311] We see how he leads his worshippers, and
desires them to follow him; and therefore that there is no reason to
fear lest the melody, which he dictates, should not be agreeable to him.
Let us particularly remember this remarkable character of God, by a
reliance on which we shall easily surmount every obstacle: “O thou that
hearest prayer, unto thee shall all flesh come.”[312] For what is more
amiable or attractive than for God to bear this character, which assures
us, that nothing is more agreeable to his nature, than to grant the
requests of humble suppliants? Hence the Psalmist concludes that the way
is open, not to a few only, but to all men; because he addresses all in
these words: “Call upon me in the day of trouble: I will deliver thee,
and thou shalt glorify me.”[313] According to this rule, David, in order
to obtain his request, pleads the promise that had been given him:
“Thou, O Lord, hast revealed to thy servant—; therefore hath thy servant
found in his heart to pray.”[314] Whence we conclude that he would have
been fearful, had he not been encouraged by the promise. So in another
place he furnishes himself with this general doctrine: “He will fulfil
the desire of them that fear him.”[315] In the Psalms we may likewise
observe the connection of prayer as it were interrupted, and sudden
transitions made, sometimes to the power of God, sometimes to his
goodness, and sometimes to the truth of his promises. It might appear as
though David mutilated his prayers by an unseasonable introduction of
such passages; but believers know by experience, that the ardour of
devotion languishes, unless it be supported by fresh supplies; and
therefore a meditation on the nature and the word of God is far from
being useless in the midst of our prayers. Let us not hesitate, then, to
follow the example of David in the introduction of topics calculated to
reanimate languid souls with new vigour.
XIV. And it is wonderful that we are no more affected with promises so
exceedingly sweet; that the generality of men, wandering through a
labyrinth of errors, after having forsaken the fountain of living
waters, prefer hewing out for themselves cisterns incapable of
containing any water, to embracing the free offers of Divine goodness.
“The name of the Lord (says Solomon) is a strong tower: the righteous
runneth into it, and is safe.”[316] And Joel, after having predicted the
speedy approach of a dreadful destruction, adds this memorable sentence:
“Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord, shall be delivered;”[317]
which we know properly refers to the course of the gospel. Scarcely one
man in a hundred is induced to advance to meet the Lord. He proclaims by
Isaiah, “Before they call, I will answer; and while they are yet
speaking, I will hear.”[318] And in another place he dignifies the whole
Church in general with the same honour; as it belongs to all the members
of Christ: “He shall call upon me, and I will answer him: I will be with
him in trouble: I will deliver him.”[319] As I have before said,
however, my design is not to enumerate all the texts, but to select the
most remarkable, from which we may perceive the condescending kindness
of God in inviting us to him, and the circumstances of aggravation
attending our ingratitude, while our indolence still lingers in the
midst of such powerful incitements. Wherefore let these words
perpetually resound in our ears: “The Lord is nigh unto all them that
call upon him, to all that call upon him in truth;”[320] as well as
those which we have cited from Isaiah and Joel; in which God affirms,
that he is inclined to hear prayers, and is delighted, as with a
sacrifice of a sweet savour, when we cast our cares upon him. We derive
this singular benefit from the Divine promises, when our prayers are
conceived without doubt or trepidation; but in reliance on his word,
whose majesty would otherwise terrify us, we venture to call upon him as
our Father, because he deigns to suggest to us this most delightful
appellation. Favoured with such invitations, it remains for us to know
that they furnish us with sufficient arguments to enforce our petitions;
since our prayers rest on no intrinsic merit; but all their worthiness,
as well as all our hope of obtaining our requests, is founded in, and
dependent upon, the Divine promises; so that there is no need of any
other support or further anxiety. Therefore we may be fully assured,
that though we equal not the sanctity so celebrated in holy patriarchs,
prophets, and apostles, yet, since the command to pray is common to us
as well as to them, and we are partakers of the same common faith, if we
rely on the Divine word, we are associated with them in this privilege.
For God’s declaration, (already noticed,) that he will be gentle and
merciful to all, gives all, even the most miserable, a hope of obtaining
the objects of their supplications; and therefore we should remark the
general forms of expression, by which no man, from the greatest to the
least, is excluded; only let him possess sincerity of heart,
self-abhorrence, humility, and faith; and let not our hypocrisy profane
the name of God by a pretended invocation of him; our most merciful
Father will not reject those whom he exhorts to approach him, and even
urges by every possible mode of solicitation. Hence the argument of
David’s prayer, just recited: “Thou, O Lord, hast revealed to thy
servant—; therefore hath thy servant found in his heart to pray this
prayer unto thee. And now, O Lord God, thou art that God, and thy words
be true, and thou hast promised this goodness unto thy servant:” begin
therefore and do it.[321] As also in another place: “Let thy kindness be
according to thy word unto thy servant.”[322] And all the Israelites
together, whenever they fortify themselves with a recollection of the
covenant, sufficiently declare that fear ought to be banished from our
devotions, because it is contrary to the Divine injunction; and in this
respect they imitated the examples of the patriarchs, particularly of
Jacob, who, after having confessed himself “not worthy of the least of
all the mercies” he had received from the hand of God, yet declares
himself animated to pray for still greater blessings, because God had
promised to grant them.[323] But whatever be the pretences of
unbelievers, for not applying to God under the pressure of every
necessity, for not seeking him or imploring his aid, they are equally
chargeable with defrauding him of the honour due to him, as if they had
fabricated for themselves new gods and idols; for by this conduct, they
deny him to be the Author of all their blessings. On the contrary, there
is nothing more efficacious to deliver believers from every scruple,
than this consideration, that no impediment ought to prevent their
acting according to the command of God, who declares that nothing is
more agreeable to him than obedience. These observations tend more fully
to elucidate what I have advanced before; that a spirit of boldness in
prayer is perfectly consistent with fear, reverence, and solicitude; and
that there is no absurdity in God’s exalting those who are abased. This
establishes an excellent agreement between those apparently repugnant
forms of expression. Both Jeremiah and Daniel use this phrase: “Make
prayers fall” before God; for so it is in the original.[324] Jeremiah
also: “Let our supplication fall before thee.”[325] Again: believers are
frequently said to “lift up their prayer.”[326] So says Hezekiah, when
requesting the prophet to intercede for him. And David desires that his
prayer may ascend “as incense.”[327] For though, under a persuasion of
God’s fatherly love, they cheerfully commit themselves to his
faithfulness, and hesitate not to implore the assistance he freely
promises, yet they are not impudently elated with careless security, but
ascend upwards by the steps of the promises, yet in such a manner, that
they still continue to be suppliant and self-abased.
XV. Here several questions are started. The Scripture relates that the
Lord has complied with some prayers, which nevertheless did not arise
from a calm or well-regulated heart. Jotham, for a just cause indeed,
but from the impulse of rage, resentment, and revenge, devoted the
inhabitants of Shechem to the destruction which afterwards fell upon
them:[328] the Lord, by fulfilling this curse, seems to approve of such
disorderly sallies of passion. Samson also was hurried away by similar
fervour when he said, “O Lord, strengthen me, that I may be avenged of
the Philistines.”[329] For though there was some mixture of honest zeal,
yet it was a violent, and therefore sinful, avidity of revenge which
predominated. God granted the request. Whence it seems deducible, that
prayers not conformable to the rules of the Divine word, are
nevertheless efficacious. I reply, first, that a permanent rule is not
annulled by particular examples; secondly, that peculiar emotions have
sometimes been excited in a few individuals, causing a distinction
between them and men in general. For the answer of Christ to his
disciples, who inconsiderately wished to emulate the example of Elias,
“that they knew not what spirit they were of,” is worthy of observation.
But we must remark, further, that God is not always pleased with the
prayers which he grants; but that, as far as examples are concerned,
there are undeniable evidences of the Scripture doctrine, that he
succours the miserable, and hears the groans of those who under the
pressure of injustice implore his aid; that he therefore executes his
judgments, when the complaints of the poor arise to him, though they are
unworthy of the least favourable attention. For how often, by punishing
the cruelty, rapine, violence, lust, and other crimes of the impious, by
restraining their audacity and fury, and even subverting their
tyrannical power, has he manifestly assisted the victims of unrighteous
oppression, though they have been beating the air with supplications to
an unknown God! And one of the Psalmists clearly teaches that some
prayers are not ineffectual, which nevertheless do not penetrate into
heaven by faith.[330] For he collects those prayers which necessity
naturally extorts from unbelievers as well as from believers, but to
which the event shows God to be propitious. Does he by such
condescension testify that they are acceptable to him? No; he designs to
amplify or illustrate his mercy by this circumstance, that even the
requests of unbelievers are not refused; and likewise to stimulate his
true worshippers to greater diligence in prayer, while they see that
even the lamentations of the profane are not unattended with advantage.
Yet there is no reason why believers should deviate from the rule given
them by God, or envy unbelievers, as though they had made some great
acquisition when they have obtained the object of their wishes. In this
manner we have said that the Lord was moved by the hypocritical
penitence of Ahab, in order to prove by this example how ready he is to
grant the prayers of his own elect, when they seek reconciliation with
him by true conversion. Therefore in the Psalms he expostulates with the
Jews, because, after having experienced his propitiousness to their
prayers, they had almost immediately returned to their native
perverseness.[331] It is evident, also, from the history of the Judges,
that whenever they wept, though their tears were hypocritical, yet they
were delivered from the hands of their enemies. As the Lord, therefore,
“maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good,”[332]
promiscuously, so he despises not the lamentations of those whose cause
is just, and whose afflictions deserve relief. At the same time his
attention to them is no more connected with salvation, than his
furnishing food to the despisers of his goodness. The question relative
to Abraham and Samuel is attended with more difficulty; the former of
whom prayed for the inhabitants of Sodom without any Divine direction,
and the latter for Saul even contrary to a plain prohibition.[333] The
same is the case of Jeremiah, who deprecated the destruction of the
city.[334] For though they suffered a repulse, yet it seems harsh to
deny them to have been under the influence of faith. But the modest
reader will, I hope, be satisfied with this solution; that mindful of
the general principles by which God enjoins them to be merciful even to
the unworthy, they were not entirely destitute of faith, though in a
particular instance their opinion may have disappointed them. Augustine
has somewhere this judicious observation: “How do the saints pray in
faith, when they implore of God that which is contrary to his decrees?
It is because they pray according to his will, not that hidden and
immutable will, but that with which he inspires them, that he may hear
them in a different way, as he wisely discriminates.” This is an
excellent remark; because, according to his incomprehensible designs, he
so regulates the events of things, that the prayers of the saints, which
contain a mixture of faith and error, are not in vain. Yet this no more
affords an example for imitation, than a sufficient plea to excuse the
saints themselves, whom I admit to have transgressed the bounds of duty.
Wherefore, when no certain promise can be found, we should present our
supplications to God in a conditional way; which is implied in this
petition of David: “Awake to the judgment that thou hast
commanded;”[335] because he suggests that he was directed by a
particular revelation to pray for a temporal blessing.
XVI. It will also be of use to remark, that the things I have delivered
concerning the four rules for praying aright, are not required by God
with such extreme rigour as to cause the rejection of all prayers, in
which he does not find a perfection of faith or repentance, united with
ardent zeal and well-regulated desires. We have said, that although
prayer is a familiar intercourse between God and pious men, yet
reverence and modesty must be preserved, that we may not give a loose to
all our wishes, nor even in our desires exceed the Divine permission;
and to prevent the majesty of God being lessened in our view, our minds
must be raised to a pure and holy veneration of him. This no man has
ever performed with the purity required; for, to say nothing of the
multitude, how many complaints of David savour of intemperance of
spirit! not that he would designedly remonstrate with God, or murmur at
his judgments; but he faints in consequence of his infirmity, and finds
no better consolation than to pour his sorrows into the Divine bosom.
Moreover, God bears with our lisping, and pardons our ignorance,
whenever any inconsiderate expressions escape us; and certainly without
this indulgence there could be no freedom of prayer. But though it was
David’s intention to submit himself wholly to the Divine will, and his
patience in prayer was equal to his desire of obtaining his requests,
yet we sometimes perceive the appearance and ebullition of turbulent
passions, very inconsistent with the first rule we have laid down. We
may discover, particularly from the conclusion of the thirty-ninth
psalm, with what vehemence of grief this holy man was hurried away
beyond all the bounds of propriety. “O spare me (says he) before I go
hence, and be no more.”[336] One might be ready to say, that the man,
being in despair, desires nothing but the removal of God’s hand, that he
may putrefy in his own iniquities and miseries. He does not intend to
rush into intemperance of language, or, as is usual with the reprobate,
desire God to depart from him; he only complains that he cannot bear the
Divine wrath. In these temptations, also, the saints often drop
petitions, not sufficiently conformable to the rule of God’s word, and
without due reflection on what is right and proper. All prayers polluted
with these blemishes deserve to be rejected; yet if the saints mourn,
correct themselves, and return to themselves again, God forgives them.
Thus they offend likewise against the second rule; because they
frequently have to contend with their own indifference; nor do their
poverty and misery sufficiently incite them to seriousness of devotion.
Now, their minds frequently wander, and are almost absorbed in vanity;
and they also need pardon in this respect, lest languid, or mutilated,
or interrupted and desultory prayers should meet with a repulse. God has
naturally impressed the minds of men with a conviction that prayers
require to be attended with an elevation of heart. Hence the ceremony of
elevating the hands, as before observed, which has been common in all
ages and nations, and still continues; but where is the person, who,
while lifting up the hands, is not conscious of dulness, because his
heart cleaves to the earth? As to praying for the remission of sins,
though none of the faithful omit this article, yet they who have been
truly engaged in prayers, perceive that they scarcely offer the tenth
part of the sacrifices mentioned by David: “The sacrifices of God are a
broken spirit; a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not
despise.”[337] Thus they have always to pray for a twofold forgiveness;
both because they are conscious of many transgressions, with which they
are not so deeply affected as to be sufficiently displeased with
themselves, and as they are enabled to advance in repentance and the
fear of God, humbled with just sorrow for their offences, they deprecate
the vengeance of the Judge. But above all, the weakness or imperfection
of their faith would vitiate the prayers of believers, were it not for
the Divine indulgence; but we need not wonder that this defect is
forgiven by God, who frequently exercises his children with severe
discipline, as if he fully designed to annihilate their faith. It is a
very sharp temptation, when believers are constrained to cry, “How long
wilt thou be angry against the prayer of thy people?”[338] as though
even their prayers were so many provocations of Divine wrath. So when
Jeremiah says, “God shutteth out my prayer,”[339] he was undoubtedly
agitated with severe trouble. Innumerable examples of this kind occur in
the Scriptures, from which it appears that the faith of the saints is
often mingled and agitated with doubts, so that amidst the exercises of
faith and hope, they nevertheless betray some remains of unbelief; but
since they cannot attain all that is to be wished, it becomes them to be
increasingly diligent, in order that, correcting their faults, they may
daily make nearer approaches to the perfect rule of prayer, and at the
same time to consider into what an abyss of evils they must have been
plunged, who even in their very remedies contract new diseases; since
there is no prayer which God would not justly disdain, if he did not
overlook the blemishes with which they are all deformed. I mention these
things, not that believers may securely forgive themselves any thing
sinful, but that, by severely correcting themselves, they may strive to
surmount these obstacles; and that, notwithstanding the endeavours of
Satan to obstruct them in all their ways, with a view to prevent them
from praying, they may nevertheless break through all opposition,
certainly persuaded, that, though they experience many impediments, yet
God is pleased with their efforts, and approves of their prayers,
provided they strenuously aim at that which they do not immediately
attain.
XVII. But since there is no one of the human race worthy to present
himself to God, and to enter into his presence, our heavenly Father
himself, to deliver us at once from shame and fear, which might justly
depress all our minds, has given us his Son Jesus Christ our Lord to be
our Advocate and Mediator with him;[340] introduced by whom we may
boldly approach him, confident, with such an Intercessor, that nothing
we ask in his name will be denied us, as nothing can be denied to him by
his Father. And to this must be referred all that we have hitherto
advanced concerning faith; because, as the promise recommends Christ to
us as the Mediator, so, unless our hope of success depend on him, it
deprives itself of all the benefit of prayer. For as soon as we reflect
on the terrible majesty of God, we cannot but be exceedingly afraid, and
driven away from him by a consciousness of our unworthiness, till we
discover Christ as the Mediator, who changes the throne of dreadful
glory into a throne of grace; as the apostle also exhorts us to “come
boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find
grace to help in time of need.”[341] And as there is a rule given for
calling upon God, as well as a promise that they shall be heard who call
upon him, so we are particularly enjoined to invoke him in the name of
Christ; and we have an express promise, that what we ask in his name we
shall obtain. “Hitherto (says he) ye have asked nothing in my name: ask,
and ye shall receive. At that day ye shall ask in my name; and
whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may
be glorified in the Son.”[342] Hence it is plain beyond all controversy,
that they who call upon God in any other name than that of Christ, are
guilty of a contumacious neglect of his precepts, and a total disregard
of his will; and that they have no promise of any success. For, as Paul
says of Christ, “All the promises of God in him are yea, and in him
amen;” that is, are confirmed and fulfilled.[343]
XVIII. And we must carefully remark the circumstance of the time when
Christ commands his disciples to apply to his intercession, which was to
be after his ascension to heaven; “At that day (says he) ye shall ask in
my name.” It is certain that from the beginning no prayers had been
heard but for the sake of the Mediator. For this reason the Lord had
appointed in the law, that the priest alone should enter the sanctuary,
bearing on his shoulders the names of the tribes of Israel and the same
number of precious stones before his breast; but that the people should
stand without in the court, and there unite their prayers with those of
the priest.[344] The use of the sacrifice was to render their prayers
effectual. The meaning, therefore, of that shadowy ceremony of the law
was, that we are all banished from the presence of God, and therefore
need a mediator to appear in our name, to bear us on his shoulders, and
bind us to his breast, that we may be heard in his person; and,
moreover, that the sprinkling of his blood purifies our prayers, which
have been asserted to be otherwise never free from defilement. And we
see that the saints, when they wished to obtain any thing by prayer,
founded their hope on the sacrifices; because they knew them to be the
confirmations of all their prayers. David says, “The Lord remember all
thy offerings, and accept thy burnt-sacrifice.”[345] Hence we conclude,
that God has from the beginning been appeased by the intercession of
Christ, so as to accept the devotions of believers. Why, then, does
Christ assign a new period, when his disciples shall begin to pray in
his name, but because this grace, being now become more illustrious,
deserves to be more strongly recommended to us? In this same sense he
had just before said, “Hitherto ye have asked nothing in my name;
ask.”[346] Not that they were totally unacquainted with the office of
the Mediator, (since all the Jews were instructed in these first
principles,) but because they did not yet clearly understand that
Christ, on his ascension to heaven, would be more evidently the advocate
of the Church than he was before. Therefore, to console their sorrow for
his absence with some signal advantage, he claims the character of an
advocate, and teaches them that they have hitherto wanted the principal
benefit, which it shall be given them to enjoy, when they shall call
upon God with greater freedom in a reliance on his intercession; as the
apostle says that this new way is consecrated by his blood.[347] So much
the more inexcusable is our perverseness, unless we embrace with the
greatest alacrity such an inestimable benefit, which is particularly
destined for us.
XIX. Moreover, since he is the only way of access by which we are
permitted to approach God, to them who deviate from this road, and
desert this entrance, there remains no other way of access to God, nor
any thing on his throne but wrath, judgment, and terror. Finally, since
the Father has appointed him to be our Head and Leader, they who in any
respect decline or turn aside from him, endeavour, as far as they can,
to deface and obliterate a character impressed by God. Thus Christ is
appointed as the one Mediator, by whose intercession the Father is
rendered propitious and favourable to us. The saints have likewise their
intercessions, in which they mutually commend each other’s interests to
God, and which are mentioned by the apostle;[348] but these are so far
from detracting any thing from the intercession of Christ, that they are
entirely dependent on it. For as they arise from the affection of love,
reciprocally felt by us towards each other as members of one body, so
likewise they are referred to the unity of the Head. Being made also in
the name of Christ, what are they but a declaration, that no man can be
benefited by any prayers at all, independently of Christ’s intercession?
And as the intercession of Christ is no objection to our mutually
pleading for each other, in our prayers in the Church, so let it be
considered as a certain maxim, that all the intercessions of the whole
Church should be directed to that principal one. We ought to beware of
ingratitude particularly on this head, because God, pardoning our
unworthiness, not only permits us to pray each one for himself, but even
admits us as intercessors for one another. For, when those who richly
deserve to be rejected, if they should privately pray each for himself,
are appointed by God as advocates of his Church, what pride would it
betray to abuse this liberality to obscure the honour of Christ!
XX. Now, the cavil of the sophists is quite frivolous, that Christ is
the Mediator of redemption, but believers of intercession; as if Christ,
after performing a temporary mediation, had left to his servants that
which is eternal and shall never die. They who detract so diminutive a
portion of honour from him, treat him, doubtless, very favourably. But
the Scripture, with the simplicity of which a pious man, forsaking these
impostors, ought to be contented, speaks very differently; for when John
says, “If any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus
Christ,”[349] does he only mean that he has been heretofore an Advocate
for us, or does he not rather ascribe to him a perpetual intercession?
What is intended by the assertion of Paul, that he “is even at the right
hand of God, and also maketh intercession for us?”[350] And when he
elsewhere calls him the “one Mediator between God and man,” does he not
refer to prayers, which he has mentioned just before?“[351] For having
first asserted that intercessions should be made for all men, he
immediately adds, in confirmation of that idea, that all have one God
and one Mediator. Consistent with which is the explanation of Augustine,
when he thus expresses himself: “Christian men in their prayers mutually
recommend each other to the Divine regard. That person, for whom no one
intercedes, while he intercedes for all, is the true and only Mediator.
The apostle Paul, though a principal member under the Head, yet because
he was a member of the body of Christ, and knew the great and true High
Priest of the Church had entered, not typically, into the recesses
within the veil, the holy of holies, but truly and really into the
interior recesses of heaven, into a sanctuary not emblematical, but
eternal,—Paul, I say, recommends himself to the prayers of believers.
Neither does he make himself a mediator between God and the people, but
exhorts all the members of the body of Christ mutually to pray for one
another; since the members have a mutual solicitude for each other; and
if one member suffers, the rest sympathize with it. And so should the
mutual prayers of all the members, who are still engaged in the labours
of the present state, ascend on each other’s behalf to the Head, who is
gone before them into heaven, and who is the propitiation for our sins.
For if Paul were a mediator, the other apostles would likewise sustain
the same character; and so there would be many mediators; and Paul’s
argument could not be supported, when he says, ‘For there is one God,
and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; in whom we
also are one, if we keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.’”
Again, in another place: “But if you seek a priest, he is above the
heavens, where he now intercedes for you, who died for you on earth.”
Yet we do not dream that he intercedes for us in suppliant prostration
at the Father’s feet; but we apprehend, with the apostle, that he
appears in the presence of God for us in such a manner, that the virtue
of his death avails as a perpetual intercession for us; yet so as that,
being entered into the heavenly sanctuary, he continually, till the
consummation of all things, presents to God the prayers of his people,
who remain, as it were, at a distance in the court.
XXI. With respect to the saints who are dead in the flesh, but live in
Christ, if we attribute any intercession to them, let us not imagine
that they have any other way of praying to God than by Christ, who is
the only way, or that their prayers are accepted by God in any other
name. Therefore, since the Scripture calls us away from all others to
Christ alone,—since it is the will of our heavenly Father to gather
together all things in him,—it would be a proof of great stupidity, not
to say insanity, to be so desirous of procuring an admission by the
saints, as to be seduced from him, without whom they have no access
themselves. But that this has been practised in some ages, and is now
practised wherever Popery prevails, who can deny? Their merits are
frequently obtruded to conciliate the Divine favour; and in general
Christ is totally neglected, and God is addressed through their names.
Is not this transferring to them that office of exclusive intercession,
which we have before asserted to be peculiar to Christ? Again, who,
either angel or demon, ever uttered to any of the human race a syllable
concerning such an intercession as they pretend? for the Scripture is
perfectly silent respecting any such thing. What reason, then, was there
for its invention? Certainly, when the human mind thus seeks assistances
for itself, in which it is not warranted by the word of God, it
evidently betrays its want of faith. Now, if we appeal to the
consciences of all the advocates for the intercession of saints, we
shall find that the only cause of it is, an anxiety in their minds, as
if Christ could fail of success, or be too severe in this business. By
which perplexity they, in the first place, dishonour Christ, and rob him
of the character of the only Mediator, which, as it has been given by
the Father as his peculiar prerogative, ought therefore not to be
transferred to any other. And by this very conduct they obscure the
glory of his nativity, and frustrate the benefit of his cross; in a
word, they divest and defraud him of the praise which is due to him for
all his actions and all his sufferings; since the end of them all is,
that he may really be, and be accounted, the sole Mediator. They at the
same time reject the goodness of God, who exhibits himself as their
Father; for he is not a father to them, unless they acknowledge Christ
as their brother. Which they plainly deny, unless they believe
themselves to be the objects of his fraternal affection, than which
nothing can be more mild or tender. Wherefore the Scripture offers him
alone to us, sends us to him, and fixes us in him. “He,” says Ambrose,
“is our mouth, with which we address the Father; our eye, by which we
behold the Father; our right hand, by which we present ourselves to the
Father. Without whose mediation, neither we, nor any of all the saints,
have the least intercourse with God.” If they reply, that the public
prayers in the churches are finished by this conclusion, “through Christ
our Lord,” it is a frivolous subterfuge; because the intercession of
Christ is not less profaned when it is confounded with the prayers and
merits of the dead, than if it were wholly omitted, and the dead alone
mentioned. Besides, in all their litanies, both verse and prose, where
every honour is ascribed to dead saints, there is no mention of Christ.
XXII. But their folly rises to such a pitch, that we have here a
striking view of the genius of superstition, which, when it has once
shaken off the reins, places in general no limits to its excursions. For
after men had begun to regard the intercession of saints, they by
degrees gave to each his particular attributes, so that sometimes one,
sometimes another, might be invoked as intercessor, according to the
difference of the cases; then they chose each his particular saint, to
whose protection they committed themselves as to the care of tutelary
gods. Thus they not only set up (as the prophet anciently accused
Israel) gods according to the number of their cities,[352] but even
according to the multitude of persons. But, since the saints refer all
their desires solely to the will of God, and observe it, and acquiesce
in it, he must entertain foolish and carnal, and even degrading thoughts
of them, who ascribes to them any other prayer, than that in which they
pray for the advent of the kingdom of God; very remote from which is
what they pretend concerning them—that every one of them is disposed by
a private affection more particularly to regard his own worshippers. At
length multitudes fell even into horrid sacrilege, by invoking them, not
as subordinate promoters, but as principal agents, in their salvation.
See how low wretched mortals fall, when they wander from their lawful
station, the word of God. I omit the grosser monstrosities of impiety,
for which, though they render them detestable to God, angels, and men,
they do not yet feel either shame or grief. Prostrate before the statue
or picture of Barbara, Catharine, and others, they mutter _Pater
Noster_, “Our Father.” This madness the pastors are so far from
endeavouring to remedy or to restrain, that, allured by the charms of
lucre, they approve and applaud it. But though they attempt to remove
from themselves the odium of so foul a crime, yet what plea will they
urge in defence of this, that Eligius and Medardus are supplicated to
look down from heaven on their servants, and to assist them? and the
holy Virgin to command her Son to grant their petitions? It was
anciently forbidden at the Council of Carthage, that at the altar any
prayers should be made directly to the saints; and it is probable that,
when those holy men could not wholly subdue the force of depraved
custom, they imposed this restraint, that the public prayers might not
be deformed by this phrase, “Saint Peter, pray for us.” But to how much
greater lengths of diabolical absurdity have they proceeded, who
hesitate not to transfer to dead men what exclusively belongs to God and
Christ!
XXIII. But when they attempt to make this intercession appear to be
founded on the authority of Scripture, they labour in vain. We
frequently read, they say, of the prayers of angels; and not only so,
but the prayers of believers are said to be carried by their hands into
the presence of God. But if they would compare saints deceased to
angels, they ought to prove that they are the ministering spirits who
are delegated to superintend the concerns of our salvation, whose
province it is to keep us in all our ways, who surround us, who advise
and comfort us, who watch over us; all of which offices are committed to
angels, but not to departed saints.[353] How preposterously they include
dead saints with angels, fully appears from so many different functions,
by which the Scripture distinguishes some from others. No man will
presume, without previous permission, to act the part of an advocate
before an earthly judge: whence, then, have worms so great a license to
obtrude on God as intercessors those who are not recorded to have been
appointed to that office? God has been pleased to appoint the angels to
attend to our salvation, whence they frequent the sacred assemblies, and
the Church is to them a theatre, in which they admire the various and
“manifold wisdom of God.”[354] Those who transfer to others that which
is peculiar to them, certainly confound and pervert the order
established by God, which ought to be inviolable. With equal dexterity
they proceed to cite other testimonies. God said to Jeremiah, “Though
Moses and Samuel stood before me, yet my mind could not be toward this
people.”[355] How, they say, could he thus have spoken concerning
persons deceased, unless he knew that they were accustomed to intercede
for the living? But I, on the contrary, deduce this conclusion—That
since it appears that neither Moses nor Samuel interceded for the
Israelites, there was then no intercession of the dead. For who of the
saints must we believe to be concerned for the salvation of the people,
when this ceases to be the case with Moses, who far surpassed all others
in this respect while alive? But if they pursue such minute subtleties,
that the dead intercede for the living, because the Lord has said,
“Though they interceded,” I shall argue, with far greater plausibility,
in this manner—In the people’s extreme necessity, no intercession was
made by Moses, of whom it is said, Though he interceded. Therefore it is
highly probable, that no intercession is made by any other, since they
are all so far from possessing the gentleness, kindness, and paternal
solicitude of Moses. This is indeed the consequence of their cavilling,
that they are wounded with the same weapons with which they thought
themselves admirably defended. But it is very ridiculous, that a plain
sentence should be so distorted; only because the Lord declares that he
will not spare the crimes of the people, even though their cause had
been pleaded by Moses or Samuel, to whose prayers he had shown himself
so very propitious. This idea is very clearly deduced from a similar
passage of Ezekiel—“Though these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were
in the land, they should deliver but their own souls by their
righteousness, saith the Lord God;”[356] where he undoubtedly meant to
signify, if two of them should return to life again; for the third was
then alive, namely, Daniel, who is well known to have given an
incomparable specimen of his piety, even in the flower of his youth. Let
us then leave them, whom the Scripture clearly shows to have finished
their course. Therefore Paul, when speaking of David, does not say that
he assists posterity by his prayers, but only that “he served his own
generation.”[357]
XXIV. They further object—Shall we then divest them of every benevolent
wish, who through the whole course of their lives breathed only
benevolence and mercy? Truly, as I do not wish too curiously to inquire
into their actions or thoughts, so it is by no means probable that they
are agitated by the impulse of particular wishes, but rather that with
fixed and permanent desires they aspire after the kingdom of God; which
consists no less in the perdition of the impious, than in the salvation
of believers. If this be true, their charity also is comprehended within
the communion of the body of Christ, and extends no further than the
nature of that communion permits. But though I grant that in this
respect they pray for us, yet they do not therefore relinquish their own
repose, to be distracted with earthly cares; and much less are they
therefore to be the objects of our invocation. Neither is it a necessary
consequence of this, that they must imitate the conduct of men on earth
by mutually praying for one another. For this conduces to the
cultivation of charity among them, while they divide, as it were,
between them, and reciprocally bear their mutual necessities. And in
this, indeed, they act according to God’s precept, and are not destitute
of his promise; which two are always the principal points in prayer. No
such considerations have any relation to the dead; whom when the Lord
has removed from our society, he has left us no intercourse with them,
nor them, indeed, as far as our conjectures can reach, any with us.[358]
But if any one plead, that they cannot but retain the same charity
towards us, as they are united with us by the same faith, yet who has
revealed that they have ears long enough to reach our voices, and eyes
so perspicacious as to watch over our necessities? They talk in the
schools of I know not what refulgence of the Divine countenance
irradiating them, in which, as in a mirror, they behold from heaven the
affairs of men. But to affirm this, especially with the presumption with
which they dare to assert it, what is it but an attempt, by the
infatuated dreams of our own brains, forcibly to penetrate into the
secret appointments of God, without the authority of his word, and to
trample the Scripture under our feet? which so frequently pronounces our
carnal wisdom to be hostile to the wisdom of God; totally condemns the
vanity of our mind; and directs all our reason to be laid in the dust,
and the Divine will to be the sole object of our regard.
XXV. The other testimonies of Scripture which they adduce in defence of
this false doctrine, they distort with the greatest perverseness. But
Jacob (they say) prays that his own name, and the name of his fathers,
Abraham and Isaac, might be named on his posterity.[359] Let us first
inquire the form of this naming, or calling on their names, among the
Israelites; for they do not invoke their fathers to assist them; but
they beseech God to remember his servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
Their example, therefore, is no vindication of those who address the
saints themselves. But as these stupid mortals understand neither what
it is to name the name of Jacob, nor for what reason it should be named,
we need not wonder that they so childishly err even in the form itself.
This phraseology more than once occurs in the Scriptures. For Isaiah
says, that the name of the husband is “called upon” the wife who lives
under his care and protection. The naming or calling, therefore, of the
name of Abraham upon the Israelites, consists in their deducing their
genealogy from him, and revering and celebrating his memory as their
great progenitor. Neither is Jacob actuated by a solicitude for
perpetuating the celebrity of his name, but by a knowledge that all the
happiness of his posterity consisted in the inheritance of that covenant
which God had made with him: and perceiving that this would be the
greatest of all blessings to them, he prays that they may be numbered
among his children; which is only transmitting to them the succession of
the covenant. They, on their part, when they introduce the mention of
this in their prayers, do not recur to the intercessions of the dead,
but put the Lord in remembrance of his covenant, in which their most
merciful Father has engaged to be propitious and beneficent to them, for
the sake of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. How little the saints depended in
any other sense on the merits of their fathers, is evinced by the public
voice of the Church in the prophet: “Thou art our Father, though Abraham
be ignorant of us, and Israel acknowledge us not: thou, O Lord, art our
Father, our Redeemer.”[360] And when they thus express themselves, they
add at the same time, “O Lord, return, for thy servants’ sake;” yet not
entertaining a thought of any intercession, but adverting to the
blessing of the covenant. But now, since we have the Lord Jesus, in
whose hand the eternal covenant of mercy is not only made but confirmed
to us,—whose name should we rather plead in our prayers? And since these
good doctors contend that the patriarchs are in these words represented
as intercessors, I wish to be informed by them, why, in such a vast
multitude, no place, not even the lowest among them, is allotted to
Abraham, the father of the Church? From what vile source they derive
their advocates, is well known. Let them answer me by proving it right,
that Abraham, whom God has preferred to all others, and elevated to the
highest degree of honour, should be neglected and suppressed. The truth
is, that since this practice was unknown in the ancient Church, they
thought proper, in order to conceal its novelty, to be silent respecting
the ancient fathers; as though the difference of names were a valid
excuse for a recent and corrupt custom. But the objection urged by some,
that God is entreated to have mercy on the people for the sake of David,
is so far from supporting their error, that it is a decisive refutation
of it. For if we consider the character sustained by David, he is
selected from the whole company of the saints, that God may fulfil the
covenant which he made with him; so that it refers to the covenant,
rather than to the person, and contains a figurative declaration of the
sole intercession of Christ. For it is certain that what was peculiar to
David, as being a type of Christ, is inapplicable to any others.
XXVI. But it seems that some are influenced by the frequent declarations
which we read, that the prayers of the saints are heard. Why? Truly
because they have prayed. “They cried unto thee,” says the Psalmist,
“and were delivered; they trusted in thee, and were not
confounded.”[361] Therefore, let us likewise pray after their example,
that we may obtain a similar audience. But these men preposterously
argue, that none will be heard but such as have been once already heard.
How much more properly does James say, “Elias was a man subject to like
passions as we are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain; and
it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months.
And he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain, and the earth brought
forth her fruit.”[362] What! does he infer any peculiar privilege of
Elias, to which we should have recourse? Not at all; but he shows the
perpetual efficacy of pure and pious prayer, to exhort us to pray in a
similar manner. For we put a mean construction on the promptitude and
benignity of God in hearing them, unless we be encouraged by such
instances to a firmer reliance on his promises; in which he promises to
hear, not one or two, or even a few, but all who call upon his name. And
this ignorance is so much the less excusable, because they appear almost
professedly to disregard so many testimonies of Scripture. David
experienced frequent deliverances by the Divine power; was it that he
might arrogate it to himself, in order to deliver us by his
interposition? He makes some very different declarations: “The righteous
shall compass me about; for thou shalt deal bountifully with me.”[363]
Again: “They looked unto him, and were lightened; and their faces were
not ashamed. This poor man cried, and the Lord heard him, and saved him
out of all his troubles.”[364] The Psalms contain many such prayers, in
which he implores God to grant his requests from this consideration,
that the righteous may not be put to shame, but may be encouraged by his
example to entertain a good hope. Let us be contented at present with
one instance: “For this shall every one that is godly pray unto thee in
a time when thou mayest be found;”[365] a text which I have the more
readily cited, because the hireling and cavilling advocates of Popery
have not been ashamed to plead it to prove the intercession of the dead.
As though David had any other design than to show the effect which would
proceed from the Divine clemency and goodness when his prayers should be
heard. And in general it must be maintained, that an experience of the
grace of God, both to ourselves and to others, affords no small
assistance to confirm our faith in his promises. I do not recite
numerous passages, where he proposes to himself the past blessings of
God as a ground of present and future confidence, since they will
naturally occur to those who peruse the Psalms. Jacob by his example had
long before taught the same lesson: “I am not worthy of the least of all
the mercies, and of all the truth, which thou hast showed unto thy
servant; for with my staff I passed over this Jordan; and now I am
become two bands.”[366] He mentions the promise indeed, but not alone;
he likewise adds the effect, that he may in future confide with the
greater boldness in the continuance of the Divine goodness towards him.
For God is not like mortals, who grow weary of their liberality, or
whose wealth is exhausted; but is to be estimated by his own nature, as
is judiciously done by David, when he says, “Thou hast redeemed me, O
Lord God of truth.”[367] After ascribing to him the praise of his
salvation, he adds, that he is a God of truth; because, unless he were
perpetually and uniformly consistent with himself, there could not be
derived from his benefits a sufficient argument for confiding in him,
and praying to him. But when we know that every act of assistance, which
he affords us, is a specimen and proof of his goodness and faithfulness,
we shall have no reason to fear lest our hopes be confounded or our
expectations disappointed.
XXVII. Let us conclude this argument in the following manner: Since the
Scripture represents the principal part of Divine worship to be an
invocation of God, as he, in preference to all sacrifices, requires of
us this duty of piety, no prayer can without evident sacrilege be
directed to any other. Wherefore also the Psalmist says, “If we have
stretched out our hands to a strange god, shall not God search this
out?”[368] Besides, since God will only be invoked in faith, and
expressly commands prayers to be conformed to the rule of his word;
finally, since faith founded on the word is the source of true
prayer,—as soon as the least deviation is made from the word, there must
necessarily be an immediate corruption of prayer. But it has been
already shown, that if the whole Scripture be consulted, this honour is
there claimed for God alone. With respect to the office of intercession,
we have also seen, that it is peculiar to Christ, and that no prayer is
acceptable to God, unless it be sanctified by this Mediator. And though
believers mutually pray to God for their brethren, we have proved that
this derogates nothing from the sole intercession of Christ; because
they all commend both themselves and others to God in a reliance upon
it. Moreover we have argued, that this is injudiciously applied to the
dead, of whom we nowhere read that they are commanded to pray for us.
The Scripture frequently exhorts us to the mutual performance of this
duty for each other; but concerning the dead there is not even a
syllable; and James, by connecting these two things, “Confess your
faults one to another, and pray one for another,” tacitly excludes the
dead.[369] Wherefore, to condemn this error, this one reason is
sufficient, that right prayer originates in faith, and that faith is
produced by hearing the word of God, where there is no mention of this
fictitious intercession; for the temerity of superstition has chosen
itself advocates, who were not of Divine appointment. For whilst the
Scripture abounds with many forms of prayer, there is not to be found an
example of this advocacy, without which the Papists believe there can be
no prayer at all. Besides, it is evident that this superstition has
arisen from a want of faith, because they either were not content with
Christ as their intercessor, or entirely denied him this glory. The
latter of these is easily proved from their impudence; for they adduce
no argument more valid to show that we need the mediation of the saints,
than when they object that we are unworthy of familiar access to God.
Which indeed we acknowledge to be strictly true; but we thence conclude,
that they rob Christ of every thing, who consider his intercession as
unavailing without the assistance of George and Hippolytus, and other
such phantasms.
XXVIII. But though prayer is properly restricted to wishes and
petitions, yet there is so great an affinity between petition and
thanksgiving, that they may be justly comprehended under the same name.
For the species which Paul enumerates, fall under the first member of
this division. In requests and petitions we pour out our desires before
God, imploring those things which tend to the propagation of his glory
and the illustration of his name, as well as those benefits which
conduce to our advantage. In thanksgiving we celebrate his beneficence
towards us with due praises, acknowledging all the blessings we have
received as the gifts of his liberality. Therefore David has connected
these two parts together: “Call upon me in the day of trouble: I will
deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify me.”[370] The Scripture, not
without reason, enjoins us the continual use of both; for we have
elsewhere said that our want is so great, and experience itself
proclaims that we are molested and oppressed on every side with such
numerous and great perplexities, that we all have sufficient cause for
unceasing sighs, and groans, and ardent supplications to God. For though
they enjoy a freedom from adversity, yet the guilt of their sins, and
the innumerable assaults of temptation, ought to stimulate even the most
eminent saints to pray for relief. But of the sacrifice of praise and
thanksgiving there can be no interruption, without guilt; since God
ceases not to accumulate on us his various benefits, according to our
respective cases, in order to constrain us, inactive and sluggish as we
are, to the exercise of gratitude. Finally, we are almost overwhelmed
with such great and copious effusions of his beneficence; we are
surrounded, whithersoever we turn our eyes, by such numerous and amazing
miracles of his hand, that we never want matter of praise and
thanksgiving. And to be a little more explicit on this point, since all
our hopes and all our help are in God, (which has already been
sufficiently proved,) so that we cannot enjoy prosperity, either in our
persons or in any of our affairs, without his benediction,—it becomes us
assiduously to commend to him ourselves and all our concerns. Further,
whatever we think, speak, or act, let all our thoughts, words, and
actions be under his direction, subject to his will, and finally in hope
of his assistance. For the curse of God is denounced on all, who
deliberate and decide on any enterprise in a reliance on themselves or
on any other, who engage in or attempt to begin any undertaking
independently of his will, and without invoking his aid. And since it
has already been several times observed, that he is justly honoured when
he is acknowledged to be the Author of all blessings, it thence follows
that they should all be so received from his hand, as to be attended
with unceasing thanksgiving; and that there is no other proper method of
using the benefits which flow to us from his goodness, but by continual
acknowledgments of his praise, and unceasing expressions of our
gratitude. For Paul, when he declares that they are “sanctified by the
word of God and prayer,” at the same time implies, that they are not at
all holy and pure to us without the word and prayer;[371] the word being
metonymically used to denote faith. Wherefore David, after experiencing
the goodness of the Lord, beautifully declares, “He hath put a new song
in my mouth;”[372] in which he certainly implies that we are guilty of a
criminal silence, if we omit to praise him for any benefit; since, in
every blessing he bestows on us, he gives us additional cause to bless
his name. Thus also Isaiah, proclaiming the unparalleled grace of God,
exhorts believers to a new and uncommon song.[373] In which sense David
elsewhere says, “O Lord, open thou my lips; and my mouth shall show
forth thy praise.”[374] Hezekiah likewise, and Jonah, declare that the
end of their deliverance shall be to sing the Divine goodness in the
temple.[375] David prescribes the same general rule for all the saints.
“What shall I render (says he) unto the Lord for all his benefits
towards me? I will take the cup of salvation, and call upon the name of
the Lord.”[376] And this is followed by the Church in another psalm:
“Save us, O Lord our God, to give thanks unto thy holy name, and to
triumph in thy praise.”[377] Again: “He will regard the prayer of the
destitute, and not despise their prayer. This shall be written for the
generation to come; and the people which shall be created shall praise
the Lord. To declare the name of the Lord in Zion, and his praise in
Jerusalem.”[378] Moreover, whenever believers entreat the Lord to do any
thing “for his name’s sake,” as they profess themselves unworthy to
obtain any blessing on their own account, so they lay themselves under
an obligation to thanksgiving; and promise that the Divine beneficence
shall be productive of this proper effect on them, even to cause them to
celebrate its fame. Thus Hosea, speaking of the future redemption of the
Church, addresses the Lord: “Take away all iniquity, and receive us
graciously; so will we render the calves of our lips.”[379] Nor do the
Divine blessings only claim the praises of the tongue, but naturally
conciliate our love. “I love the Lord (says David) because he hath heard
my voice and my supplications.”[380] In another place also, enumerating
the assistances he had experienced, “I will love thee, O Lord, my
strength.”[381] Nor will any praises ever please God, but such as flow
from this ardour of love. We must likewise remember the position of
Paul, that all petitions, to which thanksgiving is not annexed, are
irregular and faulty. For thus he speaks: “In every thing by prayer and
supplication with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known unto
God.”[382] For since moroseness, weariness, impatience, pungent sorrow
and fear, impel many to mutter petitions, he enjoins such a regulation
of the affections, that believers may cheerfully bless God, even before
they have obtained their requests. If this connection ought to exist in
circumstances apparently adverse, God lays us under a still more sacred
obligation to sing his praises, whenever he grants us the enjoyment of
our wishes. But as we have asserted that our prayers, which had
otherwise been defiled, are consecrated by the intercession of Christ,
so the apostle, when he exhorts us “by Christ to offer the sacrifice of
praise,”[383] admonishes us that our lips are not sufficiently pure to
celebrate the name of God, without the intervention of the priesthood of
Christ. Whence we infer, how prodigious must be the fascination of the
Papists, the majority of whom wonder that Christ is called an Advocate.
This is the reason why Paul directs to “pray without ceasing,” and “in
every thing to give thanks;”[384] because he desires that all men, with
all possible assiduity, at every time and in every place, and in all
circumstances and affairs, may direct their prayers to God, expecting
all from him, and ascribing to him the praise of all, since he affords
us perpetual matter of prayer and praise.
XXIX. But this diligence in prayer, although it chiefly respects the
particular and private devotions of each individual, has,
notwithstanding, some reference also to the public prayers of the
Church. But these cannot be unceasing, nor ought they to be conducted
otherwise than according to the polity which is appointed by the common
consent. This, indeed, I confess. For therefore also certain hours are
fixed and prescribed, though indifferent with God, yet necessary to the
customs of men, that the benefit of all may be regarded, and all the
affairs of the Church be administered, according to the direction of
Paul, “decently and in order.”[385] But this by no means prevents it
from being the duty of every Church often to stimulate themselves to a
greater frequency of prayer, and also to be inflamed with more ardent
devotion on the pressure of any necessity unusually great. But the place
to speak of perseverance, which is nearly allied to unceasing diligence,
will be towards the end. Moreover these things afford no encouragement
to those vain repetitions which Christ has chosen to interdict us;[386]
for he does not forbid us to pray long or frequently, or with great
fervour of affection; but he forbids us to confide in our ability to
extort any thing from God by stunning his ears with garrulous loquacity,
as though he were to be influenced by the arts of human persuasion. For
we know that hypocrites, who do not consider that they are concerned
with God, are as pompous in their prayers as in a triumph. For that
Pharisee, who thanked God that he was not like other men,[387]
undoubtedly flattered himself in the eyes of men, as if he wished to
gain by his prayer the reputation of sanctity. Hence that βαττολογια
(_vain repetition_) which from a similar cause at present prevails among
the Papists; while some vainly consume the time by reiterating the same
oraisons, and others recommend themselves among the vulgar by a tedious
accumulation of words. Since this garrulity is a puerile mocking of God,
we need not wonder that it is prohibited in the Church, that nothing may
be heard there but what is serious, and proceeds from the very heart.
Very similar to this corrupt practice is another, which Christ condemns
at the same time; that hypocrites, for the sake of ostentation, seek
after many witnesses of their devotions, and rather pray in the
market-place, than that their prayers should want the applause of the
world. But as it has been already observed that the end of prayer is to
elevate our minds towards God, both in a confession of his praise and in
a supplication of his aid, we may learn from this that its principal
place is in the mind and heart; or, rather, that prayer itself is the
desire of the inmost heart, which is poured out and laid before God the
searcher of hearts. Wherefore our heavenly Teacher, as has already been
mentioned, when he intended to deliver the best rule respecting prayer,
gave the following command: “Enter into thy closet, and when thou hast
shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father
which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.”[388] For when he has
dissuaded from imitating the example of hypocrites, who endeavoured by
the ambitious ostentation of their prayers to gain the favour of men, he
immediately adds a better direction, which is, to enter into our closet,
and there to pray with the door shut. In which words, as I understand
them, he has taught us to seek retirement, that we may be enabled to
descend into our own hearts, with all our powers of reflection, and
promised us that God, whose temples our bodies ought to be, will accede
to the desires of our souls. For he did not intend to deny the
expediency of praying also in other places; but shows that prayer is a
kind of secret thing, which lies principally in the heart, and requires
a tranquillity of mind undisturbed by all cares. It was not without
reason, therefore, that the Lord himself, when he would engage in an
unusual vehemence of devotion, retired to some solitary place, far from
the tumult of men; but with a view to admonish us by his own example,
that we ought not to neglect these helps, by which our hearts, naturally
too inconstant, are more intensely fixed on the devotional exercise. But
notwithstanding, as he did not refrain from praying even in the midst of
a multitude, if at any time the occasion required it, so we, in all
places where it may be necessary, should “lift up holy hands.”[389] And
so it is to be concluded, that whoever refuses to pray in the solemn
assembly of the saints, knows nothing of private prayer, either solitary
or domestic. And again, that he who neglects solitary and private
prayer, how sedulously soever he may frequent the public assemblies,
only forms there such as are mere wind, because he pays more deference
to the opinion of men than to the secret judgment of God. In the mean
time, that the common prayers of the Church might not sink into
contempt, God anciently distinguished them by splendid titles,
especially when he called the temple a “house of prayer.”[390] For by
this expression he taught both that the duty of prayer is a principal
part of his worship, and that the temple had been erected as a standard
for believers, in order that they might engage in it with one consent.
There was also added a remarkable promise: “Praise waiteth for thee, O
God, in Sion; and unto thee shall the vow be performed;”[391] in which
words the Psalmist informs us that the prayers of the Church are never
in vain, because the Lord supplies his people with perpetual matter of
praise and joy. But though the legal shadows have ceased, yet since it
has been the Divine will by this ceremony to maintain a unity of faith
among us also, the same promise undoubtedly belongs to us, Christ having
confirmed it with his own mouth, and Paul having represented it as
perpetually valid.
XXX. Now, as God in his word commands believers to unite in common
prayers, so also it is necessary that public temples be appointed for
performing them; where they who refuse to join with the people of God in
their devotions, have no just reason for abusing this pretext, that they
enter into their closets, in obedience to the Divine mandate. For he who
promises to grant whatever shall be implored by two or three persons
convened in his name,[392] proves that he is far from despising prayers
offered in public; provided they be free from ostentation and a desire
of human applause, and accompanied with a sincere and real affection
dwelling in the secret recesses of the heart. If this be the legitimate
use of temples, as it certainly is, there is need of great caution, lest
we either consider them as the proper habitations of the Deity, where he
may be nearer to us to hear our prayers,—an idea which has begun to be
prevalent for several ages,—or ascribe to them I know not what
mysterious sanctity, which might be supposed to render our devotions
more holy in the Divine view. For since we are ourselves the true
temples of God, we must pray within ourselves, if we wish to invoke him
in his holy temple. But let us, who are directed to worship the Lord “in
spirit and in truth,”[393] without any difference of place, relinquish
those gross ideas of religion to the Jews or pagans. There was, indeed,
anciently a temple dedicated, by Divine command, to the oblation of
prayers and sacrifices: at that time the truth was figuratively
concealed under such shadows; but now, having been plainly discovered to
us, it no longer permits an exclusive attachment to any material temple.
Nor, indeed, was the temple recommended to the Jews that they might
enclose the Divine presence within its walls, but that they might be
employed in contemplating a representation of the true temple. Therefore
Isaiah and Stephen have sharply reprehended those who suppose that God
dwells in any respect “in temples made with hands.”[394]
XXXI. Hence it is moreover clearly evident, that neither voice nor
singing, if used in prayer, has any validity, or produces the least
benefit with God, unless it proceed from the inmost desire of the heart.
But they rather provoke his wrath against us, if they be only emitted
from the lips and throat; since that is an abuse of his sacred name, and
a derision of his majesty; as we conclude from the words of Isaiah,
which, though their meaning be more extensive, contain also a reproof of
this offence: “The Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with
their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their
heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of
men,—therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous work among
this people, even a marvellous work and a wonder; for the wisdom of
their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men
shall be hid.”[395] Nor do we here condemn the use of the voice, or
singing, but rather highly recommend them, provided they accompany the
affection of the heart. For they exercise the mind in Divine meditation,
and fix the attention of the heart; which by its lubricity and
versatility is easily relaxed and distracted to a variety of objects,
unless it be supported by various helps. Besides, as the glory of God
ought in some respect to be manifested in every part of our bodies, to
this service, both in singing and in speaking, it becomes us especially
to addict and devote our tongues, which were created for the express
purpose of declaring and celebrating the Divine praises. Nevertheless
the principal use of the tongue is in the public prayers which are made
in the congregations of believers; the design of which is, that with one
common voice, and as it were with the same mouth, we may all at once
proclaim the glory of God, whom we worship in one spirit and with the
same faith; and this is publicly done, that all interchangeably, each
one of his brother, may receive the confession of faith, and be invited
and stimulated by his example.
XXXII. Now, the custom of singing in churches (to speak of it by the
way) not only appears to be very ancient, but that it was even used by
the apostles, may be concluded from these words of Paul: “I will sing
with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.”[396]
Again, to the Colossians: “Teaching and admonishing one another in
psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your
hearts to the Lord.”[397] For in the former passage he inculcates
singing with the voice and with the heart; and in the latter he
recommends spiritual songs, which may conduce to the mutual edification
of the saints. Yet that it was not universal is proved by Augustine, who
relates that in the time of Ambrose, the church at Milan first adopted
the practice of singing, when, during the persecution of the orthodox
faith by Justina, the mother of Valentinian, the people were unusually
assiduous in their vigils; and that the other Western churches followed.
For he had just before mentioned that this custom had been derived from
the churches of the East. He signifies also, in the second book of his
Retractations, that in his time it was received in Africa. “One Hilary,
(says he,) who held the tribunitial office, took every opportunity of
loading with malicious censures the custom which was then introduced at
Carthage, that hymns from the Book of Psalms should be sung at the
altar, either before the oblation, or while that which had been offered
was distributed to the people. In obedience to the commands of my
brethren, I answered him.” And certainly if singing be attempered to
that gravity which becomes the presence of God and of angels, it adds a
dignity and grace to sacred actions, and is very efficacious in exciting
the mind to a true concern and ardour of devotion. Yet great caution is
necessary, that the ears be not more attentive to the modulation of the
notes, than the mind to the spiritual import of the words. With which
danger Augustine confesses himself to have been so affected, as
sometimes to have wished for the observance of the custom instituted by
Athanasius, who directed that the reader should sound the words with
such a gentle inflection of voice, as would be more nearly allied to
rehearsing than to singing. But when he recollected the great benefit
which himself had received from singing, he inclined to the other side.
With the observance, therefore, of this limitation, it is without doubt
an institution of great solemnity and usefulness. As, on the reverse,
whatever music is composed only to please and delight the ear, is
unbecoming the majesty of the Church, and cannot but be highly
displeasing to God.
XXXIII. Hence also it plainly appears, that public prayers are to be
composed, not in Greek among the Latins, nor in Latin among the French
or English, as has hitherto been universally practised; but in the
vernacular tongue, which may be generally understood by the whole
congregation; for it ought to be conducted to the edification of the
whole Church, to whom not the least benefit can result from sounds which
they do not understand. But they who disregard the voice both of charity
and of humanity, ought at least to discover some little respect for the
authority of Paul, whose words are free from all ambiguity: “When thou
shalt bless with the Spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the
unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not
what thou sayest? For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is
not edified.”[398] Who, then, can sufficiently wonder at the unbridled
license of the Papists, who, notwithstanding this apostolic caution
against it, are not afraid to bellow their verbose prayers in a foreign
language, of which they neither sometimes understand a syllable
themselves, nor wish a syllable to be understood by others! But Paul
directs to a different practice: “What is it then? (says he) I will pray
with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will
sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.”[399]
Signifying by the word _spirit_ the peculiar gift of tongues, which was
abused by some of its possessors, when they separated it from
understanding. Thus it must be fully admitted, that both in public and
in private prayer, the tongue, unaccompanied by the heart, cannot but be
highly displeasing to God; and likewise that the mind ought to be
incited, in the ardour of meditation, to rise to a much higher elevation
than can ever be attained by the expression of the tongue; lastly, that
the tongue is indeed not necessary to private prayer, any further than
as the mind is insufficient to arouse itself, or as the vehemence of its
emotions irresistibly carries the tongue along with them. For though
some of the best prayers are not vocal, yet it is very common, under
strong emotions, for the tongue to break forth into sounds, and the
other members into gestures, without the least ostentation. Hence the
uncertain muttering of Hannah,[400] somewhat similar to which is
experienced by the saints in all ages, when they break forth into abrupt
and imperfect sounds. The corporeal gestures usually observed in prayer,
such as kneeling and uncovering the head, are customs designed to
increase our reverence of God.
XXXIV. Now, we must learn not only a certain rule, but also the form of
praying; even that which our heavenly Father has given us by his beloved
Son;[401] in which we may recognize his infinite goodness and clemency.
For beside advising and exhorting us to seek him in all our necessities,
as children, whenever they are afflicted with any distress, are
accustomed to have recourse to the protection of their parents; seeing
that we did not sufficiently perceive how great was our poverty, what it
was right to implore, or what would be suitable to our condition, he has
provided a remedy even for this our ignorance, and abundantly supplied
the deficiencies of our capacity. For he has prescribed for us a form,
in which he gives a statement of all that it is lawful to desire of him,
all that is conducive to our benefit, and all that it is necessary to
ask. From this kindness of his, we derive great consolation in the
persuasion that we pray for nothing absurd, nothing injurious or
unseasonable; in a word, nothing but what is agreeable to him; since our
petitions are almost in his own words. Plato, observing the ignorance of
men in presenting their supplications to God, which if granted were
frequently very detrimental to them, pronounces this to be the best
method of praying, borrowed from an ancient poet: “King Jupiter, give us
those things which are best, whether we pray for them or not; but
command evil things to remain at a distance from us, even though we
implore them.” And indeed the wisdom of that heathen is conspicuous in
this instance, since he considers it as very dangerous to supplicate the
Lord to gratify all the dictates of our appetites; and at the same time
discovers our infelicity, who cannot, without danger, even open our
mouths in the presence of God, unless we be instructed by the Spirit in
the right rule of prayer.[402] And this privilege deserves to be the
more highly valued by us, since the only begotten Son of God puts words
into our mouths, which may deliver our minds from all hesitation.
XXXV. This form or rule of prayer, whichever appellation be given to it,
is composed of six petitions. For my reason for not agreeing with those
who divide it into seven parts is, that the Evangelist appears, by the
insertion of the adversative conjunction, to connect together these two
clauses; as though he had said, Suffer us not to be oppressed with
temptation, but rather succour our weakness, and deliver us, that we may
not fall. The ancient writers of the Church also are of our opinion; so
that what is now added in Matthew in the seventh place, must be
explained as belonging to the sixth petition. Now, though the whole
prayer is such, that in every part of it the principal regard must be
paid to the glory of God, yet to this the first three petitions are
particularly devoted, and to this alone we ought to attend in them,
without any consideration of our own interest. The remaining three
concern ourselves, and are expressly assigned to supplications for those
things which tend to our benefit. As when we pray that God’s name may be
hallowed, since he chooses to prove whether our love and worship of him
be voluntary, or dictated by mercenary motives, we must then think
nothing of our own interest, but his glory must be proposed as the only
object of our fixed attention; nor is it lawful for us to be differently
affected in the other petitions of this class. And this indeed conduces
to our great benefit; because, when the Divine name is hallowed or
sanctified as we pray, it becomes likewise our sanctification. But our
eyes should overlook, and be, as it were, blind to such advantage, so as
not to pay the least regard to it. And even if we were deprived of all
hope of private benefit, yet this hallowing, and the other things which
pertain to the glory of God, ought still to be the objects of our
desires and of our prayers. This is conspicuous in the examples of Moses
and Paul,[403] who felt a pleasure in averting their minds and eyes from
themselves, and in praying with vehement and ardent zeal for their own
destruction, that they might promote the kingdom and glory of God even
at the expense of their own happiness. On the other hand, when we pray
that our daily bread may be given us, although we wish for what is
beneficial to ourselves, yet here also we ought principally to aim at
the glory of God, so as not even to ask it, unless it tend to his glory.
Now, let us attempt an explanation of the prayer itself.
XXXVI. OUR FATHER, WHO ART IN HEAVEN, &c. The first idea that occurs is,
what we have before asserted, that we ought never to present a prayer to
God but in the name of Christ, since no other name can recommend it to
his regard. For by calling God our Father, we certainly plead the name
of Christ. For with what confidence could any one call God his Father?
who could proceed to such a degree of temerity, as to arrogate to
himself the dignity of a son of God, if we had not been adopted as the
children of his grace in Christ? who, being his true Son, has been given
by him to us as our brother, that the character which properly belongs
to him by nature, may become ours by the blessing of adoption, if we
receive this inestimable favour with a steady faith; as John says, that
to them is given “power to become the sons of God, even to them that
believe on the name of the only begotten of the Father.”[404] Therefore
he denominates himself our Father, and wishes us to give him the same
appellation; delivering us from all diffidence by the great sweetness of
this name, since the affection of love can nowhere be found in a
stronger degree than in the heart of a father. Therefore he could not
give us a more certain proof of his infinite love towards us, than by
our being denominated the sons of God. But his love to us is as much
greater and more excellent than all the love of our parents, as he is
superior to all men in goodness and mercy;[405] so that though all the
fathers in the world, divested of every emotion of paternal affection,
should leave their children destitute, he will never forsake us, because
“he cannot deny himself.”[406] For we have his promise, “If ye, then,
being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much
more shall your Father which is in heaven?”[407] Again, in the prophet:
“Can a woman forget her child? Yea, they may forget, yet will I not
forget thee.”[408] But if we are his sons, then, as a son cannot commit
himself to the protection of a stranger and an alien, without at the
same time complaining of the cruelty or poverty of his father, so
neither can we seek supplies for our wants from any other quarter than
from him, without charging him with indigence and inability, or with
cruelty and excessive austerity.
XXXVII. Neither let us plead that we are justly terrified by a
consciousness of our sins, which may cause even a merciful, kind Father
to be daily offended with us. For if, among men, a son can conduct his
cause with his father by no better advocate, can conciliate and recover
his lost favour by no better mediator, than by approaching him as an
humble suppliant, acknowledging his own guilt, and imploring his
father’s mercy, (for the bowels of a father could not conceal their
emotions at such supplications,) what will he do, who is “the Father of
mercies, and the God of all comfort?”[409] Will he not hear the cries
and groans of his children when they deprecate his displeasure for
themselves, especially since it is to this that he invites and exhorts
us; rather than attend to any intercessions of others, to which they
resort in great consternation, not without some degree of despair,
arising from a doubt of the kindness and clemency of their Father? Of
this exuberance of paternal kindness, he gives us a beautiful
representation in a parable;[410] where a father meets and embraces a
son who had alienated himself from his family, who had dissolutely
lavished his substance, who had grievously offended him in every
respect: nor does he wait till he actually supplicates for pardon, but
anticipates him, recognizes him when returning at a great distance,
voluntarily runs to meet him, consoles him, and receives him into
favour. For by proposing to our view an example of such great kindness
in a man, he intended to teach us how much more abundant compassion we
ought, notwithstanding our ingratitude, rebellion, and wickedness, to
expect from him, who is not only our Father, but the most benevolent and
merciful of all fathers, provided we only cast ourselves on his mercy.
And to give us the more certain assurance that he is such a Father, if
we be Christians, he will be called not only “Father,” but expressly
“Our Father;” as though we might address him in the following manner: O
Father, whose affection towards thy children is so strong, and whose
readiness to pardon them is so great, we thy children invoke thee and
pray to thee, under the assurance and full persuasion that thou hast no
other than a paternal affection towards us, how unworthy soever we are
of such a Father. But because the contracted capacities of our minds
cannot conceive of a favour of such immense magnitude, we not only have
Christ as the pledge and earnest of adoption, but as a witness of this
adoption he gives us the Spirit, by whom we are enabled with a loud
voice freely to cry, “Abba, Father.”[411] Whenever, therefore, we may be
embarrassed by any difficulty, let us remember to supplicate him, that
he will correct our timidity, and give us this spirit of magnanimity to
enable us to pray with boldness.
XXXVIII. But since we are not instructed, that every individual should
appropriate him to himself exclusively as his Father, but rather that we
should all in common call him Our Father, we are thereby admonished how
strong a fraternal affection ought to prevail among us, who, by the same
privilege of mercy and free grace, are equally the children of such a
Father. For if we all have one common Father,[412] from whom proceeds
every blessing we enjoy, there ought to be nothing exclusively
appropriated by any among us, but what we should be ready to communicate
to each other with the greatest alacrity of heart, whenever necessity
requires. Now, if we desire, as we ought, to exert ourselves for our
mutual assistance, there is nothing in which we can better promote the
interests of our brethren, than by commending them to the providential
care of our most benevolent Father, with whose mercy and favour no other
want can be experienced. And, indeed, this is a debt which we owe to our
Father himself. For as he who truly and cordially loves any father of a
family, feels likewise a love and friendship for his whole household, in
the same manner, our zeal and affection towards this heavenly Father
must be shown towards his people, his family, his inheritance, whom he
has dignified with the honourable appellation of the “fulness” of his
only begotten Son.[413] Let a Christian, then, regulate his prayers by
this rule, that they be common, and comprehend all who are his brethren
in Christ; and not only those whom he at present sees and knows to be
such, but all men in the world; respecting whom, what God has determined
is beyond our knowledge; only that to wish and hope the best concerning
them, is equally the dictate of piety and of humanity. It becomes us,
however, to exercise a peculiar and superior affection “unto them who
are of the household of faith;” whom the apostle has in every case
recommended to our particular regards.[414] In a word, all our prayers
ought to be such, as to respect that community which our Lord has
established in his kingdom and in his family.
XXXIX. Yet this is no objection to the lawfulness of particular prayers,
both for ourselves and for other certain individuals; provided our minds
be not withdrawn from a regard to this community, nor even diverted from
it, but refer every thing to this point. For though the words of them be
singular, yet as they are directed to this end, they cease not to be
common. All this may be rendered very intelligible by a similitude. God
has given a general command to relieve the wants of all the poor; and
yet this is obeyed by them who to that end succour the indigence of
those whom they either know or see to be labouring under poverty; even
though they pass by multitudes who are oppressed with necessities
equally severe, because neither their knowledge nor ability can extend
to all. In the same manner, no opposition is made to the Divine will by
them who, regarding and considering this common society of the Church,
present such particular prayers, in which, with a public spirit, but in
particular terms, they recommend to God themselves or others, whose
necessity he has placed within their more immediate knowledge. However,
there is not a perfect similarity in every respect between prayer and
donation of alms, for munificence cannot be exercised but towards them
whose wants we have perceived; but we may assist by our prayers even the
greatest strangers, and those with whom we are the most unacquainted,
how distant soever they may be from us. This is done by that general
form of prayer, which comprehends all the children of God, among whom
they also are numbered. To this may be referred the exhortation which
Paul gives believers of his age, “that men pray every where, lifting up
holy hands without wrath;”[415] because by admonishing them, that
discord shuts the gate against prayers, he advises them unanimously to
unite all their petitions together.
XL. It is added, THAT HE IS IN HEAVEN. From which it is not hastily to
be inferred, that he is included and circumscribed within the
circumference of heaven, as by certain barriers. For Solomon confesses,
that “the heaven of heavens cannot contain” him.[416] And he says
himself, by the prophet, “The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my
footstool.”[417] By which he clearly signifies that he is not limited to
any particular region, but diffused throughout all space. But because
the dulness of our minds could not otherwise conceive of his ineffable
glory, it is designated to us by the heaven, than which we can behold
nothing more august or more majestic. Since, then, wherever our senses
apprehend any thing, there they are accustomed to fix it, God is
represented as beyond all place, that when we seek him we may be
elevated above all reach of both body and soul. Moreover, by this form
of expression, he is exalted above all possibility of corruption or
mutation: finally, it is signified, that he comprehends and contains the
whole world, and governs the universe by his power. Wherefore, this is
the same as if he had been said to be possessed of an incomprehensible
essence, infinite magnitude or sublimity, irresistible power, and
unlimited immortality. But when we hear this, our thoughts must be
raised to a higher elevation when God is mentioned; that we may not
entertain any terrestrial or carnal imaginations concerning him, that we
may not measure him by our diminutive proportions, or judge of his will
by our affections. We should likewise be encouraged to place the most
implicit reliance on him, by whose providence and power we understand
both heaven and earth to be governed. To conclude: under the name of
“Our Father” is represented to us, that God who has appeared to us in
his own image, that we might call upon him with a steady faith; and the
familiar appellation of Father is not only adapted to produce
confidence, but also efficacious to prevent our minds from being seduced
to dubious or fictitious deities, and to cause them to ascend from the
only begotten Son to the common Father of angels and of saints;
moreover, when his throne is placed in heaven, we are reminded by his
government of the world, that it is not in vain for us to approach to
him who makes us the objects of his present and voluntary care. “He that
cometh to God (says the apostle) must believe that he is, and that he is
a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.”[418] Christ asserts both
these of his Father, that we may have first a firm faith in his
existence, and then a certain persuasion that, since he deigns to extend
his providence to us, he will not neglect our salvation. By these
principles, Paul prepares us for praying in right manner; for his
exhortation, “Let your requests be made known unto God,” is thus
prefaced: “The Lord is at hand. Be careful for nothing.”[419] Whence it
appears, that their prayers must be attended with great doubt and
perplexity of mind, who are not well established in this truth, that
“the eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous.”[420]
XLI. The first petition is, THAT GOD’S NAME MAY BE HALLOWED; the
necessity of which is connected with our great disgrace. For what is
more shameful, than that the Divine glory should be obscured partly by
our ingratitude, partly by our malignity, and, as far as possible,
obliterated by our presumption, infatuation, and perverseness?
Notwithstanding all the sacrilegious rage and clamours of the impious,
yet the refulgence of holiness still adorns the Divine name. Nor does
the Psalmist without reason exclaim, “According to thy name, O God, so
is thy praise unto the ends of the earth.”[421] For wherever God may be
known, there must necessarily be a manifestation of his perfections of
power, goodness, wisdom, righteousness, mercy, and truth, which command
our admiration and excite us to celebrate his praise. Therefore, because
God is so unjustly robbed of his holiness on earth, if it is not in our
power to assert it for him, we are at least commanded to regard it in
our prayers. The substance of it is, that we wish God to receive all the
honour that he deserves, that men may never speak or think of him but
with the highest reverence; to which is opposed that profanation, which
has always been too common in the world, as it continues to be in the
present age. And hence the necessity of this petition, which, if we were
influenced by only a tolerable degree of piety, ought to be superfluous.
But if the name of God be truly hallowed, when separated from all others
it breathes pure glory, we are here commanded to pray, not only that God
will vindicate his holy name from all contempt and ignominy, but also
that he will constrain all mankind to revere it. Now, as God manifests
himself to us partly by his word, and partly by his works, he is no
otherwise hallowed by us, than if we attribute to him in both instances
that which belongs to him, and so receive whatever proceeds from him;
ascribing, moreover, equal praise to his severity and to his clemency;
since on the multiplicity and variety of his works he has impressed
characters of his glory, which should draw from every tongue a
confession of his praise. Thus will the Scripture obtain a just
authority with us, nor will any event obstruct the benedictions which
God deserves in the whole course of his government of the world. The
tendency of the petition is, further, that all impiety which sullies
this holy name, may be utterly abolished; that whatever obscures or
diminishes this hallowing, whether detraction or derision, may
disappear; and that while God restrains all sacrilege, his majesty may
shine with increasing splendour.
XLII. The second petition is, THAT THE KINGDOM OF GOD MAY COME; which,
though it contains nothing new, is yet not without reason distinguished
from the first; because, if we consider our inattention in the most
important of all concerns, it is useful for that which ought of itself
to have been most intimately known to us, to be inculcated in a variety
of words. Therefore, after we have been commanded to pray to God to
subdue, and at length utterly to destroy, every thing that sullies his
holy name, there is now added another petition, similar and almost
identically the same—That his kingdom may come. Now, though we have
already given a definition of this kingdom, I now briefly repeat, that
God reigns when men, renouncing themselves and despising the world and
the present state, submit themselves to his righteousness, so as to
aspire to the heavenly state. Thus this kingdom consists of two parts;
the one, God’s correcting by the power of his Spirit all our carnal and
depraved appetites, which oppose him in great numbers; the other, his
forming all our powers to an obedience to his commands. No others
therefore observe a proper order in this petition, but they who begin
from themselves, that is, that they may be purified from all corruptions
which disturb the tranquillity, or violate the purity, of God’s kingdom.
Now, since the Divine word resembles a royal sceptre, we are commanded
to pray that he will subdue the hearts and minds of all men to a
voluntary obedience to it. This is accomplished, when, by the secret
inspiration of his Spirit, he displays the efficacy of his word, and
causes it to obtain the honour it deserves. Afterwards, it is our duty
to descend to the impious, by whom his authority is resisted with the
perseverance of obstinacy and the fury of despair. God therefore erects
his kingdom on the humiliation of the whole world, though his methods of
humiliation are various; for he restrains the passions of some, and
breaks the unsubdued arrogance of others. It ought to be the object of
our daily wishes, that God would collect churches for himself from all
the countries of the earth, that he would enlarge their numbers, enrich
them with gifts, and establish a legitimate order among them; that, on
the contrary, he would overthrow all the enemies of the pure doctrine
and religion, that he would confound their counsels, and defeat their
attempts. Whence it appears that the desire of a daily progress is not
enjoined us in vain; because human affairs are never in such a happy
situation, as that all defilement of sin is removed, and purity can be
seen in full perfection. This perfection is deferred till the last
advent of Christ, when, the apostle says, “God will be all in all.”[422]
And so this petition ought to withdraw us from all the corruptions of
the world, which separate us from God, and prevent his kingdom from
flourishing within us; it ought likewise to inflame us with an ardent
desire of mortifying the flesh, and finally to teach us to bear the
cross; since these are the means which God chooses for the extension of
his kingdom. Nor should we be impatient that the outward man is
destroyed, provided the inward man be renewed. For this is the order of
the kingdom of God, that, when we submit to his righteousness, he makes
us partakers of his glory. This is accomplished, when, discovering his
light and truth with perpetual accession of splendour, before which the
shades and falsehoods of Satan and of his kingdom vanish and become
extinct, he by the aids of his Spirit directs his children into the path
of rectitude, and strengthens them to perseverance; but defeats the
impious conspiracies of his enemies, confounds their insidious and
fraudulent designs, disappoints their malice, and represses their
obstinacy, till at length “he” will “consume” Antichrist “with the
spirit of his mouth, and destroy” all impiety “with the brightness of
his coming.”[423]
XLIII. The third petition is, THAT THE WILL OF GOD MAY BE DONE ON EARTH
AS IT IS IN HEAVEN; which, though it is an appendage to his kingdom, and
cannot be disjoined from it, is yet not without reason separately
mentioned, on account of our ignorance, which does not apprehend with
facility what it is for God to reign in the world. There will be nothing
absurd, then, in understanding this as an explanation, that God’s
kingdom will then prevail in the world, when all shall submit to his
will. Now, we speak not here of his secret will, by which he governs all
things, and appoints them to fulfil his own purposes. For though Satan
and men oppose him with all the violence of rage, yet his
incomprehensible wisdom is able, not only to divert their impetuosity,
but to overrule it for the accomplishment of his decrees. But the Divine
will here intended, is that to which voluntary obedience corresponds;
and therefore heaven is expressly compared with the earth, because the
angels, as the Psalmist says, spontaneously “do his commandments,
hearkening unto the voice of his word.”[424] We are therefore commanded
to desire that, as in heaven nothing is done but according to the Divine
will, and the angels are placidly conformed to every thing that is
right, so the earth, all obstinacy and depravity being annihilated, may
be subject to the same government. And in praying for this, we renounce
our own carnal desires; because, unless we resign all our affections to
God, we are guilty of all the opposition in our power to his will, for
nothing proceeds from us but what is sinful. And we are likewise
habituated by this petition to a renunciation of ourselves, that God may
rule us according to his own pleasure; and not only so, but that he may
also create in us new minds and new hearts, annihilating our own, that
we may experience no emotion of desire within us, but a mere consent to
his will; in a word, that we may have no will of our own, but that our
hearts may be governed by his Spirit, by whose internal teachings we may
learn to love those things which please him, and to hate those which he
disapproves; consequently, that he may render abortive all those desires
which are repugnant to his will. These are the three first clauses of
this prayer, in praying which we ought solely to have in view the glory
of God, omitting all consideration of ourselves, and not regarding any
advantage of our own, which, though they largely contribute to it,
should not be our end in these petitions. But though all these things,
even if we never think of them, nor wish for them, nor request them,
must nevertheless happen in their appointed time, yet they ought to be
the objects of our wishes, and the subjects of our prayers. And such
petitions it will be highly proper for us to offer, that we may testify
and profess ourselves to be the servants and sons of God; manifesting
the sincerest devotedness, and making the most zealous efforts in our
power for advancing the honour which is due to him, both as a Master and
as a Father. Persons, therefore, who are not incited, by this ardent
zeal for promoting the glory of God, to pray, that his name may be
hallowed, that his kingdom may come, and that his will may be done, are
not to be numbered among his sons and servants; and as all these things
will be accomplished in opposition to their inclinations, so they will
contribute to their confusion and destruction.
XLIV. Next follows the second part of the prayer, in which we descend to
our own interests; not that we must dismiss all thoughts of the Divine
glory, (which, according to Paul,[425] should be regarded even in eating
and drinking,) and only seek what is advantageous to ourselves; but we
have already announced that this is the distinction—that God, by
exclusively claiming three petitions, absorbs us entirely in the
consideration of himself, that thus he may prove our piety; afterwards
he permits us to attend to our own interests, yet on this condition,
that the end of all our requests be the illustration of his glory, by
whatever benefits he confers on us, since nothing is more reasonable
than that we live and die to him. But the first petition of the second
part, GIVE US THIS DAY OUR DAILY BREAD, is a general request to God for
a supply of all our corporeal wants in the present state, not only for
food and clothing, but also for every thing which he sees to be
conducive to our good, that we may eat our bread in peace. By this we
briefly surrender ourselves to his care, and commit ourselves to his
providence, that he may feed, nourish, and preserve us. For our most
benevolent Father disdains not to receive even our body into his charge
and protection, that he may exercise our faith in these minute
circumstances, while we expect every thing from him, even down to a
crumb of bread and a drop of water. For since it is a strange effect of
our iniquity, to be affected and distressed with greater solicitude for
the body than for the soul, many, who venture to confide to God the
interests of their souls, are nevertheless still solicitous concerning
the body, still anxious what they shall eat and what they shall wear;
and unless they have an abundance of corn, wine, and oil, for the supply
of their future wants, tremble with fear. Of so much greater importance
to us is the shadow of this transitory life, than that eternal
immortality. But they who, confiding in God, have once cast off that
anxiety for the concerns of the body, expect likewise to receive from
him superior blessings, even salvation and eternal life. It is therefore
no trivial exercise of faith, to expect from God those things which
otherwise fill us with so much anxiety; nor is it a small proficiency
when we have divested ourselves of this infidelity, which is almost
universally interwoven with the human constitution. The speculations of
some, concerning supernatural bread, appear to me not very consonant to
the meaning of Christ; for if we did not ascribe to God the character of
our Supporter even in this transitory life, our prayer would be
defective. The reason which they allege has too much profanity; that it
is unbecoming for the children of God, who ought to be spiritual, not
only to devote their own attention to terrestrial cares, but also to
involve God in the same anxieties with themselves; as though, truly, his
benediction and paternal favour were not conspicuous even in our
sustenance; or there were no meaning in the assertion, that “godliness
hath promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to
come.”[426] Now, though remission of sins is of much greater value than
corporeal aliments, yet Christ has given the first place to the inferior
blessing, that he might gradually raise us to the two remaining
petitions, which properly pertain to the heavenly life; in which he has
consulted our dulness. We are commanded to ask “our bread,” that we may
be content with the portion which our heavenly Father deigns to allot
us, nor practise any illicit arts for the love of lucre. In the mean
time, it must be understood that it becomes ours by a title of donation;
because neither our industry, nor our labour, nor our hands, as is
observed by Moses,[427] acquire any thing for us of themselves, when
unattended by the Divine blessing; and that even an abundance of bread
would not be of the least service to us, unless it were by the Divine
power converted into nourishment. And therefore this liberality of God
is equally as necessary to the rich as to the poor; for though their
barns and cellars were full, they would faint with hunger and thirst,
unless through his goodness they enjoyed their food. The expression
“this day,” or “day by day,” as it is in the other Evangelist, and the
epithet _daily_, restrain the inordinate desire of transitory things,
with which we are often violently inflamed, and which leads to other
evils; since if we have a greater abundance, we fondly lavish it away in
pleasure, delights, ostentation, and other kinds of luxury. Therefore we
are enjoined to ask only as much as will supply our necessity, and as it
were for the present day, with this confidence, that our heavenly
Father, after having fed us to-day, will not fail us to-morrow. Whatever
affluence, then, we possess, even when our barns and cellars are full,
yet it behoves us always to ask for our daily bread; because it must be
considered as an undeniable truth, that all property is nothing, any
further than the Lord, by the effusions of his favour, blesses it with
continual improvement; and that even what we have in our possession is
not our own, any further than as he hourly bestows on us some portion of
it, and grants us the use of it. Since the pride of man does not easily
suffer itself to be convinced of this, the Lord declares that he has
given to all ages an eminent proof of it, by feeding his people with
manna in the desert, in order to apprize us “that man doth not live by
bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of his mouth;”[428]
which implies, that it is his power alone by which our life and strength
are sustained, although he communicates it to us by corporeal means; as
he is accustomed to teach us likewise by an opposite example, when he
breaks, at his pleasure, the strength (and, as he himself calls it, “the
staff”) of bread, so that though men eat they pine with hunger, and
though they drink are parched with thirst.[429] Now, they who are not
satisfied with daily bread, but whose avidity is insatiable, and whose
desires are unbounded, and they who are satiated with their abundance,
and think themselves secure amid their immense riches, and who
nevertheless supplicate the Divine Being in this petition, are guilty of
mocking him. For the former ask what they would not wish to obtain, and
even what most of all they abominate, that is, daily bread only; they
conceal from God, as much as they can, their avaricious disposition;
whereas true prayer ought to pour out before him the whole mind, and all
the inmost secrets of the soul; and the latter implore what they are far
from expecting to receive from him, what they think they have in their
own possession. In its being called “ours,” the Divine goodness is, as
we have observed, the more conspicuous, since it makes that _ours_, to
which we have no claim of right. Yet we must not reject the explanation
which I have likewise hinted at, that it intends also such as is
acquired by just and innocent labour, and not procured by acts of
deception and rapine; because, whatever we acquire by any criminal
methods, is never our own, but belongs to others. Our praying that it
may be “given” to us signifies that it is the simple and gratuitous
donation of God, from what quarter soever we receive it; even when it
most of all appears to be obtained by our own skill and industry, and to
be procured by our own hands; since it is solely the effect of his
blessing, that our labours are attended with success.
XLV. It follows—FORGIVE US OUR DEBTS; in which petition, and the next,
Christ has comprised whatever relates to the heavenly life; as in these
two parts consists the spiritual covenant which God has made for the
salvation of his Church—“I will write my law in their hearts, and will
pardon their iniquities.”[430] Here Christ begins with remission of
sins: immediately after, he subjoins a second favour—that God would
defend us by the power, and support us by the aid, of his Spirit, to
enable us to stand unconquered against all temptations. Sins he calls
debts, because we owe the penalty of them—a debt we are altogether
incapable of discharging, unless we are released by this remission,
which is a pardon flowing from his gratuitous mercy, when he freely
cancels these debts without any payment from us, being satisfied by his
own mercy in Christ, who has once given himself for our redemption.
Those, therefore, who rely on God’s being satisfied with their own
merits, or the merits of others, and persuade themselves that remission
of sins is purchased by these satisfactions, have no interest in this
gratuitous forgiveness; and while they call upon God in this form, they
are only subscribing their own accusation, and even sealing their
condemnation with their own testimony. For they confess themselves
debtors, unless they are discharged by the benefit of remission, which
nevertheless they accept not, but rather refuse, while they obtrude upon
God their own merits and satisfactions. For in this way they do not
implore his mercy, but appeal to his judgment. They who amuse themselves
with dreams of perfection, superseding the necessity of praying for
pardon, may have disciples whom itching ears lead into delusions; but it
must be clear that all whom they gain are perverted from Christ, since
he teaches all to confess their guilt, and receives none but sinners;
not that he would flatter and encourage sins, but because he knew that
believers are never wholly free from the vices of their flesh, but
always remain obnoxious to the judgment of God. It ought, indeed, to be
the object of our desires and strenuous exertions, that, having fully
discharged every part of our duty, we may truly congratulate ourselves
before God on being pure from every stain; but as it pleases God to
restore his image within us by degrees, so that some contagion always
remains in our flesh, the remedy ought never to be neglected. Now, if
Christ, by the authority given him by the Father, enjoins us, as long as
we live, to have recourse to prayer for the pardon of guilt, who will
tolerate the new teachers, who endeavour to dazzle the eyes of the
simple with a visionary phantom of perfect innocence, and fill them with
a confidence in the possibility of their being delivered from all sin?
which, according to John, is no other than making God a liar.[431] At
the same time, also, these worthless men, by obliterating one article,
mutilate, and so totally invalidate, the covenant of God, in which we
have seen our salvation is contained; being thus guilty not only of
sacrilege by separating things so united, but also of impiety and
cruelty, by overwhelming miserable souls with despair, and of treachery
to themselves and others, by contracting a habit of carelessness, in
diametrical opposition to the Divine mercy. The objection of some, that
in wishing the advent of God’s kingdom, we desire at the same time the
abolition of sin, is too puerile; because, in the first part of the
prayer, we have an exhibition of the highest perfection, but here of
infirmity. Thus these two things are perfectly consistent, that in
aspiring towards the mark we may not neglect the remedies required by
our necessity. Lastly, we pray that we may be forgiven AS WE FORGIVE OUR
DEBTORS; that is, as we forgive and pardon all who have ever injured us,
either by unjust actions or by contumelious language. Not that it is our
province to forgive the guilt of sin and transgression; this is the
prerogative of God alone: our forgiveness consists in divesting the mind
of anger, enmity, and desire of revenge, and losing the memory of
injuries by a voluntary forgetfulness. Wherefore we must not pray to God
for forgiveness of sins, unless we also forgive all the offences and
injuries of others against us, either present or past. But if we retain
any enmities in our minds, meditate acts of revenge, and seek
opportunities of annoyance, and even if we do not endeavour to obtain
reconciliation with our enemies, to oblige them by all kind offices, and
to render them our friends,—we beseech God, by this petition, not to
grant us remission of sins. For we supplicate him to grant to us what we
grant to others. This is praying him not to grant it to us, unless we
grant it also. What do persons of this description gain by their prayers
but a heavier judgment? Lastly, it must be observed, that this is not a
condition, that he would forgive us as we forgive our debtors, because
we can merit his forgiveness of us by our forgiveness of others, as
though it described the cause of his forgiveness; but, by this
expression, the Lord intended, partly to comfort the weakness of our
faith; for he has added this as a sign, that we may be as certainly
assured of remission of sins being granted us by him, as we are certain
and conscious of our granting it to others; if, at the same time, our
minds be freed and purified from all hatred, envy, and revenge; partly
by this, as a criterion, he expunges from the number of his children,
those who, hasty to revenge and difficult to forgive, maintain
inveterate enmities, and cherish in their own hearts towards others,
that indignation which they deprecate from themselves, that they may not
presume to invoke him as their Father. Which is also clearly expressed
by Luke in Christ’s own words.
XLVI. The sixth petition is, LEAD US NOT INTO TEMPTATION, BUT DELIVER US
FROM EVIL. This, as we have said, corresponds to the promise respecting
the law of God to be engraven in our hearts. But because our obedience
to God is not without continual warfare, and severe and arduous
conflicts, we here pray for arms, and assistance to enable us to gain
the victory. This suggests to us our necessity, not only of the grace of
the Spirit within us to soften, bend, and direct our hearts to obedience
to God, but also of his aid to render us invincible, in opposition to
all the stratagems and violent assaults of Satan. Now, the forms of
temptations are many and various. For the corrupt conceptions of the
mind, provoking us to transgressions of the law, whether suggested by
our own concupiscence or excited by the devil, are temptations; and
things not evil in themselves, nevertheless become temptations through
the subtlety of the devil, when they are obtruded on our eyes in such a
manner that their intervention occasions our seduction or declension
from God. And these temptations are either from prosperous, or from
adverse events. From prosperous ones, as riches, power, honours; which
generally dazzle men’s eyes by their glitter and external appearance of
goodness, and insnare them with their blandishments, that, caught with
such delusions and intoxicated with such delights, they forget their
God. From unpropitious ones, as poverty, reproaches, contempt,
afflictions, and other things of this kind; overcome with the bitterness
and difficulty of which, they fall into despondency, cast away faith and
hope, and at length become altogether alienated from God. To both these
kinds of temptations which assail us, whether kindled within us by our
concupiscence, or presented to us by the craft of Satan, we pray our
heavenly Father not to permit us to yield, but rather to sustain and
raise us up with his hand, that, strong in his might, we may be able to
stand firm against all the assaults of our malignant enemy, whatever
imaginations he may inject into our minds; and also, that whatever is
presented to us on either quarter, we may convert it to our benefit;
that is, by not being elated with prosperity or dejected with adversity.
Yet we do not here pray for an entire exemption from all temptations,
which we very much need, to excite, stimulate, and animate us, lest we
should grow torpid with too much rest. For it was not without reason
that David wished to be tempted or tried; nor is it without cause that
the Lord daily tries his elect, chastising them by ignominy, poverty,
tribulation, and the cross in various forms. But the temptations of God
are widely different from those of Satan. Satan tempts to overthrow,
condemn, confound, and destroy. But God, that, by proving his people, he
may make a trial of their sincerity, to confirm their strength by
exercising it, to mortify, purify, and refine their flesh, which,
without such restraints, would run into the greatest excesses. Besides,
Satan attacks persons unarmed and unprepared, to overwhelm the unwary.
“God, with the temptation, also makes a way to escape, that they may be
able to bear” whatever he brings upon them.[432] By the word _evil_,
whether we understand the devil or sin, is of little importance. Satan
himself, indeed, is the enemy that lies in wait for our life; but sin is
the weapon with which he seeks our destruction. Our petition therefore
is, that we may not be overwhelmed and conquered by any temptations, but
that we may stand, strong in the power of the Lord, against all adverse
powers that assault us, which is not to submit to temptations; that
being taken into his custody and charge, and being secure in his
protection, we may persevere unconquered, and rise superior to sin,
death, the gates of hell, and the whole kingdom of the devil. This is
being delivered from evil. Here it must also be carefully remarked, that
it is not in our power to contend with so powerful an enemy as the
devil, and sustain the violence of his assaults. Otherwise it would be
useless, or insulting, to supplicate from God what we already possessed
in ourselves. Certainly, they who prepare themselves for such a combat
with self-confidence, are not sufficiently aware of the skill and
prowess of the enemy that they have to meet. Now, we pray to be
delivered from his power, as from the mouth of a ravenous and raging
lion, just about to tear us with his teeth and claws, and to swallow us
down his throat, unless the Lord snatch us from the jaws of death;
knowing, at the same time, that if the Lord shall be present and fight
for us while we are silent, in his strength “we shall do
valiantly.”[433] Let others confide as they please in the native
abilities and powers of free-will, which they suppose themselves to
possess,—let it be sufficient for us, to stand and be strong in the
power of God alone. But this petition comprehends more than at first
appears. For if the Spirit of God is our strength for fighting the
battle with Satan, we shall not be able to gain the victory, till, being
full of him, we shall have laid aside all the infirmity of our flesh.
When we pray for deliverance from Satan and sin, therefore, we pray to
be frequently enriched with new accessions of Divine grace; till, being
quite filled with them, we may be able to triumph over all evil. To some
there appears a difficulty and harshness in our petition to God, that he
will not lead us into temptation, whereas, according to James, it is
contrary to his nature for him to tempt us.[434] But this objection has
already been partly answered, because our own lust is properly the cause
of all the temptations that overcome us, and therefore we are charged
with the guilt. Nor does James intend any other than to assert the
futility and injustice of transferring to God the vices which we are
constrained to impute to ourselves, because we are conscious of our
being guilty of them. But notwithstanding this, God may, when he sees
fit, deliver us to Satan, abandon us to a reprobate mind and sordid
passions, and so lead us into temptations, by a righteous yet often
secret judgment; the cause being frequently concealed from man, but, at
the same time, well known to him. Whence it is inferred, that there is
no impropriety in this mode of expression, if we are persuaded that
there is any meaning in his frequent threatenings, that he will manifest
his vengeance on the reprobate, by smiting them with blindness and
hardness of heart.
XLVII. These three petitions, in which we particularly commend to God
ourselves and all our concerns, evidently prove, what we have before
asserted, that the prayers of Christians ought to be public, and to
regard the public edification of the Church, and the advancement of the
communion of believers. For each individual does not supplicate the gift
of any favour to himself in particular; but we all in common pray for
our bread, the remission of our sins, that we may not be led into
temptation, that we may be delivered from evil. The cause is likewise
subjoined, which gives us such great boldness in asking, and confidence
of obtaining; which, though not to be found in the Latin copies, yet
appears too apposite to this place to be omitted—namely, HIS IS THE
KINGDOM, AND THE POWER, AND THE GLORY FOR EVER. This is a solid and
secure basis for our faith; for if our prayers were to be recommended to
God by our own merit, who could dare to utter a word in his presence?
Now, all miserable, unworthy, and destitute as we are of every
recommendation, yet we shall never want an argument or plea for our
prayers: our confidence can never forsake us; for our Father can never
be deprived of his kingdom, power, and glory. The whole is concluded
with AMEN; which expresses our ardent desire to obtain the blessings
supplicated of God, and confirms our hope that all these things are
already obtained, and will certainly be granted to us; because they are
promised by God, who is incapable of deception. And this agrees with
that form of petition already quoted—“Do this, O Lord, for thy name’s
sake, not for our sake, or for our righteousness;” in which the saints
not only express the end of their prayers, but acknowledge that they are
unworthy to obtain it, unless God derive the cause from himself, and
that their confidence of success arises solely from his nature.
XLVIII. Whatever we ought, or are even at liberty, to seek from God, is
stated to us in this model and directory for prayer, given by that best
of masters, Christ, whom the Father has set over us as our Teacher, and
to whom alone he has enjoined us to listen.[435] For he was always his
eternal wisdom, and being made man, was given to men as the Angel of
great counsel.[436] And this prayer is so comprehensive and complete,
that whatever addition is made of any thing extraneous or foreign, not
capable of being referred to it, is impious and unworthy of the
approbation of God. For in this summary he has prescribed what is worthy
of him, what is acceptable to him, what is necessary for us, and, in a
word, what he chooses to bestow. Wherefore those who presume to go
beyond it, and to ask of God any thing else, in the first place, are
determined to make some addition of their own to the wisdom of God,
which cannot be done without folly and blasphemy; in the next place,
despising the limits fixed by the will of God, they are led far astray
by their own irregular desires; and in the last place, they will never
obtain any thing, since they pray without faith. And there is no doubt
that all prayers of this kind are made without faith, because they are
not sanctioned by the word of God, the only basis on which faith can
stand. But they who neglect the Master’s rule, and indulge their own
desires, not only deviate from the word of God, but make all possible
opposition against it. With equal beauty and truth, therefore,
Tertullian has called this a _legitimate prayer_, tacitly implying, that
all others are irregular and unlawful.
XLIX. We would not here be understood, as if we were confined to this
form of prayer, without the liberty of changing a word or syllable. For
the Scriptures contain many prayers, expressed in words very different
from this, yet written by the same Spirit, and very profitable for our
use. Many, which have little verbal resemblance to it, are continually
suggested to believers by the same Spirit. We only mean by these
observations, that no one should even seek, expect, or ask for any thing
that is not summarily comprehended in this prayer, though there may be a
diversity of expression, without any variation of sense. As it is
certain that all the prayers contained in the Scriptures, or proceeding
from pious hearts, are referred to this, so it is impossible to find one
any where which can surpass or even equal the perfection of this. Here
is nothing omitted which ought to be recollected for the praises of God,
nothing that should occur to the mind of man for his own advantage; and
the whole is so complete, as justly to inspire universal despair of
attempting any improvement. To conclude; let us remember, that this is
the teaching of Divine wisdom, which taught what it willed, and willed
what is needful.
L. But though we have before said that we ought to be always aspiring
towards God with our minds, and praying without intermission, yet as our
weakness requires many assistances, and our indolence needs to be
stimulated, we ought every one of us, for the sake of regularity, to
appoint particular hours which should not elapse without prayer, and
which should witness all the affections of the mind entirely engaged in
this exercise; as, when we rise in the morning, before we enter on the
business of the day, when we sit down to meat, when we have been fed by
the Divine blessing, when we retire to rest. This must not be a
superstitious observance of hours, by which, as if discharging our debt
to God, we may fancy ourselves discharged from all obligation for the
remaining hours; but a discipline for our weakness, which may thus, from
time to time, be exercised and stimulated. It must especially be the
object of our solicitous care, whenever we are oppressed, or see others
oppressed, with adversity, immediately to resort to him with celerity,
not of body, but of mind; secondly, to suffer no prosperity of our own
or others to pass without testifying our acknowledgment of his hand by
praise and thanksgiving; lastly, we must carefully observe this in every
prayer, that we entertain not the thought of binding God to certain
circumstances, or prescribing to him the time, the place, or the manner
of his proceedings. As we are taught by this prayer to fix no law, to
impose no condition on him, but to leave it to his will to do what he
intends, in the manner, at the time, and in the place he pleases,
therefore, before we form a petition for ourselves, we first pray that
his will may be done; thereby submitting our will to his, that, being,
as it were, bridled and restrained, it may not presume to regulate God,
but may constitute him the arbiter and ruler of all its desires.
LI. If, with minds composed to this obedience, we suffer ourselves to be
governed by the laws of Divine Providence, we shall easily learn to
persevere in prayer, and with suspended desires to wait patiently for
the Lord; assured, though he does not discover himself, yet that he is
always near us, and in his own time will declare that his ears have not
been deaf to those prayers which, to human apprehension, seemed to be
neglected. Now, this, if God do not at any time answer our first
prayers, will be an immediate consolation, to prevent our sinking into
despair, like those who, actuated only by their own ardour, call upon
God in such a manner, that if he do not attend to their first
transports, and afford them present aid, they at once imagine him to be
displeased and angry with them, and, casting away all hope of succeeding
in their prayers, cease to call upon him. But deferring our hope with a
well-tempered equanimity, let us rather practise the perseverance so
highly recommended to us in the Scriptures. For in the Psalms we may
frequently observe how David and other faithful men, when, almost
wearied with praying, they seemed to beat the air, and God seemed deaf
to their petitions, yet did not desist from praying; because the
authority of the Divine word is not maintained, unless it be fully
credited, notwithstanding the appearance of any circumstances to the
contrary. Nor let us tempt God, and provoke him against us by wearying
him with our presumption; which is the practice of many who merely
bargain with God on a certain condition, and as though he were
subservient to their passions, bind him with laws of their own
stipulation; with which unless he immediately complies, they give way to
anger and fretfulness, to cavils, and murmurs, and rage. To such
persons, therefore, he frequently grants in his wrath what he denies in
mercy to others. This is exemplified in the children of Israel, for whom
it had been better for the Lord not to have heard them, than for them to
swallow his indignation with the meat that he sent them.[437]
LII. But if, after long waiting, our sense neither understands what
advance we have made by praying, nor experiences any advantage resulting
from it, yet our faith will assure us, what cannot be perceived by
sense, that we have obtained what was expedient for us, since the Lord
so frequently and so certainly promises to take care of our troubles
when they have been once deposited in his bosom. And thus he will cause
us to possess abundance in poverty, and consolation in affliction. For
though all things fail us, yet God will never forsake us; he cannot
disappoint the expectation and patience of his people. He will amply
compensate us for the loss of all others, for he comprehends in himself
all blessings, which he will reveal to us at the day of judgment, when
his kingdom will be fully manifested. Besides, though God grants our
prayers, he does not always answer them according to the express form of
the request; but seeming to keep us in suspense, shows by unknown means
that our prayers were not in vain. This is the meaning of these words of
John: “If we know that he heareth us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we
have the petitions that we desired of him.”[438] This seems to be a
feeble superfluity of expression, but is in reality a very useful
declaration, that God, even when he does not comply with our desires, is
nevertheless favourable and propitious to our prayers, so that a hope
depending upon his word can never disappoint us. Now, this patience is
very necessary to support believers, who would not long stand unless
they relied upon it. For the Lord proves his people with heavy trials,
and exercises them with severity; frequently driving them to various
kinds of extremities, and suffering them to remain in them a long time
before he grants them any enjoyment of his grace; and as Hannah says,
“The Lord killeth, and maketh alive; he bringeth down to the grave, and
bringeth up.”[439] In such distresses must they not inevitably faint in
their minds, and fall into despair, unless, in the midst of their
affliction and desolation, and almost death, they were revived by this
reflection, that God regards them, and that the end of their present
evils is approaching? But though they rely on the certainty of this
hope, they at the same time cease not to pray; because, without constant
perseverance in prayer, we pray to no purpose.
Footnote 262:
Rom. x. 13, 14, 17.
Footnote 263:
Rom. viii. 15, 26.
Footnote 264:
1 Kings xviii. 42, &c.
Footnote 265:
Psalm cxlv. 18.
Footnote 266:
Psalm xxxiv. 15.
Footnote 267:
Psalm xxv. 1.
Footnote 268:
Psalm lxii. 8.
Footnote 269:
Psalm cxlv. 19.
Footnote 270:
1 John v. 14.
Footnote 271:
Rom. viii. 26.
Footnote 272:
Jude 20. 1 Cor. xiv. 15.
Footnote 273:
James v. 13.
Footnote 274:
Psalm xxxii. 6.
Footnote 275:
Ephes. vi. 18.
Footnote 276:
Isaiah i. 15.
Footnote 277:
Jer. xi. 7, 8, 11.
Footnote 278:
Isaiah xxix. 13.
Footnote 279:
James iv. 3.
Footnote 280:
1 John iii. 22.
Footnote 281:
Dan. ix. 18, 19.
Footnote 282:
Dan. ix. 20.
Footnote 283:
Psalm cxliii. 2.
Footnote 284:
Isaiah lxiv. 5-9.
Footnote 285:
Jer. xiv. 7.
Footnote 286:
Baruch ii. 18.
Footnote 287:
Psalm xxv. 7, 18.
Footnote 288:
Psalm li. 5.
Footnote 289:
Matt. ix. 2.
Footnote 290:
1 John i. 9.
Footnote 291:
Psalm lxxxvi. 2.
Footnote 292:
2 Kings xx. 3.
Footnote 293:
Psalm xxxiv. 15.
Footnote 294:
1 John iii. 22.
Footnote 295:
John ix. 31.
Footnote 296:
Psalm v. 7.
Footnote 297:
Mark xi. 24.
Footnote 298:
Matt. xxi. 22.
Footnote 299:
James i. 5, 6.
Footnote 300:
James v. 15.
Footnote 301:
Rom. x. 14, 17.
Footnote 302:
Heb. iv. 16.
Footnote 303:
Ephes. iii. 12.
Footnote 304:
Psalm xxxiii. 22.
Footnote 305:
Psalm lvi. 9.
Footnote 306:
Psalm v. 3.
Footnote 307:
Ephes. vi. 16, 18.
Footnote 308:
Psalm xli. 4.
Footnote 309:
Psalm l. 15.
Footnote 310:
Matt. vii. 7.
Footnote 311:
Zech. xiii. 9.
Footnote 312:
Psalm lxv. 2.
Footnote 313:
Psalm l. 15.
Footnote 314:
2 Sam. vii. 27.
Footnote 315:
Psalm cxlv. 19.
Footnote 316:
Prov. xviii. 10.
Footnote 317:
Joel ii. 32.
Footnote 318:
Isaiah lxv. 24.
Footnote 319:
Psalm xci. 15.
Footnote 320:
Psalm cxlv. 18.
Footnote 321:
2 Sam. vii. 27, 28.
Footnote 322:
Psalm cxix. 76.
Footnote 323:
Gen. xxxii. 10, &c.
Footnote 324:
Jer. xlii. 9. Dan. ix. 18.
Footnote 325:
Jer. xlii. 2.
Footnote 326:
2 Kings xix. 4.
Footnote 327:
Psalm cxli. 2.
Footnote 328:
Judges ix. 20.
Footnote 329:
Judges xvi. 28.
Footnote 330:
Psalm cvii.
Footnote 331:
Psalm cvi. 39.
Footnote 332:
Matt. v. 45.
Footnote 333:
Gen. xviii. 23. 1 Sam. xv. 11.
Footnote 334:
Jer. xxxii. 16, &c.
Footnote 335:
Psalm vii. 6.
Footnote 336:
Psalm xxxix. 13.
Footnote 337:
Psalm li. 17.
Footnote 338:
Psalm lxxx. 4.
Footnote 339:
Lam. iii. 8.
Footnote 340:
1 Tim. ii. 5. 1 John ii. 1.
Footnote 341:
Heb. iv. 16.
Footnote 342:
John xvi. 24, 26; xiv. 13.
Footnote 343:
2 Cor. i. 20.
Footnote 344:
Exod. xxviii.
Footnote 345:
Psalm xx. 3.
Footnote 346:
John xvi. 24.
Footnote 347:
Heb. x. 20.
Footnote 348:
Ephes. vi. 18, 19. 1 Tim. ii. 1.
Footnote 349:
1 John ii. 1.
Footnote 350:
Rom. viii. 34.
Footnote 351:
1 Tim. ii. 5.
Footnote 352:
Jer. ii. 28; xi. 13.
Footnote 353:
Heb. i. 14. Psalm xci. 11; xxxiv. 7.
Footnote 354:
Ephes. iii. 10.
Footnote 355:
Jer. xv. 1.
Footnote 356:
Ezek. xiv. 14.
Footnote 357:
Acts xiii. 36.
Footnote 358:
Eccles. ix. 5, 6.
Footnote 359:
Gen. xlviii. 16.
Footnote 360:
Isaiah lxiii. 16.
Footnote 361:
Psalm xxii. 5.
Footnote 362:
James v. 17, 18.
Footnote 363:
Psalm cxlii. 7.
Footnote 364:
Psalm xxxiv. 5, 6.
Footnote 365:
Psalm xxxii. 6.
Footnote 366:
Gen. xxxii. 10.
Footnote 367:
Psalm xxxi. 5.
Footnote 368:
Psalm xliv. 20, 21.
Footnote 369:
James v. 16.
Footnote 370:
Psalm l. 15.
Footnote 371:
1 Tim. iv. 5.
Footnote 372:
Psalm xl. 3.
Footnote 373:
Isaiah xlii. 10.
Footnote 374:
Psalm li. 15.
Footnote 375:
Isaiah xxxviii. 20. Jonah ii. 9.
Footnote 376:
Psalm cxvi. 12, 13.
Footnote 377:
Psalm cvi. 47.
Footnote 378:
Psalm cii. 17, &c.
Footnote 379:
Hosea xiv. 2.
Footnote 380:
Psalm cxvi. 1.
Footnote 381:
Psalm xviii. 1.
Footnote 382:
Phil. iv. 6.
Footnote 383:
Heb. xiii. 15.
Footnote 384:
1 Thess. v. 17, 18.
Footnote 385:
1 Cor. xiv. 40.
Footnote 386:
Matt. vi. 7.
Footnote 387:
Luke xviii. 11.
Footnote 388:
Matt. vi. 6.
Footnote 389:
1 Tim. ii. 8.
Footnote 390:
Isaiah lvi. 7.
Footnote 391:
Psalm lxv. 1.
Footnote 392:
Matt. xviii. 20.
Footnote 393:
John iv. 23.
Footnote 394:
Isaiah lxvi. 1. Acts vii. 48.
Footnote 395:
Isaiah xxix. 13, 14. Matt. xv. 8, 9.
Footnote 396:
1 Cor. xiv. 15.
Footnote 397:
Col. iii. 16.
Footnote 398:
1 Cor. xiv. 16, 17.
Footnote 399:
1 Cor. xiv. 15.
Footnote 400:
1 Sam. i. 13.
Footnote 401:
Matt. vi. 9. Luke xi. 2.
Footnote 402:
Rom. viii. 26, 27.
Footnote 403:
Exod. xxxii. 32. Rom. ix. 3.
Footnote 404:
John i. 12, 14.
Footnote 405:
1 John iii. 1. Psalm xxvii. 10. Isaiah lxiii. 16.
Footnote 406:
2 Tim. ii. 13.
Footnote 407:
Matt. vii. 11.
Footnote 408:
Isaiah xlix. 15.
Footnote 409:
2 Cor. i. 3.
Footnote 410:
Luke xv. 11, &c.
Footnote 411:
Gal. iv. 6.
Footnote 412:
Matt. xxiii. 9.
Footnote 413:
Ephes. i. 23.
Footnote 414:
Gal. vi. 10.
Footnote 415:
1 Tim. ii. 8.
Footnote 416:
1 Kings viii. 27.
Footnote 417:
Isaiah lxvi. 1. Acts vii. 49; xvii. 24.
Footnote 418:
Heb. xi. 6.
Footnote 419:
Phil. iv. 5, 6.
Footnote 420:
Psalm xxxiv. 15; xxxiii. 18.
Footnote 421:
Psalm xlviii. 10.
Footnote 422:
1 Cor. xv. 28.
Footnote 423:
2 Thess. ii. 8.
Footnote 424:
Psalm ciii. 20.
Footnote 425:
1 Cor. x. 31.
Footnote 426:
1 Tim. iv. 8.
Footnote 427:
Lev. xxvi. 20.
Footnote 428:
Deut. viii. 3. Matt. iv. 4.
Footnote 429:
Lev. xxvi. 26.
Footnote 430:
Jer. xxxi. 33, 34; xxxiii. 8.
Footnote 431:
1 John i. 10.
Footnote 432:
1 Cor. x. 13.
Footnote 433:
Psalm lx. 12.
Footnote 434:
James i. 13, 14.
Footnote 435:
Matt. xvii. 5.
Footnote 436:
Isaiah xi. 2.
Footnote 437:
Num. xi. 18, 33.
Footnote 438:
1 John v. 15.
Footnote 439:
1 Sam. ii. 6.
CHAPTER XXI.
ETERNAL ELECTION, OR GOD’S PREDESTINATION OF SOME TO SALVATION, AND OF
OTHERS TO DESTRUCTION.
The covenant of life not being equally preached to all, and among those
to whom it is preached not always finding the same reception, this
diversity discovers the wonderful depth of the Divine judgment. Nor is
it to be doubted that this variety also follows, subject to the decision
of God’s eternal election. If it be evidently the result of the Divine
will, that salvation is freely offered to some, and others are prevented
from attaining it,—this immediately gives rise to important and
difficult questions, which are incapable of any other explication, than
by the establishment of pious minds in what ought to be received
concerning election and predestination—a question, in the opinion of
many, full of perplexity; for they consider nothing more unreasonable,
than that, of the common mass of mankind, some should be predestinated
to salvation, and others to destruction. But how unreasonably they
perplex themselves will afterwards appear from the sequel of our
discourse. Besides, the very obscurity which excites such dread, not
only displays the utility of this doctrine, but shows it to be
productive of the most delightful benefit. We shall never be clearly
convinced as we ought to be, that our salvation flows from the fountain
of God’s free mercy, till we are acquainted with his eternal election,
which illustrates the grace of God by this comparison, that he adopts
not all promiscuously to the hope of salvation, but gives to some what
he refuses to others. Ignorance of this principle evidently detracts
from the Divine glory, and diminishes real humility. But according to
Paul, what is so necessary to be known, never can be known, unless God,
without any regard to works, chooses those whom he has decreed. “At this
present time also, there is a remnant according to the election of
grace. And if by grace, then it is no more of works; otherwise, grace is
no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace;
otherwise, work is no more work.”[440] If we need to be recalled to the
origin of election, to prove that we obtain salvation from no other
source than the mere goodness of God, they who desire to extinguish this
principle, do all they can to obscure what ought to be magnificently and
loudly celebrated, and to pluck up humility by the roots. In ascribing
the salvation of the remnant of the people to the election of grace,
Paul clearly testifies, that it is then only known that God saves whom
he will of his mere good pleasure, and does not dispense a reward to
which there can be no claim. They who shut the gates to prevent any one
from presuming to approach and taste this doctrine, do no less injury to
man than to God; for nothing else will be sufficient to produce in us
suitable humility, or to impress us with a due sense of our great
obligations to God. Nor is there any other basis for solid confidence,
even according to the authority of Christ, who, to deliver us from all
fear, and render us invincible amidst so many dangers, snares, and
deadly conflicts, promises to preserve in safety all whom the Father has
committed to his care. Whence we infer, that they who know not
themselves to be God’s peculiar people will be tortured with continual
anxiety; and therefore, that the interest of all believers, as well as
their own, is very badly consulted by those who, blind to the three
advantages we have remarked, would wholly remove the foundation of our
salvation. And hence the Church rises to our view, which otherwise, as
Bernard justly observes, could neither be discovered nor recognized
among creatures, being in two respects wonderfully concealed in the
bosom of a blessed predestination, and in the mass of a miserable
damnation. But before I enter on the subject itself, I must address some
preliminary observations to two sorts of persons. The discussion of
predestination—a subject of itself rather intricate—is made very
perplexed, and therefore dangerous, by human curiosity, which no
barriers can restrain from wandering into forbidden labyrinths, and
soaring beyond its sphere, as if determined to leave none of the Divine
secrets unscrutinized or unexplored. As we see multitudes every where
guilty of this arrogance and presumption, and among them some who are
not censurable in other respects, it is proper to admonish them of the
bounds of their duty on this subject. First, then, let them remember
that when they inquire into predestination, they penetrate the inmost
recesses of Divine wisdom, where the careless and confident intruder
will obtain no satisfaction to his curiosity, but will enter a labyrinth
from which he will find no way to depart. For it is unreasonable that
man should scrutinize with impunity those things which the Lord has
determined to be hidden in himself; and investigate, even from eternity,
that sublimity of wisdom which God would have us to adore and not
comprehend, to promote our admiration of his glory. The secrets of his
will which he determined to reveal to us, he discovers in his word; and
these are all that he foresaw would concern us or conduce to our
advantage.
II. “We are come into the way of faith,” says Augustine; “let us
constantly pursue it. It conducts into the king’s palace, in which are
hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. For the Lord Christ
himself envied not his great and most select disciples when he said, ‘I
have many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.’ We must
walk, we must improve, we must grow, that our hearts may be able to
understand those things of which we are at present incapable. If the
last day finds us improving, we shall then learn what we never could
learn in the present state.” If we only consider that the word of the
Lord is the only way to lead us to an investigation of all that ought to
be believed concerning him, and the only light to enlighten us to behold
all that ought to be seen of him, this consideration will easily
restrain and preserve us from all presumption. For we shall know that
when we have exceeded the limits of the word, we shall get into a
devious and darksome course, in which errors, slips, and falls, will
often be inevitable. Let us, then, in the first place, bear in mind,
that to desire any other knowledge of predestination than what is
unfolded in the word of God, indicates as great folly, as a wish to walk
through unpassable roads, or to see in the dark. Nor let us be ashamed
to be ignorant of some things relative to a subject in which there is a
kind of learned ignorance. Rather let us abstain with cheerfulness from
the pursuit of that knowledge, the affectation of which is foolish,
dangerous, and even fatal. But if we are stimulated by the wantonness of
intellect, we must oppose it with a reflection calculated to repress it,
that as “it is not good to eat much honey, so for men to search their
own glory, is not glory.”[441] For there is sufficient to deter us from
that presumption, which can only precipitate us into ruin.
III. Others, desirous of remedying this evil, will have all mention of
predestination to be as it were buried; they teach men to avoid every
question concerning it as they would a precipice. Though their
moderation is to be commended, in judging that mysteries ought to be
handled with such great sobriety, yet, as they descend too low, they
have little influence on the mind of man, which refuses to submit to
unreasonable restraints. To observe, therefore, the legitimate boundary
on this side also, we must recur to the word of the Lord, which affords
a certain rule for the understanding. For the Scripture is the school of
the Holy Spirit, in which, as nothing necessary and useful to be known
is omitted, so nothing is taught which it is not beneficial to know.
Whatever, therefore, is declared in the Scripture concerning
predestination, we must be cautious not to withhold from believers, lest
we appear either to defraud them of the favor of their God, or to
reprove and censure the Holy Spirit for publishing what it would be
useful by any means to suppress. Let us, I say, permit the Christian man
to open his heart and his ears to all the discourses addressed to him by
God, only with this moderation, that as soon as the Lord closes his
sacred mouth, he shall also desist from further inquiry. This will be
the best barrier of sobriety, if in learning we not only follow the
leadings of God, but as soon as he ceases to teach, we give up our
desire of learning. Nor is the danger they dread, sufficient to divert
our attention from the oracles of God. It is a celebrated observation of
Solomon, that “it is the glory of God to conceal a thing.”[442] But, as
both piety and common sense suggest that this is not to be understood
generally of every thing, we must seek for the proper distinction, lest
we content ourselves with brutish ignorance under the pretext of modesty
and sobriety. Now, this distinction is clearly expressed in a few words
by Moses. “The secret things,” he says, “belong unto the Lord our God;
but those things which are revealed belong unto us, and to our children
for ever, that we may do all the words of this law.”[443] For we see how
he enforces on the people attention to the doctrine of the law only by
the celestial decree, because it pleased God to promulgate it; and
restrains the same people within those limits with this single reason,
that it is not lawful for mortals to intrude into the secrets of God.
IV. Profane persons, I confess, suddenly lay hold of something relating
to the subject of predestination, to furnish occasion for objections,
cavils, reproaches, and ridicule. But if we are frightened from it by
their impudence, all the principal articles of the faith must be
concealed, for there is scarcely one of them which such persons as these
leave unviolated by blasphemy. The refractory mind will discover as much
insolence, on hearing that there are three persons in the Divine
essence, as on being told, that when God created man, he foresaw what
would happen concerning him. Nor will they refrain from derision on
being informed, that little more than five thousand years have elapsed
since the creation of the world. They will ask why the power of God was
so long idle and asleep. Nothing can be advanced which they will not
endeavour to ridicule. Must we, in order to check these sacrileges, say
nothing of the Divinity of the Son and Spirit, or pass over in silence
the creation of the world? In this instance, and every other, the truth
of God is too powerful to dread the detraction of impious men; as is
strenuously maintained by Augustine, in his treatise on the Perseverance
of the Faithful. We see the false apostles, with all their defamation
and accusation of the true doctrine of Paul, could never succeed to make
him ashamed of it. Their assertion, that all this discussion is
dangerous to pious minds, because it is inconsistent with exhortations,
shakes their faith, and disturbs and discourages the heart itself, is
without any foundation. Augustine admits, that he was frequently blamed,
on these accounts, for preaching predestination too freely; but he
readily and amply refutes them. But as many and various absurdities are
crowded upon us here, we prefer reserving every one to be refuted in its
proper place. I only desire this general admission, that we should
neither scrutinize those things which the Lord has left concealed, nor
neglect those which he has openly exhibited, lest we be condemned for
excessive curiosity on the one hand, or for ingratitude on the other.
For it is judiciously remarked by Augustine, that we may safely follow
the Scripture, which proceeds as with the pace of a mother stooping to
the weakness of a child, that it may not leave our weak capacities
behind. But persons who are so cautious or timid, as to wish
predestination to be buried in silence, lest feeble minds should be
disturbed,—with what pretext, I ask, will they gloss over their
arrogance, which indirectly charges God with foolish inadvertency, as
though he foresaw not the danger which they suppose they have had the
penetration to discover. Whoever, therefore, endeavours to raise
prejudices against the doctrine of predestination, openly reproaches
God, as though something had inconsiderately escaped from him that is
pernicious to the Church.
V. Predestination, by which God adopts some to the hope of life, and
adjudges others to eternal death, no one, desirous of the credit of
piety, dares absolutely to deny. But it is involved in many cavils,
especially by those who make foreknowledge the cause of it. We maintain,
that both belong to God; but it is preposterous to represent one as
dependent on the other. When we attribute foreknowledge to God, we mean
that all things have ever been, and perpetually remain, before his eyes,
so that to his knowledge nothing is future or past, but all things are
present; and present in such a manner, that he does not merely conceive
of them from ideas formed in his mind, as things remembered by us appear
present to our minds, but really beholds and sees them as if actually
placed before him. And this foreknowledge extends to the whole world,
and to all the creatures. Predestination we call the eternal decree of
God, by which he has determined in himself, what he would have to become
of every individual of mankind. For they are not all created with a
similar destiny; but eternal life is fore-ordained for some, and eternal
damnation for others. Every man, therefore, being created for one or the
other of these ends, we say, he is predestinated either to life or to
death. This God has not only testified in particular persons, but has
given a specimen of it in the whole posterity of Abraham, which should
evidently show the future condition of every nation to depend upon his
decision. “When the Most High divided the nations, when he separated the
sons of Adam, the Lord’s portion was his people; Jacob was the lot of
his inheritance.”[444] The separation is before the eyes of all: in the
person of Abraham, as in the dry trunk of a tree, one people is
peculiarly chosen to the rejection of others: no reason for this
appears, except that Moses, to deprive their posterity of all occasion
of glorying, teaches them that their exaltation is wholly from God’s
gratuitous love. He assigns this reason for their deliverance, that “he
loved their fathers, and chose their seed after them.”[445] More fully
in another chapter: “The Lord did not set his love upon you, nor choose
you, because you were more in number than any people; but because the
Lord loved you.”[446] He frequently repeats the same admonition:
“Behold, the heaven is the Lord’s thy God, the earth also, with all that
therein is. Only the Lord had a delight in thy fathers to love them, and
he chose their seed after them.”[447] In another place, sanctification
is enjoined upon them, because they were chosen to be a peculiar
people.[448] And again, elsewhere, love is asserted to be the cause of
their protection. It is declared by the united voice of the faithful,
“He hath chosen our inheritance for us, the excellency of Jacob, whom he
loved.”[449] For the gifts conferred on them by God, they all ascribe to
gratuitous love, not only from a consciousness that these were not
obtained by any merit of theirs, but from a conviction, that the holy
patriarch himself was not endued with such excellence as to acquire the
privilege of so great an honour for himself and his posterity. And the
more effectually to demolish all pride, he reproaches them with having
deserved no favour, being “a stiff-necked and rebellious people.”[450]
The prophets also frequently reproach the Jews with the unwelcome
mention of this election, because they had shamefully departed from it.
Let them, however, now come forward, who wish to restrict the election
of God to the desert of men, or the merit of works. When they see one
nation preferred to all others,—when they hear that God had no
inducement to be more favourable to a few, and ignoble, and even
disobedient and obstinate people,—will they quarrel with him because he
has chosen to give such an example of mercy? But their obstreperous
clamours will not impede his work, nor will the reproaches they hurl
against Heaven, injure or affect his justice; they will rather recoil
upon their own heads. To this principle of the gracious covenant, the
Israelites are also recalled whenever thanks are to be rendered to God,
or their hopes are to be raised for futurity. “He hath made us, and not
we ourselves,” says the Psalmist: “we are his people, and the sheep of
his pasture.”[451] It is not without reason that the negation is added,
“not we ourselves,” that they may know that of all the benefits they
enjoy, God is not only the Author, but derived the cause from himself,
there being nothing in them deserving of such great honour. He also
enjoins them to be content with the mere good pleasure of God, in these
words: “O ye seed of Abraham his servant, ye children of Jacob his
chosen.” And after having recounted the continual benefits bestowed by
God as fruits of election, he at length concludes that he had acted with
such liberality, “because he remembered his covenant.”[452] Consistent
with this doctrine is the song of the whole Church: “Thy right hand, and
thine arm, and the light of thy countenance, gave our fathers the land,
because thou hadst a favour unto them.”[453] It must be observed that
where mention is made of the land, it is a visible symbol of the secret
separation, which comprehends adoption. David, in another place, exhorts
the people to the same gratitude: “Blessed is the nation whose God is
the Lord; and the people whom he hath chosen for his own
inheritance.”[454] Samuel animates to a good hope: “The Lord will not
forsake his people, for his great name’s sake; because it hath pleased
the Lord to make you his people.”[455] David, when his faith is
assailed, thus arms himself for the conflict: “Blessed is the man whom
thou choosest, and causest to approach unto thee; he shall dwell in thy
courts.”[456] But since the election hidden in God has been confirmed by
the first deliverance, as well as by the second and other intermediate
blessings, the word _choose_ is transferred to it in Isaiah: “The Lord
will have mercy on Jacob, and will yet choose Israel;”[457] because,
contemplating a future period, he declares that the collection of the
residue of the people, whom he had appeared to have forsaken, would be a
sign of the stable and sure election, which had likewise seemed to fail.
When he says also, in another place, “I have chosen thee, and not cast
thee away,”[458] he commends the continual course of his signal
liberality and paternal benevolence. The angel, in Zechariah, speaks
more plainly: “The Lord shall choose Jerusalem again;”[459] as though
his severe chastisement had been a rejection, or their exile had been an
interruption of election; which, nevertheless, remains inviolable,
though the tokens of it are not always visible.
VI. We must now proceed to a second degree of election, still more
restricted, or that in which the Divine grace was displayed in a more
special manner, when of the same race of Abraham God rejected some, and
by nourishing others in the Church, proved that he retained them among
his children. Ishmael at first obtained the same station as his brother
Isaac, for the spiritual covenant was equally sealed in him by the
symbol of circumcision. He is cut off; afterwards Esau; lastly, an
innumerable multitude, and almost all Israel. In Isaac the seed was
called; the same calling continued in Jacob. God exhibited a similar
example in the rejection of Saul, which is magnificently celebrated by
the Psalmist: “He refused the tabernacle of Joseph, and chose not the
tribe of Ephraim, but chose the tribe of Judah;”[460] and this the
sacred history frequently repeats, that the wonderful secret of Divine
grace may be more manifest in that change. I grant, it was by their own
crime and guilt that Ishmael, Esau, and persons of similar characters,
fell from the adoption; because the condition annexed was, that they
should faithfully keep the covenant of God, which they perfidiously
violated. Yet it was a peculiar favour of God, that he deigned to prefer
them to other nations; as it is said in the Psalms: “He hath not dealt
so with any nation; and as for his judgments, they have not known
them.”[461] But I have justly said that here are two degrees to be
remarked; for in the election of the whole nation, God has already shown
that in his mere goodness he is bound by no laws, but is perfectly free,
so that none can require of him an equal distribution of grace, the
inequality of which demonstrates it to be truly gratuitous. Therefore
Malachi aggravates the ingratitude of Israel, because, though not only
elected out of the whole race of mankind, but also separated from a
sacred family to be a peculiar people, they perfidiously and impiously
despised God their most beneficent Father. “Was not Esau Jacob’s
brother? saith the Lord: yet I loved Jacob, and I hated Esau.”[462] For
God takes it for granted, since both were sons of a holy father,
successors of the covenant, and branches from a sacred root, that the
children of Jacob were already laid under more than common obligations
by their admission to that honour; but Esau the first-born having been
rejected, and their father, though inferior by birth, having been made
the heir, he proves them guilty of double ingratitude, and complains of
their violating this twofold claim.
VII. Though it is sufficiently clear, that God, in his secret counsel,
freely chooses whom he will, and rejects others, his gratuitous election
is but half displayed till we come to particular individuals, to whom
God not only offers salvation, but assigns it in such a manner, that the
certainty of the effect is liable to no suspense or doubt. These are
included in that one seed mentioned by Paul; for though the adoption was
deposited in the hand of Abraham, yet many of his posterity being cut
off as putrid members, in order to maintain the efficacy and stability
of election, it is necessary to ascend to the head, in whom their
heavenly Father has bound his elect to each other, and united them to
himself by an indissoluble bond. Thus the adoption of the family of
Abraham displayed the favour of God, which he denied to others; but in
the members of Christ there is a conspicuous exhibition of the superior
efficacy of grace; because, being united to their head, they never fail
of salvation. Paul, therefore, justly reasons from the passage of
Malachi which I have just quoted, that where God, introducing the
covenant of eternal life, invites any people to himself, there is a
peculiar kind of election as to part of them, so that he does not
efficaciously choose all with indiscriminate grace. The declaration,
“Jacob have I loved,” respects the whole posterity of the patriarch,
whom the prophet there opposes to the descendants of Esau. Yet this is
no objection to our having in the person of one individual a specimen of
the election, which can never fail of attaining its full effect. These,
who truly belong to Christ, Paul correctly observes, are called “a
remnant;” for experience proves, that of a great multitude the most part
fall away and disappear, so that often only a small portion remains.
That the general election of a people is not always effectual and
permanent, a reason readily presents itself, because, when God covenants
with them, he does not also give them the spirit of regeneration to
enable them to persevere in the covenant to the end; but the external
call, without the internal efficacy of grace, which would be sufficient
for their preservation, is a kind of medium between the rejection of all
mankind and the election of the small number of believers. The whole
nation of Israel was called “God’s inheritance,” though many of them
were strangers; but God, having firmly covenanted to be their Father and
Redeemer, regards that gratuitous favour rather than the defection of
multitudes; by whom his truth was not violated, because his preservation
of a certain remnant to himself, made it evident that his calling was
without repentance. For God’s collection of a Church for himself, from
time to time, from the children of Abraham, rather than from the profane
nations, was in consideration of his covenant, which, being violated by
the multitude, he restricted to a few, to prevent its total failure.
Lastly, the general adoption of the seed of Abraham was a visible
representation of a greater blessing, which God conferred on a few out
of the multitude. This is the reason that Paul so carefully
distinguishes the descendants of Abraham according to the flesh, from
his spiritual children called after the example of Isaac. Not that the
mere descent from Abraham was a vain and unprofitable thing, which could
not be asserted without depreciating the covenant; but because to the
latter alone the immutable counsel of God, in which he predestinated
whom he would, was of itself effectual to salvation. But I advise my
readers to adopt no prejudice on either side, till it shall appear from
adduced passages of Scripture what sentiments ought to be entertained.
In conformity, therefore, to the clear doctrine of the Scripture, we
assert, that by an eternal and immutable counsel, God has once for all
determined, both whom he would admit to salvation, and whom he would
condemn to destruction. We affirm that this counsel, as far as concerns
the elect, is founded on his gratuitous mercy, totally irrespective of
human merit; but that to those whom he devotes to condemnation, the gate
of life is closed by a just and irreprehensible, but incomprehensible,
judgment. In the elect, we consider calling as an evidence of election,
and justification as another token of its manifestation, till they
arrive in glory, which constitutes its completion. As God seals his
elect by vocation and justification, so by excluding the reprobate from
the knowledge of his name and the sanctification of his Spirit, he
affords an indication of the judgment that awaits them. Here I shall
pass over many fictions fabricated by foolish men to overthrow
predestination. It is unnecessary to refute things which, as soon as
they are advanced, sufficiently prove their own falsehood. I shall dwell
only on those things which are subjects of controversy among the
learned, or which may occasion difficulty to simple minds, or which
impiety speciously pleads in order to stigmatize the Divine justice.
Footnote 440:
Rom. xi. 5, 6.
Footnote 441:
Prov. xxv. 27.
Footnote 442:
Prov. xxv. 2.
Footnote 443:
Deut. xxix. 29.
Footnote 444:
Deut. xxxii. 8, 9.
Footnote 445:
Deut. iv. 37.
Footnote 446:
Deut. vii. 7, 8.
Footnote 447:
Deut. x. 14, 15.
Footnote 448:
Deut. xxiii.
Footnote 449:
Psalm xlvii. 4.
Footnote 450:
Deut. ix. 6, 7.
Footnote 451:
Psalm c. 3.
Footnote 452:
Psalm cv. 6, 8.
Footnote 453:
Psalm xliv. 3.
Footnote 454:
Psalm xxxiii. 12.
Footnote 455:
1 Sam. xii. 22.
Footnote 456:
Psalm lxv. 4.
Footnote 457:
Isaiah xiv. 1.
Footnote 458:
Isaiah xli. 9.
Footnote 459:
Zech. ii. 12.
Footnote 460:
Psalm lxxviii. 67, 68.
Footnote 461:
Psalm cxlvii. 20.
Footnote 462:
Mal. i. 2, 3.
CHAPTER XXII.
TESTIMONIES OF SCRIPTURE IN CONFIRMATION OF THIS DOCTRINE.
All the positions we have advanced are controverted by many, especially
the gratuitous election of believers, which nevertheless cannot be
shaken. It is a notion commonly entertained, that God, foreseeing what
would be the respective merits of every individual, makes a
correspondent distinction between different persons; that he adopts as
his children such as he foreknows will be deserving of his grace, and
devotes to the damnation of death others, whose dispositions he sees
will be inclined to wickedness and impiety. Thus they not only obscure
election by covering it with the veil of foreknowledge, but pretend that
it originates in another cause. Nor is this commonly received notion the
opinion of the vulgar only, for it has had great advocates in all ages;
which I candidly confess, that no one may cherish a confidence of
injuring our cause by opposing us with their names. For the truth of God
on this point is too certain to be shaken, too clear to be overthrown by
the authority of men. Others, neither acquainted with the Scripture, nor
deserving of any attention, oppose the sound doctrine with extreme
presumption and intolerable effrontery. God’s sovereign election of
some, and preterition of others, they make the subject of formal
accusation against him. But if this is the known fact, what will they
gain by quarrelling with God? We teach nothing but what experience has
proved, that God has always been at liberty to bestow his grace on whom
he chooses. I will not inquire how the posterity of Abraham excelled
other nations, unless it was by that favour, the cause of which can only
be found in God. Let them answer why they are men, and not oxen or
asses: when it was in God’s power to create them dogs, he formed them
after his own image. Will they allow the brute animals to expostulate
with God respecting their condition, as though the distinction were
unjust? Their enjoyment of a privilege which they have acquired by no
merits, is certainly no more reasonable than God’s various distribution
of his favours according to the measure of his judgment. If they make a
transition to persons where the inequality is more offensive to them,
the example of Christ at least ought to deter them from carelessly
prating concerning this sublime mystery. A mortal man is conceived of
the seed of David: to the merit of what virtues will they ascribe his
being made, even in the womb, the Head of angels, the only begotten Son
of God, the Image and Glory of the Father, the Light, Righteousness, and
Salvation of the world? It is judiciously remarked by Augustine, that
there is the brightest example of gratuitous election in the Head of the
Church himself, that it may not perplex us in the members; that he did
not become the Son of God by leading a righteous life, but was
gratuitously invested with this high honour, that he might afterwards
render others partakers of the gifts bestowed upon him. If any one
inquire, why others are not all that he was, or why we are all at such a
vast distance from him,—why we are all corrupt, and he purity itself,—he
will betray both folly and impudence. But if they persist in the wish to
deprive God of the uncontrollable right of choosing and rejecting, let
them also take away what is given to Christ. Now, it is of importance to
attend to what the Scripture declares respecting every individual.
Paul’s assertion, that we were “chosen in Christ before the foundation
of the world,”[463] certainly precludes any consideration of merit in
us; for it is as though he had said, our heavenly Father, finding
nothing worthy of his choice in all the posterity of Adam, turned his
views towards his Christ, to choose members from his body whom he would
admit to the fellowship of life. Let believers, then, be satisfied with
this reason, that we were adopted in Christ to the heavenly inheritance,
because in ourselves we were incapable of such high dignity. He has a
similar remark in another place, where he exhorts the Colossians to
“give thanks unto the Father, who had made them meet to be partakers of
the inheritance of the saints.”[464] If election precedes this grace of
God, which makes us meet to obtain the glory of the life to come, what
will God find in us to induce him to elect us? Another passage from this
apostle will still more clearly express my meaning. “He hath chosen us,”
he says, “before the foundation of the world, according to the good
pleasure of his will, that we should be holy, and without blame before
him;”[465] where he opposes the good pleasure of God to all our merits
whatsoever.
II. To render the proof more complete, it will be useful to notice all
the clauses of that passage, which, taken in connection, leave no room
for doubt. By the appellation of the _elect_, or _chosen_, he certainly
designates believers, as he soon after declares: wherefore it is
corrupting the term by a shameful fiction to restrict it to the age in
which the gospel was published. By saying that they were elected before
the creation of the world, he precludes every consideration of merit.
For what could be the reason for discrimination between those who yet
had no existence, and whose condition was afterward to be the same in
Adam? Now, if they are chosen in Christ, it follows, not only that each
individual is chosen out of himself, but also that some are separated
from others; for it is evident, that all are not members of Christ. The
next clause, stating them to have been “chosen that they might be holy,”
fully refutes the error which derives election from foreknowledge; since
Paul, on the contrary, declares that all the virtue discovered in men is
the effect of election. If any inquiry be made after a superior cause,
Paul replies, that God thus “predestinated,” and that it was “according
to the good pleasure of his will.” This overturns any means of election
which men imagine in themselves; for all the benefits conferred by God
for the spiritual life, he represents as flowing from this one source,
that God elected whom he would, and, before they were born, laid up in
reserve for them the grace with which he determined to favor them.
III. Wherever this decree of God reigns, there can be no consideration
of any works. The antithesis, indeed, is not pursued here; but it must
be understood, as it is amplified by the same writer in another place:
“Who hath called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but
according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ
Jesus, before the world began.”[466] And we have already shown that the
following clause, “that we should be holy,” removes every difficulty.
For say, Because he foresaw they would be holy, therefore he chose them,
and you will invert the order of Paul. We may safely infer, then, If he
chose us that we should be holy, his foresight of our future holiness
was not the cause of his choice. For these two propositions, That the
holiness of believers is the fruit of election, and, That they attain it
by means of works, are incompatible with each other. Nor is there any
force in the cavil to which they frequently resort, that the grace of
election was not God’s reward of antecedent works, but his gift to
future ones. For when it is said, that believers were elected that they
should be holy, it is fully implied, that the holiness they were in
future to possess had its origin in election. And what consistency would
there be in asserting, that things derived from election were the causes
of election? A subsequent clause seems further to confirm what he had
said—“according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in
himself.”[467] For the assertion, that God purposed in himself, is
equivalent to saying, that he considered nothing out of himself, with
any view to influence his determination. Therefore he immediately
subjoins, that the great and only object of our election is, “that we
should be to the praise of” Divine “grace.” Certainly the grace of God
deserves not the sole praise of our election, unless this election be
gratuitous. Now, it could not be gratuitous, if, in choosing his people,
God himself considered what would be the nature of their respective
works. The declaration of Christ to his disciples, therefore, is
universally applicable to all believers: “Ye have not chosen me, but I
have chosen you;”[468] which not only excludes past merits, but
signifies that they had nothing in themselves to cause their election,
independently of his preventing mercy. This also is the meaning of that
passage of Paul, “Who hath first given to him, and it shall be
recompensed unto him again?”[469] For his design is to show, that God’s
goodness altogether anticipates men, finding nothing in them, either
past or future, to conciliate his favour towards them.
IV. In the Epistle to the Romans, where he goes to the bottom of this
argument, and pursues it more at length, he says, “They are not all
Israel which are” born “of Israel;”[470] because though all were blessed
by hereditary right, yet the succession did not pass to all alike. This
controversy originated in the pride and vain-glorying of the Jewish
people, who, claiming for themselves the title of the Church, would make
the faith of the gospel to depend on their decision; just as, in the
present day, the Papists with this false pretext would substitute
themselves in the place of God. Paul, though he admits the posterity of
Abraham to be holy in consequence of the covenant, yet contends that
most of them are strangers to it; and that not only because they
degenerate, from legitimate children becoming spurious ones, but because
the preëminence and sovereignty belong to God’s special election, which
is the sole foundation of the validity of their adoption. If some were
established in the hope of salvation by their own piety, and the
rejection of others were owing wholly to their own defection, Paul’s
reference of his readers to the secret election would indeed be weak and
absurd. Now, if the will of God, of which no cause appears or must be
sought out of himself, discriminates some from others, so that the
children of Israel are not all true Israelites, it is in vain pretended
that the condition of every individual originates with himself. He
pursues the subject further under the example of Jacob and Esau; for
being both children of Abraham, and both enclosed in their mother’s
womb, the transfer of the honour of primogeniture to Jacob was by a
preternatural change, which Paul, however, contends indicated the
election of the one and the reprobation of the other. The origin and the
cause are inquired, which the champions of foreknowledge maintain to be
exhibited in the virtues and the vices of men. For this is their short
and easy doctrine—That God has showed in the person of Jacob, that he
elects such as are worthy of his grace; and in the person of Esau, that
he rejects those whom he foresees to be unworthy. This, indeed, they
assert with confidence; but what is the testimony of Paul? “The children
being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the
purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of
him that calleth, it was said, The elder shall serve the younger; as it
is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.”[471] If this
distinction between the brothers was influenced by foreknowledge, the
mention of the time must certainly be unnecessary. On the supposition
that Jacob was elected, because that honour was acquired by his future
virtues, to what purpose could Paul remark that he was not yet born? It
would not have been so proper to add, that he had not yet done any good;
for it will be immediately replied, that nothing is concealed from God,
and therefore the piety of Jacob must have been present before him. If
grace be the reward of works, they ought to have had their just value
attributed to them before Jacob was born, as much as if he were already
grown to maturity. But the apostle proceeds in unravelling the
difficulty, and teaches that the adoption of Jacob flowed not from
works, but from the calling of God. In speaking of works, he introduces
no time, future or past, but positively opposes them to the calling of
God, intending the establishment of the one, and the absolute subversion
of the other; as though he had said, We must consider the good pleasure
of God, and not the productions of men. Lastly, the very terms,
_election_ and _purpose_, certainly exclude from this subject all the
causes frequently invented by men, independently of God’s secret
counsel.
V. Now, what pretexts will be urged to obscure these arguments, by those
who attribute to works, either past or future, any influence on
election? For this is nothing but an evasion of the apostle’s argument,
that the distinction between the two brothers depends not on any
consideration of works, but on the mere calling of God, because it was
fixed between them when they were not yet born. Nor would their subtilty
have escaped him, if there had been any solidity in it; but well knowing
the impossibility of God’s foreseeing any good in man, except what he
had first determined to bestow by the benefit of his election, he
resorts not to the preposterous order of placing good works before their
cause. We have the apostle’s authority that the salvation of believers
is founded solely on the decision of Divine election, and that that
favour is not procured by works, but proceeds from gratuitous calling.
We have also a lively exhibition of this truth in a particular example.
Jacob and Esau are brothers, begotten of the same parents, still
enclosed in the same womb, not yet brought forth into light; there is in
all respects a perfect equality between them; yet the judgment of God
concerning them is different. For he takes one, and rejects the other.
The primogeniture was the only thing that gave one a right of priority
to the other. But that also is passed by, and on the younger is bestowed
what is refused to the elder. In other instances, also, God appears
always to have treated primogeniture with designed and decided contempt,
to cut off from the flesh all occasion of boasting. He rejects Ishmael,
and favours Isaac. He degrades Manasseh, and honours Ephraim.
VI. If it be objected, that from these inferior and inconsiderable
benefits, it must not be concluded respecting the life to come, that he
who has been raised to the honour of primogeniture is therefore to be
considered as adopted to the inheritance of heaven,—for there are many
who spare not Paul, as though in his citation of Scripture testimonies
he had perverted them from their genuine meaning,—I answer as before,
that the apostle has neither erred through inadvertency, nor wilfully
perverted testimonies of Scripture. But he saw, what they cannot bear to
consider, that God intended by an earthly symbol to declare the
spiritual election of Jacob, which otherwise lay concealed behind his
inaccessible tribunal. For unless the primogeniture granted him had
reference to the future world, it was a vain and ridiculous kind of
blessing, which produced him nothing but various afflictions and
adversities, grievous exile, numerous cares, and bitter sorrows.
Discerning, beyond all doubt, that God’s external blessing was an
indication of the spiritual and permanent blessing he had prepared for
his servant in his kingdom, Paul hesitated not to argue from the former
in proof of the latter. It must also be remembered, that to the land of
Canaan was annexed the pledge of the celestial residence; so that it
ought not to be doubted that Jacob was ingrafted with angels into the
body of Christ, that he might be a partaker of the same life. While Esau
is rejected, therefore, Jacob is elected, and distinguished from him by
God’s predestination, without any difference of merit. If you inquire
the cause, the apostle assigns the following: “For he saith to Moses, I
will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on
whom I will have compassion.”[472] And what is this but a plain
declaration of the Lord, that he finds no cause in men to induce him to
show favour to them, but derives it solely from his own mercy; and
therefore that the salvation of his people is his work? When God fixes
your salvation in himself alone, why will you descend into yourself?
When he assigns you his mere mercy, why will you have recourse to your
own merits? When he confines all your attention to his mercy, why will
you divert part of it to the contemplation of your own works? We must
therefore come to that more select people, whom Paul in another place
tells us “God foreknew,”[473] not using this word, according to the
fancy of our opponents, to signify a prospect, from a place of idle
observation, of things which he has no part in transacting, but in the
sense in which it is frequently used. For certainly, when Peter says
that Christ was “delivered” to death “by the determinate counsel and
foreknowledge of God,”[474] he introduces God not as a mere spectator,
but as the Author of our salvation. So the same apostle, by calling
believers, to whom he writes, “elect according to the foreknowledge of
God,”[475] properly expresses that secret predestination by which God
has marked out whom he would as his children. And the word _purpose_,
which is added as a synonymous term, and in common speech is always
expressive of fixed determination, undoubtedly implies that God, as the
Author of our salvation, does not go out of himself. In this sense
Christ is called, in the same chapter, the “Lamb foreknown before the
foundation of the world.” For what can be more absurd or uninteresting,
than God’s looking from on high to see from what quarter salvation would
come to mankind? The people, therefore, whom Paul describes as
“foreknown,”[476] are no other than a small number scattered among the
multitude, who falsely pretend to be the people of God. In another place
also, to repress the boasting of hypocrites assuming before the world
the preëminence among the godly, Paul declares, “The Lord knoweth them
that are his.”[477] Lastly, by this expression Paul designates two
classes of people, one consisting of the whole race of Abraham, the
other separated from it, reserved under the eyes of God, and concealed
from the view of men. And this, without doubt, he gathered from Moses,
who asserts that God will be merciful to whom he will be merciful;
though he is speaking of the chosen people, whose condition was, to
outward appearance, all alike; as though he had said, that the common
adoption includes in it peculiar grace towards some, who resemble a more
sacred treasure; that the common covenant prevents not this small number
being exempted from the common lot; and that, determined to represent
himself as the uncontrolled dispenser and arbiter in this affair, he
positively denies that he will have mercy on one rather than another,
from any other motive than his own pleasure; because, when mercy meets a
person who seeks it, though he suffers no repulse, yet he either
anticipates or in some degree obtains for himself that favour, of which
God claims to himself all the praise.
VII. Now, let the supreme Master and Judge decide the whole matter.
Beholding in his hearers such extreme obduracy, that his discourses were
scattered among the multitude almost without any effect, to obviate this
offence, he exclaims, “All that the Father giveth me, shall come to me.
And this is the Father’s will, that of all which he hath given me, I
should lose nothing.”[478] Observe, the origin is from the donation of
the Father, that we are given into the custody and protection of Christ.
Here, perhaps, some one may argue in a circle, and object, that none are
considered as the Father’s peculiar people, but those whose surrender
has been voluntary, arising from faith. But Christ only insists on this
point—that notwithstanding the defections of vast multitudes, shaking
the whole world, yet the counsel of God will be stable and firmer than
the heavens, so that election can never fail. They are said to have been
the elect of the Father, before he gave them to his only begotten Son.
Is it inquired whether this was by nature? No, he draws those who were
strangers, and so makes them his children. The language of Christ is too
clear to be perplexed by the quibbles of sophistry: “No man can come to
me, except the Father draw him. Every man that hath heard and learned of
the Father, cometh unto me.”[479] If all men promiscuously submitted to
Christ, election would be common: now, the fewness of believers
discovers a manifest distinction. Having asserted his disciples
therefore, who were given to him, to be the peculiar portion of the
Father, Christ a little after adds, “I pray not for the world, but for
them which thou hast given me, for they are thine;”[480] which shows
that the whole world does not belong to its Creator; only that grace
delivers from the curse and wrath of God, and from eternal death, a few,
who would otherwise perish, but leaves the world in its destruction, to
which it has been destined. At the same time, though Christ introduces
himself in his mediatorial capacity, yet he claims to himself the right
of election, in common with the Father. “I speak not of all,” he says;
“I know whom I have chosen.”[481] If it be inquired whence he chose
them, he elsewhere answers, “out of the world,”[482] which he excludes
from his prayers, when he commends his disciples to the Father. It must
be admitted, that when Christ asserts his knowledge of whom he has
chosen, it refers to a particular class of mankind, and that they are
distinguished, not by the nature of their virtues, but by the decree of
Heaven. Whence it follows, that none attain any excellence by their own
ability or industry, since Christ represents himself as the author of
election. His enumeration of Judas among the elect, though he was a
devil, only refers to the apostolical office, which, though an
illustrious instance of the Divine favour, as Paul so frequently
acknowledges in his own person, yet does not include the hope of eternal
salvation. Judas, therefore, in his unfaithful exercise of the
apostleship, might be worse than a devil; but of those whom Christ has
once united to his body, he will never suffer one to perish; for in
securing their salvation, he will perform what he has promised, by
exerting the power of God, who is greater than all. What he says in
another place, “Those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them
is lost, but the son of perdition,” is a mode of expression, called
_catachresis_, but the sense is sufficiently plain. The conclusion is,
that God creates whom he chooses to be his children by gratuitous
adoption; that the cause of this is wholly in himself; because he
exclusively regards his own secret determination.
VIII. But, it will be said, Ambrose, Origen, and Jerome believed that
God dispenses his grace among men, according to his foreknowledge of the
good use which every individual will make of it. Augustine also was once
of the same sentiment; but when he had made a greater proficiency in
scriptural knowledge, he not only retracted, but powerfully confuted it.
And after his retractation, rebuking the Pelagians for persisting in
this error, he says, “Who but must wonder that this most ingenious sense
should escape the apostle? For after proposing what was calculated to
excite astonishment respecting those children yet unborn, he started to
himself, by way of objection, the following question: What, then, is
there unrighteousness with God? It was the place for him to answer, that
God foresaw the merits of each of them; yet he says nothing of this, but
resorts to the decrees and mercy of God.” And in another place, after
having discarded all merits antecedent to election, he says, “Here
undoubtedly falls to the ground the vain reasoning of those who defend
the foreknowledge of God in opposition to his grace, and affirm that we
were elected before the foundation of the world, because God foreknew
that we would be good, not that he himself would make us good. This is
not the language of him who says, ‘Ye have not chosen me, but I have
chosen you.’[483] For if he elected us because he foreknew our future
good, he must also have foreknown our choice of him;” and more to the
like purpose. This testimony should have weight with those who readily
acquiesce in the authority of the fathers. Though Augustine will not
allow himself to be disunited from the rest, but shows by clear
testimonies the falsehood of that discordance, with the odium of which
he was loaded by the Pelagians, he makes the following quotations from
Ambrose’s book on predestination: “Whom Christ has mercy on, him he
calls. Those who were indevout he could, if he would, have made devout.
But God calls whom he pleases, and makes whom he will religious.” If I
were inclined to compile a whole volume from Augustine, I could easily
show my readers, that I need no words but his; but I am unwilling to
burden them with prolixity. But come, let us suppose them to be silent;
let us attend to the subject itself. A difficult question was
raised—Whether it was a just procedure in God to favour with his grace
certain particular persons. This Paul could have decided by a single
word, if he had pleaded the consideration of works. Why, then, does he
not do this, but rather continue his discourse involved in the same
difficulty? Why, but from necessity? for the Holy Spirit, who spoke by
his mouth, never laboured under the malady of forgetfulness. Without any
evasion or circumlocution, therefore, he answers, that God favours his
elect because he will, and has mercy because he will. For this oracle,
“I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on
whom I will show mercy,”[484] is equivalent to a declaration, that God
is excited to mercy by no other motive than his own will to be merciful.
The observation of Augustine therefore remains true, “that the grace of
God does not find men fit to be elected, but makes them so.”
IX. We shall not dwell upon the sophistry of Thomas Aquinas, “that the
foreknowledge of merits is not the cause of predestination in regard to
the act of him who predestinates; but that with regard to us, it may in
some sense be so called, according to the particular consideration of
predestination; as when God is said to predestinate glory for man
according to merits, because he decreed to give him grace by which glory
is merited.” For since the Lord allows us to contemplate nothing in
election but his mere goodness, the desire of any one to see any thing
more is a preposterous disposition. But if we were inclined to a
contention of subtilty, we should be at no loss to refute this petty
sophism of Aquinas. He contends that glory is in a certain sense
predestinated for the elect according to their merits, because God
predestinates to them the grace by which glory is merited. What if I, on
the contrary, reply, that predestination to grace is subordinate to
election to life, and attendant upon it? that grace is predestinated to
those to whom the possession of glory has been already assigned; because
it pleases the Lord to conduct his children from election to
justification? For hence it will follow, that predestination to glory is
rather the cause of predestination to grace, than the contrary. But let
us dismiss these controversies; they are unnecessary with those who
think they have wisdom enough in the word of God. For it was truly
remarked by an ancient ecclesiastical writer, That they who ascribe
God’s election to merits, are wiser than they ought to be.
X. It is objected by some, that God will be inconsistent with himself,
if he invites all men universally to come to him, and receives only a
few elect. Thus, according to them, the universality of the promises
destroys the discrimination of special grace; and this is the language
of some moderate men, not so much for the sake of suppressing the truth,
as to exclude thorny questions, and restrain the curiosity of many. The
end is laudable, but the means cannot be approved; for disingenuous
evasion can never be excused; but with those who use insult and
invective, it is a foul cavil or a shameful error. How the Scripture
reconciles these two facts, that by external preaching all are called to
repentance and faith, and yet that the spirit of repentance and faith is
not given to all, I have elsewhere stated, and shall soon have occasion
partly to repeat. What they assume, I deny, as being false in two
respects. For he who threatens drought to one city while it rains upon
another, and who denounces to another place a famine of doctrine,[485]
lays himself under no positive obligation to call all men alike. And he
who, forbidding Paul to preach the word in Asia, and suffering him not
to go into Bithynia, calls him into Macedonia,[486] demonstrates his
right to distribute this treasure to whom he pleases. In Isaiah, he
still more fully declares his destination of the promises of salvation
exclusively for the elect; for of them only, and not indiscriminately of
all mankind, he declares that they shall be his disciples.[487] Whence
it appears, that when the doctrine of salvation is offered to all for
their effectual benefit, it is a corrupt prostitution of that which is
declared to be reserved particularly for the children of the church. At
present let this suffice, that though the voice of the gospel addresses
all men generally, yet the gift of faith is bestowed on few. Isaiah
assigns the cause, that “the arm of the Lord” is not “revealed” to
all.[488] If he had said, that the gospel is wickedly and perversely
despised, because many obstinately refuse to hear it, perhaps there
would be some colour for this notion of the universal call. The design
of the prophet is not to extenuate the guilt of men, when he states that
the source of blindness is God’s not deigning to reveal his arm to them;
he only suggests that their ears are in vain assailed with external
doctrine, because faith is a peculiar gift. I would wish to be informed
by these teachers, whether men become children of God by mere preaching,
or by faith. Surely, when John declares that all who believe in God’s
only begotten Son, are themselves made the children of God,[489] this is
not said of all the hearers of the word in a confused mass, but a
particular rank is assigned to believers, “which were born, not of
blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of
God.”[490] But they say, there is a mutual agreement between faith and
the word. This is the case wherever there is any faith; but it is no new
thing for the seed to fall among thorns or in stony places; not only
because most men are evidently in actual rebellion against God, but
because they are not all endued with eyes and ears. Where, then, will be
the consistency of God’s calling to himself such as he knows will never
come? Let Augustine answer for me: “Do you wish to dispute with me?
Rather unite with me in admiration, and exclaim, O the depth! Let us
both agree in fear, lest we perish in error.” Besides, if election is,
as Paul represents it, the parent of faith, I retort that argument upon
them, that faith cannot be general, because election is special. For
from the connection of causes and effects, it is easily inferred, when
Paul says, “God hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings, according
as he hath chosen us before the foundation of the world;” that therefore
these treasures are not common to all, because God has chosen only such
as he pleased. This is the reason why, in another place, he commends
“the faith of God’s elect;”[491] that none may be supposed to acquire
faith by any exertion of their own, but that God may retain the glory of
freely illuminating the objects of his previous election. For Bernard
justly observes, “Friends hear each one for himself when he addresses
them, ‘Fear not, little flock, for to you it is given to know the
mystery of the kingdom of heaven.’ Who are these? Certainly those whom
he has foreknown and predestinated to be conformed to the image of his
Son. The great and secret counsel has been revealed. The Lord knows who
are his, but what was known to God is manifested to men. Nor does he
favour any others with the participation of so great a mystery, but
those particular individuals whom he foreknew, and predestinated to be
his own.” A little after he concludes, “The mercy of God is from
everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him; from everlasting in
predestination, to everlasting in beatification; the one knowing no
beginning; the other, no end.” But what necessity is there for citing
the testimony of Bernard, since we hear from the Master’s own mouth,
that “no man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God,”[492] which
implies, that all who are not regenerated by God, are stupefied with the
splendour of his countenance. Faith, indeed, is properly connected with
election, provided it occupies the second place. This order is clearly
expressed in these words of Christ: “This is the Father’s will, that of
all which he hath given me, I should lose nothing. And this is the will
of him that sent me, that every one which believeth on the Son, may have
everlasting life.”[493] If he willed the salvation of all, he would give
them all into the custody of his Son, and unite them all to his body by
the sacred bond of faith. Now, it is evident, that faith is the peculiar
pledge of his paternal love, reserved for his adopted children.
Therefore Christ says in another place, “The sheep follow the shepherd,
for they know his voice; and a stranger will they not follow, for they
know not the voice of strangers.”[494] Whence arises this difference,
but because their ears are divinely penetrated? For no man makes himself
a sheep, but is created such by heavenly grace. Hence also the Lord
proves the perpetual certainty and security of our salvation, because it
is kept by the invincible power of God.[495] Therefore he concludes that
unbelievers are not his sheep, because they are not of the number of
those whom God by Isaiah promised to him for his future disciples.[496]
Moreover, the testimonies I have cited, being expressive of
perseverance, are so many declarations of the invariable perpetuity of
election.
XI. Now, with respect to the reprobate, whom the apostle introduces in
the same place; as Jacob, without any merit yet acquired by good works,
is made an object of grace, so Esau, while yet unpolluted by any crime,
is accounted an object of hatred.[497] If we turn our attention to
works, we insult the apostle, as though he saw not that which is clear
to us. Now, that he saw none, is evident, because he expressly asserts
the one to have been elected and the other rejected while they had not
done any good or evil; in order to prove the foundation of Divine
predestination not to be in works.[498] Secondly, when he raises the
objection whether God is unjust, he never urges, what would have been
the most absolute and obvious defence of his justice, that God rewarded
Esau according to his wickedness; but contents himself with a different
solution, that the reprobate are raised up for this purpose, that the
glory of God may be displayed by their means. Lastly, he subjoins a
concluding observation, that “God hath mercy on whom he will have mercy,
and whom he will he hardeneth.”[499] You see how he attributes both to
the mere will of God. If, therefore, we can assign no reason why he
grants mercy to his people but because such is his pleasure, neither
shall we find any other cause but his will for the reprobation of
others. For when God is said to harden or show mercy to whom he pleases,
men are taught by this declaration to seek no cause beside his will.
Footnote 463:
Ephes. i. 4.
Footnote 464:
Col. i. 12.
Footnote 465:
Ephes. i. 4, 5.
Footnote 466:
2 Tim. i. 9.
Footnote 467:
Ephes. i. 9.
Footnote 468:
John xv. 16.
Footnote 469:
Rom. xi. 35.
Footnote 470:
Rom. ix. 6.
Footnote 471:
Rom. ix. 11-13.
Footnote 472:
Rom. ix. 15.
Footnote 473:
Rom. xi. 2.
Footnote 474:
Acts ii. 23.
Footnote 475:
1 Pet. i. 2.
Footnote 476:
Rom. xi. 2.
Footnote 477:
2 Tim. ii. 19.
Footnote 478:
John vi. 37, 39.
Footnote 479:
John vi. 44, 45.
Footnote 480:
John xvii. 9.
Footnote 481:
John xiii. 18.
Footnote 482:
John xv. 19.
Footnote 483:
John xv. 16.
Footnote 484:
Exod. xxxiii. 19.
Footnote 485:
Amos iv. 7; viii. 11.
Footnote 486:
Acts xvi. 6-10.
Footnote 487:
Isaiah viii. 16, &c.
Footnote 488:
Isaiah liii. 1.
Footnote 489:
John i. 12.
Footnote 490:
John i. 13.
Footnote 491:
Titus i. 1.
Footnote 492:
John vi. 46.
Footnote 493:
John vi. 39, 40.
Footnote 494:
John x. 4, 5.
Footnote 495:
John x. 29.
Footnote 496:
John x. 26.
Footnote 497:
Rom. ix. 13.
Footnote 498:
Rom. ix. 11.
Footnote 499:
Rom. ix. 18.
CHAPTER XXIII.
A REFUTATION OF THE CALUMNIES GENERALLY, BUT UNJUSTLY, URGED AGAINST
THIS DOCTRINE.
When the human mind hears these things, its petulance breaks all
restraint, and it discovers as serious and violent agitation as if
alarmed by the sound of a martial trumpet. Many, indeed, as if they
wished to avert odium from God, admit election in such a way as to deny
that any one is reprobated. But this is puerile and absurd, because
election itself could not exist without being opposed to reprobation.
God is said to separate those whom he adopts to salvation. To say that
others obtain by chance, or acquire by their own efforts, that which
election alone confers on a few, will be worse than absurd. Whom God
passes by, therefore, he reprobates, and from no other cause than his
determination to exclude them from the inheritance which he predestines
for his children. And the petulance of men is intolerable, if it refuses
to be restrained by the word of God, which treats of his
incomprehensible counsel, adored by angels themselves. But now we have
heard that hardening proceeds from the Divine power and will, as much as
mercy. Unlike the persons I have mentioned, Paul never strives to excuse
God by false allegations; he only declares that it is unlawful for a
thing formed to quarrel with its maker.[500] Now, how will those, who
admit not that any are reprobated by God, evade this declaration of
Christ: “Every plant which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be
rooted up?”[501] Upon all whom our heavenly Father has not deigned to
plant as sacred trees in his garden, they hear destruction plainly
denounced. If they deny this to be a sign of reprobation, there is
nothing so clear as to be capable of proof to such persons. But if they
cease not their clamour, let the sobriety of faith be satisfied with
this admonition of Paul, that there is no cause for quarrelling with
God, if, on the one hand, willing to show his wrath, and to make his
power known, he endures, “with much long-suffering, the vessels of wrath
fitted to destruction;” and on the other, makes “known the riches of his
glory on the vessels of mercy, whom he had afore prepared unto
glory.”[502] Let the reader observe that, to preclude every pretext for
murmurs and censures, Paul ascribes supreme dominion to the wrath and
power of God; because it is unreasonable for those deep judgments, which
absorb all our faculties, to be called in question by us. It is a
frivolous reply of our adversaries, that God does not wholly reject the
objects of his long-suffering, but remains in suspense towards them,
awaiting the possibility of their repentance; as though Paul attributed
patience to God, in expectation of the conversion of those whom he
asserts to be fitted to destruction. For Augustine, in expounding this
passage, where power is connected with patience, justly observes, that
God’s power is not permissive, but influential. They observe, also, that
it is not said without meaning, that the vessels of wrath are fitted to
destruction, but that God prepared the vessels of mercy; since by this
mode of expression, he ascribes and challenges to God the praise of
salvation, and throws the blame of perdition upon those who by their
choice procure it to themselves. But though I concede to them, that Paul
softens the asperity of the former clause by the difference of
phraseology, yet it is not at all consistent to transfer the preparation
for destruction to any other than the secret counsel of God; which is
also asserted just before in the context, that “God raised up Pharaoh,
and whom he will he hardeneth.” Whence it follows, that the cause of
hardening is the secret counsel of God. This, however, I maintain, which
is observed by Augustine that when God turns wolves into sheep, he
renovates them by more powerful grace to conquer their obduracy; and
therefore the obstinate are not converted, because God exerts not that
mightier grace, of which he is not destitute, if he chose to display it.
II. These things will amply suffice for persons of piety and modesty,
who remember that they are men. But as these virulent adversaries are
not content with one species of opposition, we will reply to them all as
occasion shall require. Foolish mortals enter into many contentions with
God, as though they could arraign him to plead to their accusations. In
the first place they inquire, by what right the Lord is angry with his
creatures who had not provoked him by any previous offence; for that to
devote to destruction whom he pleases, is more like the caprice of a
tyrant than the lawful sentence of a judge; that men have reason,
therefore, to expostulate with God, if they are predestinated to eternal
death without any demerit of their own, merely by his sovereign will. If
such thoughts ever enter the minds of pious men, they will be
sufficiently enabled to break their violence by this one consideration,
how exceedingly presumptuous it is only to inquire into the causes of
the Divine will; which is in fact, and is justly entitled to be, the
cause of every thing that exists. For if it has any cause, then there
must be something antecedent, on which it depends; which it is impious
to suppose. For the will of God is the highest rule of justice; so that
what he wills must be considered just, for this very reason, because he
wills it. When it is inquired, therefore, why the Lord did so, the
answer must be, Because he would. But if you go further, and ask why he
so determined, you are in search of something greater and higher than
the will of God, which can never be found. Let human temerity,
therefore, desist from seeking that which is not, lest it should fail of
finding that which is. This will be a sufficient restraint to any one
disposed to reason with reverence concerning the secrets of his God.
Against the audaciousness of the impious, who are not afraid openly to
rail against God, the Lord will sufficiently defend himself by his own
justice, without any vindication by us, when, depriving their
consciences of every subterfuge, he shall convict them and bind them
with a sense of their guilt. Yet we espouse not the notion of the Romish
theologians concerning the absolute and arbitrary power of God, which,
on account of its profaneness, deserves our detestation. We represent
not God as lawless, who is a law to himself; because, as Plato says,
laws are necessary to men, who are the subjects of evil desires; but the
will of God is not only pure from every fault, but the highest standard
of perfection, even the law of all laws. But we deny that he is liable
to be called to any account; we deny also that we are proper judges, to
decide on this cause according to our own apprehension. Wherefore, if we
attempt to go beyond what is lawful, let us be deterred by the Psalmist,
who tells us, that God will be clear when he is judged by mortal
man.[503]
III. Thus God is able to check his enemies by silence. But that we may
not suffer them to deride his holy name with impunity, he supplies us
from his word with arms against them. Therefore, if any one attack us
with such an inquiry as this, why God has from the beginning
predestinated some men to death, who, not yet being brought into
existence, could not yet deserve the sentence of death,—we will reply by
asking them, in return, what they suppose God owes to man, if he chooses
to judge of him from his own nature. As we are all corrupted by sin, we
must necessarily be odious to God, and that not from tyrannical cruelty,
but in the most equitable estimation of justice. If all whom the Lord
predestinates to death are in their natural condition liable to the
sentence of death, what injustice do they complain of receiving from
him? Let all the sons of Adam come forward; let them all contend and
dispute with their Creator, because by his eternal providence they were
previously to their birth adjudged to endless misery. What murmur will
they be able to raise against this vindication, when God, on the other
hand, shall call them to a review of themselves. If they have all been
taken from a corrupt mass, it is no wonder that they are subject to
condemnation. Let them not, therefore, accuse God of injustice, if his
eternal decree has destined them to death, to which they feel
themselves, whatever be their desire or aversion, spontaneously led
forward by their own nature. Hence appears the perverseness of their
disposition to murmur, because they intentionally suppress the cause of
condemnation, which they are constrained to acknowledge in themselves,
hoping to excuse themselves by charging it upon God. But though I ever
so often admit God to be the author of it, which is perfectly correct,
yet this does not abolish the guilt impressed upon their consciences,
and from time to time recurring to their view.
IV. They further object, Were they not, by the decree of God,
antecedently predestinated to that corruption which is now stated as the
cause of condemnation? When they perish in their corruption, therefore,
they only suffer the punishment of that misery into which, in
consequence of his predestination, Adam fell, and precipitated his
posterity with him. Is he not unjust, therefore, in treating his
creatures with such cruel mockery? I confess, indeed, that all the
descendants of Adam fell by the Divine will into that miserable
condition in which they are now involved; and this is what I asserted
from the beginning, that we must always return at last to the sovereign
determination of God’s will, the cause of which is hidden in himself.
But it follows not, therefore, that God is liable to this reproach. For
we will answer them thus in the language of Paul: “O man, who art thou
that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed
it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay,
of the same lump, to make one vessel unto honour and another unto
dishonour?”[504] They will deny this to be in reality any vindication of
God’s justice, and call it a subterfuge, such as is commonly resorted to
by persons destitute of a sufficient defence. For what appears to be the
meaning of this, but that God possesses power, that cannot be resisted,
of doing any thing whatsoever according to his pleasure? But it is very
different. For what stronger reason can be alleged, than when we are
directed to consider who God is? How could any injustice be committed by
him who is the Judge of the world? If it is the peculiar property of the
nature of God to do justice, then he naturally loves righteousness and
hates iniquity. The apostle, therefore, has not resorted to sophistry,
as if he were in danger of confutation, but has shown that the reason of
the Divine justice is too high to be measured by a human standard, or
comprehended by the littleness of the human mind. The apostle, indeed,
acknowledges that there is a depth in the Divine judgments sufficient to
absorb the minds of all mankind, if they attempt to penetrate it. But he
also teaches how criminal it is to reduce the works of God to such a
law, that on failing to discover the reason of them, we presume to
censure them. It is a well known observation of Solomon, though few
rightly understand it, that “the great God, that formed all things, both
rewardeth the fool, and rewardeth transgressors.”[505] For he is
proclaiming the greatness of God, whose will it is to punish fools and
transgressors, although he favours them not with his Spirit. And men
betray astonishing madness in desiring to comprehend immensity within
the limits of their reason. The angels who stood in their integrity,
Paul calls “elect;”[506] if their constancy rested on the Divine
pleasure, the defection of the others argues their being forsaken—a fact
for which no other cause can be assigned than the reprobation hidden in
the secret counsel of God.
V. Now, to any follower of Manes or Celestius, a calumniator of Divine
Providence, I reply with Paul, that no account ought to be given of it,
for its greatness far surpasses our understanding. What wonder or
absurdity is there in this? Would he have the Divine power so limited,
as to be unable to execute more than his little capacity can comprehend?
I say, with Augustine, that the Lord created those who, he certainly
foreknew, would fall into destruction, and that this was actually so
because he willed it; but of his will it belongs not to us to demand the
reason, which we are incapable of comprehending; nor is it reasonable
that the Divine will should be made the subject of controversy with us,
which, whenever it is discussed, is only another name for the highest
rule of justice. Why, then, is any question started concerning
injustice, where justice is evidently conspicuous? Nor let us be ashamed
to follow the example of Paul, and stop the mouths of unreasonable and
wicked men in this manner, repeating the same answer as often as they
shall dare to repeat their complaints. Who are you, miserable mortals,
preferring an accusation against God, because he accommodates not the
greatness of his works to your ignorance? as though they were
necessarily wrong, because they are concealed from carnal view. Of the
immensity of God’s judgments you have the clearest evidences. You know
they are called “a great deep.” Now, examine your contracted intellects,
whether they can comprehend God’s secret decrees. What advantage or
satisfaction do you gain from plunging yourselves, by your mad
researches, into an abyss that reason itself pronounces will be fatal to
you? Why are you not at least restrained by some fear of what is
contained in the history of Job and the books of the prophets,
concerning the inconceivable wisdom and terrible power of God? If your
mind is disturbed, embrace without reluctance the advice of Augustine:
“You, a man, expect an answer from me, who am also a man. Let us,
therefore, both hear him, who says, O man, who art thou? Faithful
ignorance is better than presumptuous knowledge. Seek merits; you will
find nothing but punishment. O the depth! Peter denies; the thief
believes; O the depth! Do you seek a reason? I will tremble at the
depth. Do you reason? I will wonder. Do you dispute? I will believe. I
see the depth, I reach not the bottom. Paul rested, because he found
admiration. He calls the judgments of God unsearchable; and are you come
to scrutinize them? He says, his ways are past finding out; and are you
come to investigate them?” We shall do no good by proceeding any
further; it will not satisfy their petulance; and the Lord needs no
other defence than what he has employed by his Spirit, speaking by the
mouth of Paul; and we forget to speak well when we cease to speak with
God.
VI. Impiety produces also a second objection, which directly tends, not
so much to the crimination of God, as to the vindication of the sinner;
though the sinner whom God condemns cannot be justified without the
disgrace of the Judge. For this is their profane complaint, Why should
God impute as a fault to man those things which were rendered necessary
by his predestination? What should they do? Should they resist his
decrees? This would be vain, for it would be impossible. Therefore they
are not justly punished for those things of which God’s predestination
is the principal cause. Here I shall refrain from the defence commonly
resorted to by ecclesiastical writers, that the foreknowledge of God
prevents not man from being considered as a sinner, since God foresees
man’s evils, not his own. For then the cavil would not stop here; it
would rather be urged, that still God might, if he would, have provided
against the evils he foresaw, and that not having done this, he created
man expressly to this end, that he might so conduct himself in the
world; but if, by the Divine Providence, man was created in such a state
as afterwards to do whatever he actually does, he ought not to be
charged with guilt for things which he cannot avoid, and to which the
will of God constrains him. Let us see, then, how this difficulty should
be solved. In the first place, the declaration of Solomon ought to be
universally admitted, that “the Lord hath made all things for himself;
yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.”[507] Observe; all things
being at God’s disposal, and the decision of salvation or death
belonging to him, he orders all things by his counsel and decree in such
a manner, that some men are born devoted from the womb to certain death,
that his name may be glorified in their destruction. If any one pleads,
that no necessity was imposed on them by the providence of God, but
rather that they were created by him in such a state in consequence of
his foresight of their future depravity,—it will amount to nothing. The
old writers used, indeed, to adopt this solution, though not without
some degree of hesitation. But the schoolmen satisfy themselves with it,
as though it admitted of no opposition. I will readily grant, indeed,
that mere foreknowledge lays no necessity on the creatures, though this
is not universally admitted; for there are some who maintain it to be
the actual cause of what comes to pass. But Valla, a man otherwise not
much versed in theology, appears to me to have discovered superior
acuteness and judiciousness, by showing that this controversy is
unnecessary, because both life and death are acts of God’s will, rather
than of his foreknowledge. If God simply foresaw the fates of men, and
did not also dispose and fix them by his determination, there would be
room to agitate the question, whether his providence or foresight
rendered them at all necessary. But since he foresees future events only
in consequence of his decree, that they shall happen, it is useless to
contend about foreknowledge, while it is evident that all things come to
pass rather by ordination and decree.
VII. They say it is nowhere declared in express terms, that God decreed
Adam should perish by his defection; as though the same God, whom the
Scripture represents as doing whatever he pleases, created the noblest
of his creatures without any determinate end. They maintain, that he was
possessed of free choice, that he might be the author of his own fate,
but that God decreed nothing more than to treat him according to his
desert. If so weak a scheme as this be received, what will become of
God’s omnipotence, by which he governs all things according to his
secret counsel, independently of every person or thing besides? But
whether they wish it or dread it, predestination exhibits itself in
Adam’s posterity. For the loss of salvation by the whole race through
the guilt of one parent, was an event that did not happen by nature.
What prevents their acknowledging concerning one man, what they
reluctantly grant concerning the whole species? Why should they lose
their labour in sophistical evasions? The Scripture proclaims, that all
men were, in the person of their father, sentenced to eternal death.
This, not being attributable to nature, it is evident must have
proceeded from the wonderful counsel of God. The perplexity and
hesitation discovered at trifles by these pious defenders of the justice
of God, and their facility in overcoming great difficulties, are truly
absurd. I inquire again, how it came to pass that the fall of Adam,
independent of any remedy, should involve so many nations with their
infant children in eternal death, but because such was the will of God.
Their tongues, so loquacious on every other point, must here be struck
dumb. It is an awful decree, I confess; but no one can deny that God
foreknew the future final fate of man before he created him, and that he
did foreknow it because it was appointed by his own decree. If any one
here attacks God’s foreknowledge, he rashly and inconsiderately
stumbles. For what ground of accusation is there against the heavenly
Judge for not being ignorant of futurity? If there is any just or
plausible complaint, it lies against predestination. Nor should it be
thought absurd to affirm, that God not only foresaw the fall of the
first man, and the ruin of his posterity in him, but also arranged all
by the determination of his own will. For as it belongs to his wisdom to
foreknow every thing future, so it belongs to his power to rule and
govern all things by his hand. And this question also, as well as
others, is judiciously discussed by Augustine. “We most wholesomely
confess, what we most rightly believe, that the God and Lord of all
things, who created every thing very good, and foreknew that evil would
arise out of good, and knew that it was more suitable to his almighty
goodness to bring good out of evil than not to suffer evil to exist,
ordained the life of angels and men in such a manner as to exhibit in
it, first, what free-will was capable of doing, and afterwards, what
could be effected by the blessings of his grace, and the sentence of his
justice.”
VIII. Here they recur to the distinction between will and permission,
and insist that God permits the destruction of the impious, but does not
will it. But what reason shall we assign for his permitting it, but
because it is his will? It is not probable, however, that man procured
his own destruction by the mere permission, and without any appointment,
of God; as though God had not determined what he would choose to be the
condition of the principal of his creatures. I shall not hesitate,
therefore, to confess plainly with Augustine, “that the will of God is
the necessity of things, and that what he has willed will necessarily
come to pass; as those things are really about to happen which he has
foreseen.” Now, if either Pelagians, or Manichæans, or Anabaptists, or
Epicureans, (for we are concerned with these four sects on this
argument,) in excuse for themselves and the impious, plead the necessity
with which they are bound by God’s predestination,—they allege nothing
applicable to the case. For if predestination is no other than a
dispensation of Divine justice,—mysterious indeed, but liable to no
blame,—since it is certain they were not unworthy of being predestinated
to that fate, it is equally certain, that the destruction they incur by
predestination is consistent with the strictest justice. Besides, their
perdition depends on the Divine predestination in such a manner, that
the cause and matter of it are found in themselves. For the first man
fell because the Lord had determined it was so expedient. The reason of
this determination is unknown to us. Yet it is certain that he
determined thus, only because he foresaw it would tend to the just
illustration of the glory of his name. Whenever you hear the glory of
God mentioned, think of his justice. For what deserves praise must be
just. Man falls, therefore, according to the appointment of Divine
Providence; but he falls by his own fault. The Lord had a little before
pronounced “every thing that he had made” to be “very good.” Whence,
then, comes the depravity of man to revolt from his God? Lest it should
be thought to come from creation, God had approved and commended what
had proceeded from himself. By his own wickedness, therefore, he
corrupted the nature he had received pure from the Lord, and by his fall
he drew all his posterity with him into destruction. Wherefore let us
rather contemplate the evident cause of condemnation, which is nearer to
us in the corrupt nature of mankind, than search after a hidden and
altogether incomprehensible one in the predestination of God. And we
should feel no reluctance to submit our understanding to the infinite
wisdom of God, so far as to acquiesce in its many mysteries. To be
ignorant of things which it is neither possible nor lawful to know, is
to be learned: an eagerness to know them, is a species of madness.
IX. Some one perhaps will say, that I have not yet adduced a sufficient
answer to that sacrilegious excuse. I confess it is impossible ever
wholly to prevent the petulance and murmurs of impiety; yet I think I
have said what should suffice to remove not only all just ground, but
every plausible pretext, for objection. The reprobate wish to be thought
excusable in sinning, because they cannot avoid a necessity of sinning;
especially since this necessity is laid upon them by the ordination of
God. But we deny this to be a just excuse; because the ordination of
God, by which they complain that they are destined to destruction, is
guided by equity, unknown indeed to us, but indubitably certain. Whence
we conclude, that they sustain no misery that is not inflicted upon them
by the most righteous judgment of God. In the next place, we maintain
that they act preposterously, who, in seeking for the origin of their
condemnation, direct their views to the secret recesses of the Divine
counsel, and overlook the corruption of nature, which is its real
source. The testimony God gives to his creation prevents their imputing
it to him. For though, by the eternal providence of God, man was created
to that misery to which he is subject, yet the ground of it he has
derived from himself, not from God; since he is thus ruined solely in
consequence of his having degenerated from the pure creation of God to
vicious and impure depravity.
X. The doctrine of God’s predestination is calumniated by its
adversaries, as involving a third absurdity. For when we attribute it
solely to the determination of the Divine will, that those whom God
admits to be heirs of his kingdom are exempted from the universal
destruction, from this they infer, that he is a respecter of persons,
which the Scripture uniformly denies; that, therefore, either the
Scripture is inconsistent with itself, or in the election of God regard
is had to merits. In the first place, the Scripture denies that God is a
respecter of persons, in a different sense from that in which they
understand it; for by the word _person_, it signifies not a man, but
those things in a man, which, being conspicuous to the eyes, usually
conciliate favour, honour, and dignity, or attract hatred, contempt, and
disgrace. Such are riches, wealth, power, nobility, magistracy, country,
elegance of form, on the one hand; and on the other hand, poverty,
necessity, ignoble birth, slovenliness, contempt, and the like. Thus
Peter and Paul declare that God is not a respecter of persons, because
he makes no difference between the Jew and Greek, to reject one and
receive the other, merely on account of his nation.[508] So James uses
the same language when he means to assert, that God in his judgment pays
no regard to riches.[509] And Paul, in another place, declares, that in
judging, God has no respect to liberty or bondage.[510] There will,
therefore, be no contradiction in our affirming, that according to the
good pleasure of his will, God chooses whom he will as his children,
irrespective of all merit, while he rejects and reprobates others. Yet,
for the sake of further satisfaction, the matter may be explained in the
following manner: They ask how it happens, that of two persons
distinguished from each other by no merit, God, in his election, leaves
one and takes another. I, on the other hand, ask them, whether they
suppose him that is taken to possess any thing that can attract the
favour of God. If they confess that he has not, as indeed they must, it
will follow, that God looks not at man, but derives his motive to favour
him from his own goodness. God’s election of one man, therefore, while
he rejects another, proceeds not from any respect of man, but solely
from his own mercy; which may freely display and exert itself wherever
and whenever it pleases. For we have elsewhere seen also that, from the
beginning, not many noble, or wise, or honourable were called,[511] that
God might humble the pride of flesh; so far is his favour from being
confined to persons.
XI. Wherefore some people falsely and wickedly charge God with a
violation of equal justice, because, in his predestination, he observes
not the same uniform course of proceeding towards all. If he finds all
guilty, they say, let him punish all alike; if innocent, let him
withhold the rigour of justice from all. But they deal with him just as
if either mercy were forbidden him, or, when he chooses to show mercy,
he were constrained wholly to renounce justice. What is it that they
require? If all are guilty, that they shall all suffer the same
punishment. We confess the guilt to be common, but we say, that some are
relieved by Divine mercy. They say, Let it relieve all. But we reply,
Justice requires that he should likewise show himself to be a just judge
in the infliction of punishment. When they object to this, what is it
but attempting to deprive God of the opportunity to manifest his mercy,
or to grant it to him, at least, on the condition that he wholly abandon
his justice? Wherefore there is the greatest propriety in these
observations of Augustine: “The whole mass of mankind having fallen into
condemnation in the first man, the vessels that are formed from it to
honour, are not vessels of personal righteousness, but of Divine mercy;
and the formation of others to dishonour, is to be attributed, not to
iniquity, but to the Divine decree,” &c. While God rewards those whom he
rejects with deserved punishment, and to those whom he calls, freely
gives undeserved grace, he is liable to no accusation, but may be
compared to a creditor, who has power to release one, and enforce his
demands on another. The Lord, therefore, may give grace to whom he will,
because he is merciful, and yet not give it to all, because he is a just
judge; may manifest his free grace, by giving to some what they never
deserve, while, by not giving to all, he declares the demerit of all.
For when Paul says, that “God hath concluded all under sin, that he
might have mercy upon all,”[512] it must, at the same time, be added,
that he is debtor to none; for no man “hath first given to him,” to
entitle him to demand a recompense.[513]
XII. Another argument often urged to overthrow predestination is, that
its establishment would destroy all solicitude and exertion for
rectitude of conduct. For who can hear, they say, that either life or
death is appointed for him by God’s eternal and immutable decree,
without immediately concluding that it is of no importance how he
conducts himself; since no action of his can in any respect either
impede or promote the predestination of God? Thus all will abandon
themselves to despair, and run into every excess to which their
licentious propensities may lead them. And truly this objection is not
altogether destitute of truth; for there are many impure persons who
bespatter the doctrine of predestination with these vile blasphemies,
and with this pretext elude all admonitions and reproofs: God knows what
he has determined to do with us: if he has decreed our salvation, he
will bring us to it in his own time; if he has destined us to death, it
will be in vain for us to strive against it. But the Scripture, while it
inculcates superior awe and reverence of mind in the consideration of so
great a mystery, instructs the godly in a very different conclusion, and
fully refutes the wicked and unreasonable inferences of these persons.
For the design of what it contains respecting predestination is, not
that, being excited to presumption, we may attempt, with nefarious
temerity, to scrutinize the inaccessible secrets of God, but rather
that, being humbled and dejected, we may learn to tremble at his justice
and admire his mercy. At this object believers will aim. But the impure
cavils of the wicked are justly restrained by Paul. They profess to go
on securely in their vices; because if they are of the number of the
elect, such conduct will not prevent their being finally brought into
life. But Paul declares the end of our election to be, that we may lead
a holy and blameless life.[514] If the object of election be holiness of
life, it should rather awaken and stimulate us to a cheerful practice of
it, than be used as a pretext for slothfulness. But how inconsistent is
it to cease from the practice of virtue because election is sufficient
to salvation, while the end proposed in election is our diligent
performance of virtuous actions! Away, then, with such corrupt and
sacrilegious perversions of the whole order of election. They carry
their blasphemies much further, by asserting, that any one who is
reprobated by God will labour to no purpose if he endeavour to approve
himself to him by innocence and integrity of life; but here they are
convicted of a most impudent falsehood. For whence could such exertion
originate but from election? Whoever are of the number of the reprobate,
being vessels made to dishonour, cease not to provoke the Divine wrath
against them by continual transgressions, and to confirm by evident
proofs the judgment of God already denounced against them; so that their
striving with him in vain is what can never happen.
XIII. This doctrine is maliciously and impudently calumniated by others,
as subversive of all exhortations to piety of life. This formerly
brought great odium upon Augustine, which he removed by his Treatise on
Correction and Grace, addressed to Valentine, the perusal of which will
easily satisfy all pious and teachable persons. Yet I will touch on a
few things, which I hope will convince such as are honest and not
contentious. How openly and loudly gratuitous election was preached by
Paul, we have already seen; was he therefore cold in admonitions and
exhortations? Let these good zealots compare his vehemence with theirs;
theirs will be found ice itself in comparison with his incredible
fervour. And certainly every scruple is removed by this principle, that
“God hath not called us to uncleanness but that every one should know
how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour;”[515] and again,
that “we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works,
which God hath before ordained, that we should walk in them.”[516]
Indeed, a slight acquaintance with Paul will enable any one to
understand, without tedious arguments, how easily he reconciles things
which they pretend to be repugnant to each other. Christ commands men to
believe in him. Yet his limitation is neither false nor contrary to his
command, when he says, “No man can come unto me, except it were given
unto him of my Father.”[517] Let preaching therefore have its course to
bring men to faith, and by a continual progress to promote their
perseverance. Nor let the knowledge of predestination be prevented, that
the obedient may not be proud as of any thing of their own, but may
glory in the Lord. Christ had some particular meaning in saying, “Who
hath ears to hear, let him hear.”[518] Therefore when we exhort and
preach, persons endued with ears readily obey; and those who are
destitute of them exhibit an accomplishment of the Scripture, that
hearing they hear not.[519] “But why (says Augustine) should some have
ears, and others not? ‘Who hath known the mind of the Lord?’[520] Must
that which is evident be denied, because that which is concealed cannot
be comprehended?” These observations I have faithfully borrowed from
Augustine; but as his words will perhaps have more authority than mine,
I will proceed to an exact quotation of them. “If, on hearing this, some
persons become torpid and slothful, and exchanging labour for lawless
desire, pursue the various objects of concupiscence, must what is
declared concerning the foreknowledge of God be therefore accounted
false? If God foreknew that they would be good, will they not be so, in
whatever wickedness they now live? and if he foreknew that they would be
wicked, will they not be so, in whatever goodness they now appear? Are
these, then, sufficient causes why the truths which are declared
concerning the foreknowledge of God should be either denied or passed
over in silence? especially when the consequence of silence respecting
these would be the adoption of other errors. The reason of concealing
the truth (he says) is one thing, and the necessity of declaring it is
another. It would be tedious to inquire after all the reasons for
passing the truth over in silence; but this is one of them; lest those
who understand it not should become worse, while we wish to make those
who understand it better informed; who, indeed, are not made wiser by
our declaring any such thing, nor are they rendered worse. But since the
truth is of such a nature, that when we speak of it, he becomes worse
who cannot understand it, and when we are silent about it, he who can
understand it becomes worse,—what do we think ought to be done? Should
not the truth rather be spoken, that he who is capable may understand
it, than buried in silence; the consequence of which would be, not only
that neither would know it, but even the more intelligent of the two
would become worse, who, if he heard and understood it, would also teach
it to many others? And we are unwilling to say what we are authorized to
say by the testimony of Scripture. For we are afraid, indeed, lest by
speaking we may offend him who cannot understand, but are not afraid
lest in consequence of our silence, he who is capable of understanding
the truth may be deceived by falsehood.” And condensing this sentiment
afterwards into a smaller compass, he places it in a still stronger
light. “Wherefore, if the apostles and the succeeding teachers of the
Church both piously treated of God’s eternal election, and held
believers under the discipline of a pious life, what reason have these
our opponents, when silenced by the invincible force of truth, to
suppose themselves right in maintaining that what is spoken of
predestination, although it be true, ought not to be preached to the
people? But it must by all means be preached, that he who has ears to
hear may hear. But who has them, unless he receives them from him who
has promised to bestow them? Certainly he who receives not may reject,
provided he who receives, takes and drinks, drinks and lives. For as
piety must be preached that God may be rightly worshipped, so also must
predestination, that he who has ears to hear of the grace of God, may
glory in God, and not in himself.”
XIV. And yet, being peculiarly desirous of edification, that holy man
regulates his mode of teaching the truth, so that offence may as far as
possible be prudently avoided. For he suggests that whatever is asserted
with truth may also be delivered in a suitable manner. If any one
address the people in such a way as this, If you believe not, it is
because you are by a Divine decree already destined to destruction,—he
not only cherishes slothfulness, but even encourages wickedness. If any
one extend the declaration to the future, that they who hear will never
believe because they are reprobated,—this would be rather imprecation
than instruction. Such persons, therefore, as foolish teachers, or
inauspicious, ominous prophets, Augustine charges to depart from the
Church. In another place, indeed, he justly maintains, “that a man then
profits by correction, when he, who causes whom he pleases to profit
even without correction, compassionates and assists. But why some in one
way, and some in another? Far be it from us to ascribe the choice to the
clay instead of the potter.” Again afterwards: “When men are either
introduced or restored into the way of righteousness by correction, who
works salvation in their hearts, but he who gives the increase, whoever
plants and waters? he whose determination to save is not resisted by any
free-will of man. It is beyond all doubt, therefore, that the will of
God, who has done whatever he has pleased in heaven and in earth, and
who has done even things that are yet future, cannot possibly be
resisted by the will of man, so as to prevent the execution of his
purposes: since he controls the wills of men according to his pleasure.”
Again: “When he designs to bring men to himself, does he bind them by
corporeal bonds? He acts inwardly; he inwardly seizes their hearts; he
inwardly moves their hearts, and draws them by their wills, which he has
wrought in them.” But he immediately subjoins, what must by no means be
omitted; “that because we know not who belongs, or does not belong, to
the number of the predestinated, it becomes us affectionately to desire
the salvation of all. The consequence will be, that whomsoever we meet
we shall endeavour to make him a partaker of peace. But our peace shall
rest upon the sons of peace. On our part, therefore, salutary and severe
reproof, like a medicine, must be administered to all, that they may
neither perish themselves nor destroy others; but it will be the
province of God to render it useful to them whom he had foreknown and
predestinated.”
Footnote 500:
Rom. ix. 20.
Footnote 501:
Matt. xv. 13.
Footnote 502:
Rom. ix. 22, 23.
Footnote 503:
Psalm li. 4.
Footnote 504:
Rom. v. 20, 21.
Footnote 505:
Prov. xxvi. 10.
Footnote 506:
1 Tim. v. 21.
Footnote 507:
Prov. xvi. 4.
Footnote 508:
Acts x. 34. Rom. ii. 11. Gal. iii. 28.
Footnote 509:
James ii. 5.
Footnote 510:
Col. iii. 25. Eph. vi. 9.
Footnote 511:
1 Cor. i. 26.
Footnote 512:
Gal. iii. 22. Rom. xi. 32.
Footnote 513:
Rom. xi. 35.
Footnote 514:
Ephes. i. 4.
Footnote 515:
1 Thess. iv. 4, 7.
Footnote 516:
Ephes. ii. 10.
Footnote 517:
John vi. 65.
Footnote 518:
Matt. xiii. 9.
Footnote 519:
Isaiah vi. 9.
Footnote 520:
Rom. xi. 34.
CHAPTER XXIV.
ELECTION CONFIRMED BY THE DIVINE CALL. THE DESTINED DESTRUCTION OF THE
REPROBATE PROCURED BY THEMSELVES.
But, in order to a further elucidation of the subject, it is necessary
to treat of the calling of the elect, and of the blinding and hardening
of the impious. On the former I have already made a few observations,
with a view to refute the error of those who suppose the generality of
the promises to put all mankind on an equality. But the discriminating
election of God, which is otherwise concealed within himself, he
manifests only by his calling, which may therefore with propriety be
termed the testification or evidence of it. “For whom he did foreknow,
he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son.
Moreover, whom he did predestinate, them he also called; and whom he
called, them he also justified,” in order to their eventual
glorification.[521] Though by choosing his people, the Lord has adopted
them as his children, yet we see that they enter not on the possession
of so great a blessing till they are called; on the other hand, as soon
as they are called, they immediately enjoy some communication of his
election. On this account Paul calls the Spirit received by them, both
“the Spirit of adoption, and the seal and earnest of the future
inheritance;”[522] because, by his testimony, he confirms and seals to
their hearts the certainty of their future adoption. For though the
preaching of the gospel is a stream from the source of election, yet,
being common also to the reprobate, it would of itself be no solid proof
of it. For God effectually teaches his elect, to bring them to faith, as
we have already cited from the words of Christ: “He which is of God,
he,” and he alone, “hath seen the Father.”[523] Again: “I have
manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me.”[524] For he says
in another place, “No man can come to me, except the Father draw
him.”[525] This passage is judiciously explained by Augustine in the
following words: “If, according to the declaration of truth, every one
that has learned comes, whosoever comes not, certainly has not learned.
It does not necessarily follow that he who can come actually comes,
unless he has both willed and done it; but every one that has learned of
the Father, not only can come, but also actually comes; where there is
an immediate union of the advantage of possibility, the inclination of
the will, and the consequent action.” In another place he is still
clearer: “Every one that hath heard and learned of the Father, cometh
unto me. Is not this saying, There is no one that hears and learns of
the Father, and comes not unto me? For if every one that has heard and
learned of the Father comes, certainly every one that comes not has
neither heard nor learned of the Father; for if he had heard and
learned, he would come. Very remote from carnal observation is this
school, in which men hear and learn of the Father to come to the Son.”
Just after he says, “This grace, which is secretly communicated to the
hearts of men, is received by no hard heart; for the first object of its
communication is, that hardness of heart may be taken away. When the
Father is heard within therefore, he takes away the heart of stone, and
gives a heart of flesh. For thus he forms children of promise and
vessels of mercy whom he has prepared for glory. Why, then, does he not
teach all, that they may come to Christ, but because all whom he
teaches, he teaches in mercy? but whom he teaches not, he teaches not in
judgment; for he hath mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will
he hardeneth.” Those whom God has chosen, therefore, he designates as
his children, and determines himself to be their Father. By calling, he
introduces them into his family, and unites them to himself, that they
may be one. By connecting calling with election, the Scripture evidently
suggests that nothing is requisite to it but the free mercy of God. For
if we inquire whom he calls, and for what reason, the answer is, those
whom he had elected. But when we come to election, we see nothing but
mercy on every side. And so that observation of Paul is very applicable
here—“It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God
that showeth mercy;” but not as it is commonly understood by those who
make a distribution between the grace of God, and the will and exertion
of man. For they say, that human desires and endeavours have no efficacy
of themselves, unless they are rendered successful by the grace of God;
but maintain that, with the assistance of his blessing, these things
have also their share in procuring salvation. To refute their cavil, I
prefer Augustine’s words to my own. “If the apostle only meant that it
is not of him that wills, or of him that runs, without the assistance of
the merciful Lord, we may retort the converse proposition, that it is
not of mercy alone without the assistance of willing and running.” If
this be manifestly impious, we may be certain that the apostle ascribes
every thing to the Lord’s mercy, and leaves nothing to our wills or
exertions. This was the opinion of that holy man. Nor is the least
regard due to their paltry sophism, that Paul would not have expressed
himself so, if we had no exertion or will. For he considered not what
was in man; but seeing some persons attribute salvation partly to human
industry, he simply condemned their error in the former part of the
sentence, and in the latter, vindicated the claim of Divine mercy to the
whole accomplishment of salvation. And what do the prophets, but
perpetually proclaim the gratuitous calling of God?
II. This point is further demonstrated by the very nature and
dispensation of calling, which consists not in the mere preaching of the
word, but in the accompanying illumination of the Spirit. To whom God
offers his word, we are informed in the prophet: “I am sought of them
that asked not for me: I am found of them that sought me not: I said,
Behold me, behold me, unto a nation that was not called by my
name.”[526] And lest the Jews should suppose that this clemency extended
only to the Gentiles, he recalls to their remembrance the situation from
which he took their father Abraham, when he deigned to draw him to
himself; that was from the midst of idolatry, in which he and all his
family were sunk.[527] When he first shines upon the undeserving with
the light of his word, he thereby exhibits a most brilliant specimen of
his free goodness. Here, then, the infinite goodness of God is
displayed, but not to the salvation of all; for heavier judgment awaits
the reprobate, because they reject the testimony of Divine love. And God
also, to manifest his glory, withdraws from them the efficacious
influence of his Spirit. This internal call, therefore, is a pledge of
salvation, which cannot possibly deceive. To this purpose is that
passage of John—“Hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit
which he hath given us.”[528] And lest the flesh should glory in having
answered at least to his call, and accepted his free offers, he affirms
that men have no ears to hear, or eyes to see, but such as he has
formed; and that he acts in this, not according to individual gratitude,
but according to his own election. Of this fact Luke gives us an eminent
example, where Jews and Gentiles in common heard the preaching of Paul
and Barnabas. Though they were all instructed on that occasion with the
same discourse, it is narrated that “as many as were ordained to eternal
life, believed.”[529] With what face, then, can we deny the freeness of
calling, in which election reigns alone, even to the last?
III. Here two errors are to be avoided. For some suppose man to be a
coöperator with God, so that the validity of election depends on his
consent; thus, according to them, the will of man is superior to the
counsel of God. As though the Scripture taught, that we are only given
an ability to believe, and not faith itself. Others, not thus enervating
the grace of the Holy Spirit, yet induced by I know not what mode of
reasoning, suspend election on that which is subsequent to it; as though
it were doubtful and ineffectual till it is confirmed by faith. That
this is its confirmation _to us_ is very clear; that it is the
manifestation of God’s secret counsel before concealed, we have already
seen; but all that we are to understand by this, is that what was before
unknown is verified, and as it were ratified with a seal. But it is
contrary to the truth to assert, that election has no efficacy till
after we have embraced the gospel, and that this circumstance gives it
all its energy. The certainty of it, indeed, we are to seek here; for if
we attempt to penetrate to the eternal decree of God, we shall be
ingulfed in the profound abyss. But when God has discovered it to us, we
must ascend to loftier heights, that the cause may not be lost in the
effect. For what can be more absurd and inconsistent, when the Scripture
teaches that we are illuminated according as God has chosen us, than
that our eyes should be so dazzled with the blaze of this light as to
refuse to contemplate election? At the same time I admit that, in order
to attain an assurance of our salvation, we ought to begin with the
word, and that with it our confidence ought to be satisfied, so as to
call upon God as our Father. For some persons, to obtain certainty
respecting the counsel of God, “which is nigh unto us, in our mouth and
in our heart,”[530] preposterously wish to soar above the clouds. Such
temerity, therefore, should be restrained by the sobriety of faith, that
we may be satisfied with the testimony of God in his external word
respecting his secret grace; only the channel, which conveys to us such
a copious stream to satisfy our thirst, must not deprive the
fountain-head of the honour which belongs to it.
IV. As it is erroneous, therefore, to suspend the efficacy of election
upon the faith of the gospel, by which we discover our interest in
election, so we shall observe the best order, if, in seeking an
assurance of our election, we confine our attention to those subsequent
signs which are certain attestations of it. Satan never attacks
believers with a more grievous or dangerous temptation, than when he
disquiets them with doubts of their election, and stimulates to an
improper desire of seeking it in a wrong way. I call it seeking in a
wrong way, when miserable man endeavours to force his way into the
secret recesses of Divine wisdom, and to penetrate even to the highest
eternity, that he may discover what is determined concerning him at the
tribunal of God. Then he precipitates himself to be absorbed in the
profound of an unfathomable gulf; then he entangles himself in
numberless and inextricable snares; then he sinks himself in an abyss of
total darkness. For it is right that the folly of the human mind should
be thus punished with horrible destruction, when it attempts by its own
ability to rise to the summit of Divine wisdom. This temptation is the
more fatal, because there is no other to which men in general have a
stronger propensity. For there is scarcely a person to be found, whose
mind is not sometimes struck with this thought—Whence can you obtain
salvation but from the election of God? And what revelation have you
received of election? If this has once impressed a man, it either
perpetually excruciates the unhappy being with dreadful torments, or
altogether stupefies him with astonishment. Indeed, I should desire no
stronger argument to prove how extremely erroneous the conceptions of
such persons are respecting predestination, than experience itself;
since no error can affect the mind, more pestilent than such as disturbs
the conscience, and destroys its peace and tranquillity towards God.
Therefore, if we dread shipwreck, let us anxiously beware of this rock,
on which none ever strike without being destroyed. But though the
discussion of predestination may be compared to a dangerous ocean, yet,
in traversing over it, the navigation is safe and serene, and I will
also add pleasant, unless any one freely wishes to expose himself to
danger. For as those who, in order to gain an assurance of their
election, examine into the eternal counsel of God without the word,
plunge themselves into a fatal abyss, so they who investigate it in a
regular and orderly manner, as it is contained in the word, derive from
such inquiry the benefit of peculiar consolation. Let this, then, be our
way of inquiry; to begin and end with the calling of God. Though this
prevents not believers from perceiving, that the blessings they daily
receive from the hand of God descend from that secret adoption; as
Isaiah introduces them, saying, “Thou hast done wonderful things; thy
counsels of old are faithfulness and truth;”[531] for by adoption, as by
a token, God chooses to confirm to us all that we are permitted to know
of his counsel. Lest this should be thought a weak testimony, let us
consider how much clearness and certainty it affords us. Bernard has
some pertinent observations on this subject. After speaking of the
reprobate, he says, “The counsel of God stands, the sentence of peace
stands, respecting them who fear him, concealing their faults and
rewarding their virtues; so that to them, not only good things, but evil
ones also, coöperate for good. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of
God’s elect? It is sufficient for me, for all righteousness, to possess
his favour alone, against whom alone I have sinned. All that he has
decreed not to impute to me, is just as if it had never been.” And a
little after: “O place of true rest, which I might not improperly call a
bed-chamber, in which God is viewed, not as disturbed with anger, or
filled with care, but where his will is proved to be good, and
acceptable, and perfect. This view is not terrifying, but soothing; it
excites no restless curiosity, but allays it; it fatigues not the
senses, but tranquillizes them. Here true rest is enjoyed. A tranquil
God tranquillizes all things; and to behold rest, is to enjoy repose.”
V. In the first place, if we seek the fatherly clemency and propitious
heart of God, our eyes must be directed to Christ, in whom alone the
Father is well pleased.[532] If we seek salvation, life, and the
immortality of the heavenly kingdom, recourse must be had to no other;
for he alone is the Fountain of life, the Anchor of salvation, and the
Heir of the kingdom of heaven. Now, what is the end of election, but
that, being adopted as children by our heavenly Father, we may by his
favour obtain salvation and immortality? Consider and investigate it as
much as you please, you will not find its ultimate scope extend beyond
this. The persons, therefore, whom God has adopted as his children, he
is said to have chosen, not in themselves, but in Christ; because it was
impossible for him to love them, except in him; or to honour them with
the inheritance of his kingdom, unless previously made partakers of him.
But if we are chosen in him, we shall find no assurance of our election
in ourselves; nor even in God the Father, considered alone, abstractedly
from the Son. Christ, therefore, is the mirror, in which it behoves us
to contemplate our election; and here we may do it with safety. For as
the Father has determined to unite to the body of his Son all who are
the objects of his eternal choice, that he may have, as his children,
all that he recognizes among his members, we have a testimony
sufficiently clear and strong, that if we have communion with Christ, we
are written in the book of life. And he gave us this certain communion
with himself, when he testified by the preaching of the gospel, that he
was given to us by the Father, to be ours with all his benefits. We are
said to put him on, and to grow up into him, that we may live because he
lives. This doctrine is often repeated. “God spared not his only
begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish.”[533]
“He that believeth on him, is passed from death unto life.”[534] In
which sense he calls himself “The bread of life, he that eateth which,
shall live for ever.”[535] He, I say, is our witness, that all who
receive him by faith shall be considered as the children of his heavenly
Father. If we desire any thing more than being numbered among the sons
and heirs of God, we must rise above Christ. If this is our highest
limit, what folly do we betray in seeking out of him, that which we have
already obtained in him, and which can never be found any where else!
Besides, as he is the Father’s eternal Wisdom, immutable Truth, and
determined Counsel, we have no reason to fear the least variation in the
declarations of his word from that will of the Father, which is the
object of our inquiry; indeed, he faithfully reveals it to us, as it has
been from the beginning, and will ever continue to be. This doctrine
ought to have a practical influence on our prayers. For though faith in
election animates us to call upon God, yet it would be preposterous to
obtrude it upon him when we pray, or to stipulate this condition—O Lord,
if I am elected, hear me; since it is his pleasure that we should be
satisfied with his promises, and make no further inquiries whether he
will be propitious to our prayers. This prudence will extricate us from
many snares, if we know how to make a right use of what has been rightly
written; but we must not inconsiderately apply to various purposes, what
ought to be restricted to the object particularly designed.
VI. For the establishment of our confidence, there is also another
confirmation of election, which, we have said, is connected with our
calling. For those whom Christ illuminates with the knowledge of his
name, and introduces into the bosom of his Church, he is said to receive
into his charge and protection. And all whom he receives are said to be
committed and intrusted to him by the Father, to be kept to eternal
life. What do we wish for ourselves? Christ loudly proclaims that all
whose salvation was designed by the Father, had been delivered by him
into his protection.[536] If, therefore, we want to ascertain whether
God is concerned for our salvation, let us inquire whether he has
committed us to Christ, whom he constituted the only Saviour of all his
people. Now, if we doubt whether Christ has received us into his charge
and custody, he obviates this doubt, by freely offering himself as our
Shepherd, and declaring that if we hear his voice, we shall be numbered
among his sheep. We therefore embrace Christ, thus kindly offered to us
and advancing to meet us; and he will number us with his sheep, and
preserve us enclosed in his fold. But yet we feel anxiety for our future
state; for as Paul declares that “whom he predestinated, them he also
called,”[537] so Christ informs us that “many are called, but few
chosen.”[538] Besides, Paul himself also, in another place, cautions
against carelessness, saying, “Let him that thinketh he standeth, take
heed lest he fall.”[539] Again: “Art thou grafted among the people of
God? Be not high-minded, but fear. God is able to cut thee off again,
and graft in others.”[540] Lastly, experience itself teaches us that
vocation and faith are of little value, unless accompanied by
perseverance, which is not the lot of all. But Christ has delivered us
from this anxiety, for these promises undoubtedly belong to the future:
“All that the Father giveth me, shall come to me; and him that cometh to
me, I will in no wise cast out. And this is the Father’s will which hath
sent me, that of all which he hath given me, I should lose nothing, but
should raise it up again at the last day.”[541] Again: “My sheep hear my
voice, and I know them, and they follow me. And I give unto them eternal
life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of
my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and none is
able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.”[542] Besides, when he
declares, “Every plant which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall
be rooted up,”[543] he fully implies on the contrary, that those who are
rooted in God, can never by any violence be deprived of salvation. With
this corresponds that passage of John, “If they had been of us, they
would no doubt have continued with us.”[544] Hence also that magnificent
exultation of Paul, in defiance of life and death, of things present and
future; which must necessarily have been founded in the gift of
perseverance.[545] Nor can it be doubted that he applies this sentiment
to all the elect. The same apostle in another place says, “He which hath
begun a good work in you, will perform it until the day of Jesus
Christ.”[546] This also supported David when his faith was failing:
“Thou wilt not forsake the work of thine own hands.”[547] Nor is it to
be doubted, that when Christ intercedes for all the elect, he prays for
them the same as for Peter, that their faith may never fail. Hence we
conclude, that they are beyond all danger of falling away, because the
intercessions of the Son of God for their perseverance in piety have not
been rejected. What did Christ intend we should learn from this, but
confidence in our perpetual security, since we have once been introduced
into the number of his people?
VII. But it daily happens, that they who appeared to belong to Christ,
fall away from him again, and sink into ruin. Even in that very place,
where he asserts that none perish of those who were given to him by the
Father, he excepts the son of perdition. This is true; but it is equally
certain, that such persons never adhered to Christ with that confidence
of heart which, we say, gives us an assurance of our election. “They
went out from us,” says John, “but they were not of us; for if they had
been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us.”[548] I dispute
not their having similar signs of calling with the elect; but I am far
from admitting them to possess that certain assurance of election which
I enjoin believers to seek from the word of the gospel. Wherefore, let
not such examples move us from a tranquil reliance on our Lord’s
promise, where he declares, that all who receive him by faith were given
him by the Father, and that since he is their Guardian and Shepherd, not
one of them shall perish. Of Judas we shall speak afterwards. Paul is
dissuading Christians, not from all security, but from supine,
unguarded, carnal security, which is attended with pride, arrogance, and
contempt of others, extinguishes humility and reverence of God, and
produces forgetfulness of favours received. For he is addressing
Gentiles, teaching them that the Jews should not be proudly and
inhumanly insulted because they had been rejected, and the Gentiles
substituted in their place. He also inculcates fear; not such a fear as
produces terror and uncertainty, but such as teaches humble admiration
of the grace of God, without any diminution of confidence in it; as has
been elsewhere observed. Besides, he is not addressing individuals, but
distinct parties generally. For as the Church was divided into two
parties, and emulation gave birth to dissension, Paul admonishes the
Gentiles, that their substitution in the place of the holy and peculiar
people ought to be a motive to fear and modesty. There were, however,
many clamorous people among them, whose empty boasting it was necessary
to restrain. But we have already seen that our hope extends into
futurity, even beyond the grave, and that nothing is more contrary to
its nature than doubts respecting our final destiny.
VIII. The declaration of Christ, that “many are called, and few chosen,”
is very improperly understood. For there will be no ambiguity in it, if
we remember what must be clear from the foregoing observations, that
there are two kinds of calling. For there is a universal call, by which
God, in the external preaching of the word, invites all,
indiscriminately, to come to him, even those to whom he intends it as a
savour of death, and an occasion of heavier condemnation. There is also
a special call, with which he, for the most part, favours only
believers, when, by the inward illumination of his Spirit, he causes the
word preached to sink into their hearts. Yet sometimes he also
communicates it to those whom he only enlightens for a season, and
afterwards forsakes on account of their ingratitude, and strikes with
greater blindness. Now, the Lord, seeing the gospel published far and
wide, held in contempt by the generality of men, and justly appreciated
by few, gives us a description of God, under the character of a king,
who prepares a solemn feast, and sends out his messengers in every
direction, to invite a great company, but can only prevail on very few,
every one alleging impediments to excuse himself; so that at length he
is constrained by their refusal to bring in all who can be found in the
streets. Thus far, every one sees, the parable is to be understood of
the external call. He proceeds to inform us, that God acts like a good
master of a feast, walking round the tables, courteously receiving his
guests; but that if he finds any one not adorned with a nuptial garment,
he suffers not the meanness of such a person to disgrace the festivity
of the banquet. I confess, this part is to be understood of those who
enter into the Church by a profession of faith, but are not invested
with the sanctification of Christ. Such blemishes, and, as it were,
cankers of his Church, God will not always suffer, but will cast them
out of it, as their turpitude deserves. Few, therefore, are chosen out
of a multitude that are called, but not with that calling by which we
say believers ought to judge of their election. For the former is common
also to the wicked; but the latter is attended with the Spirit of
regeneration, the earnest and seal of the future inheritance, which
seals our hearts to the day of the Lord.[549] In short, though
hypocrites boast of piety as if they were true worshippers of God,
Christ declares that he will finally cast them out of the place which
they unjustly occupy. Thus the Psalmist says, “Who shall abide in thy
tabernacle? He that worketh righteousness, and speaketh the truth in his
heart.”[550] Again: “This is the generation of them that seek him, that
seek thy face, O Jacob.”[551] And thus the Spirit exhorts believers to
patience, that they may not be disturbed by Ishmaelites being united
with them in the Church, since the mask will at length be torn off, and
they will be cast out with disgrace.
IX. The same reasoning applies to the exception lately cited, where
Christ says, that “none of them is lost, but the son of perdition.”[552]
Here is, indeed, some inaccuracy of expression, but the meaning is
clear. For he was never reckoned among the sheep of Christ, as being
really such, but only as he occupied the place of one. When the Lord
declares he was chosen by himself with the other apostles, it only
refers to the ministerial office. “Have not I chosen you twelve,” says
he, “and one of you is a devil?”[553] That is, he had chosen him to the
office of an apostle. But when he speaks of election to salvation, he
excludes him from the number of the elect: “I speak not of you all; I
know whom I have chosen.”[554] If any one confound the term _election_
in these passages, he will miserably embarrass himself; if he make a
proper distinction, nothing is plainer. It is therefore a very erroneous
and pernicious assertion of Gregory, that we are only conscious of our
calling, but uncertain of our election; from which he exhorts all to
fear and trembling, using also this argument, that though we know what
we are to-day, yet we know not what we may be in future. But the context
plainly shows the cause of his error on this point. For as he suspended
election on the merit of works, this furnished abundant reason for
discouragement to the minds of men: he could never establish them, for
want of leading them from themselves to a confidence in the Divine
goodness. Hence believers have some perception of what we stated at the
beginning, that predestination, rightly considered, neither destroys nor
weakens faith, but rather furnishes its best confirmation. Yet I will
not deny, that the Spirit sometimes accommodates his language to the
limited extent of our capacity, as when he says, “They shall not be in
the assembly of my people, neither shall they be written in the writing
of the house of Israel.”[555] As though God were beginning to write in
the book of life those whom he numbers among his people, whereas we know
from the testimony of Christ, that the names of God’s children have been
written in the book of life from the beginning.[556] But these
expressions only signify the rejection of those who seemed to be the
chief among the elect; as the Psalmist says, “Let them be blotted out of
the book of the living, and not be written with the righteous.”[557]
X. Now, the elect are not gathered into the fold of Christ by calling,
immediately from their birth, nor all at the same time, but according as
God is pleased to dispense his grace to them. Before they are gathered
to that chief Shepherd, they go astray, scattered in the common
wilderness, and differing in no respect from others, except in being
protected by the special mercy of God from rushing down the precipice of
eternal death. If you observe them, therefore, you will see the
posterity of Adam partaking of the common corruption of the whole
species. That they go not to the most desperate extremes of impiety, is
not owing to any innate goodness of theirs, but because the eye of God
watches over them, and his hand is extended for their preservation. For
those who dream of I know not what seed of election sown in their hearts
from their very birth, always inclining them to piety and the fear of
God, are unsupported by the authority of Scripture, and refuted by
experience itself. They produce, indeed, a few examples to prove that
certain elect persons were not entire strangers to religion, even before
they were truly enlightened; that Paul lived blameless in his
Pharisaism;[558] that Cornelius, with his alms and prayers, was accepted
of God,[559] and if there are any other similar ones. What they say of
Paul, we admit; but respecting Cornelius, we maintain that they are
deceived; for it is evident, he was then enlightened and regenerated,
and wanted nothing but a clear revelation of the gospel. But what will
they extort from these very few examples? that the elect have always
been endued with the spirit of piety? This is just as if any one, having
proved the integrity of Aristides, Socrates, Xenocrates, Scipio, Curius,
Camillus, and other heathens, should conclude from this, that all who
were left in the darkness of idolatry, were followers of holiness and
virtue. But this is contradicted in many passages of Scripture. Paul’s
description of the state of the Ephesians prior to regeneration,
exhibits not a grain of this seed. “Ye were dead,” he says, “in
trespasses and sins, wherein in time past ye walked according to the
course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air,
the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience; among whom
also we all had our conversation in times past, in the lusts of our
flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by
nature the children of wrath, even as others.”[560] Again: “Remember
that at that time ye were without hope, and without God in the
world.”[561] Again: “Ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in
the Lord; walk as children of light.”[562] But perhaps they will plead,
that these passages refer to that ignorance of the true God, in which
they acknowledge the elect to be involved previously to their calling.
Though this would be an impudent cavil, since the apostle’s inferences
from them are such as these: “Put away lying; and let him that stole,
steal no more.”[563] But what will they reply to other passages? such as
that where, after declaring to the Corinthians, that “Neither
fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers
of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards,
nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God;” he
immediately adds, “And such were some of you; but ye are washed, but ye
are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and
by the Spirit of our God.”[564] And another passage, addressed to the
Romans: “As ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness, and to
iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to
righteousness. What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now
ashamed?”[565]
XI. What kind of seed of election was springing up in them, who were all
their lives contaminated with various pollutions, and with desperate
wickedness wallowed in the most nefarious and execrable of all crimes?
If he had intended to speak according to these teachers, he ought to
have shown how much they were obliged to the goodness of God, which had
preserved them from falling into such great pollutions. So likewise the
persons whom Peter addressed, he ought to have exhorted to gratitude on
account of the perpetual seed of election. But, on the contrary, he
admonishes them, “that the time past may suffice to have wrought the
will of the Gentiles.”[566] What if we come to particular examples? What
principle of righteousness was there in Rahab the harlot before
faith?[567] in Manasseh, when Jerusalem was dyed, and almost drowned,
with the blood of the prophets?[568] in the thief, who repented in his
dying moments?[569] Away, then, with these arguments, which men of
presumptuous curiosity raise to themselves without regarding the
Scripture. Let us rather abide by the declaration of the Scripture, that
“all we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own
way,”[570] that is, destruction. Those whom the Lord has determined to
rescue from this gulf of perdition, he defers till his appointed season;
before which he only preserves them from falling into unpardonable
blasphemy.
XII. As the Lord, by his effectual calling of the elect, completes the
salvation to which he predestinated them in his eternal counsel, so he
has his judgments against the reprobate, by which he executes his
counsel respecting them. Those, therefore, whom he has created to a life
of shame and a death of destruction, that they might be instruments of
his wrath, and examples of his severity, he causes to reach their
appointed end, sometimes depriving them of the opportunity of hearing
the word, sometimes, by the preaching of it, increasing their blindness
and stupidity. Of the former there are innumerable examples: let us only
select one that is more evident and remarkable than the rest. Before the
advent of Christ, there passed about four thousand years, in which the
Lord concealed the light of the doctrine of salvation from all the
Gentiles. If it be replied, that he withheld from them the participation
of so great a blessing because he esteemed them unworthy, their
posterity will be found equally unworthy of it. The truth of this, to
say nothing of experience, is sufficiently attested by Malachi, who
follows his reproofs of unbelief and gross blasphemies by an immediate
prediction of the coming of the Messiah. Why, then, is he given to the
posterity rather than to their ancestors? He will torment himself in
vain, who seeks for any cause of this beyond the secret and inscrutable
counsel of God. Nor need we be afraid lest any disciple of Porphyry
should be imboldened to calumniate the justice of God by our silence in
its defence. For while we assert that all deserve to perish, and it is
of God’s free goodness that any are saved, enough is said for the
illustration of his glory, so that every subterfuge of ours is
altogether unnecessary. The supreme Lord, therefore, by depriving of the
communication of his light, and leaving in darkness, those whom he has
reprobated, makes way for the accomplishment of his predestination. Of
the second class, the Scriptures contain many examples, and others
present themselves every day. The same sermon is addressed to a hundred
persons; twenty receive it with the obedience of faith; the others
despise, or ridicule, or reject, or condemn it. If it be replied, that
the difference proceeds from their wickedness and perverseness, this
will afford no satisfaction; because the minds of others would have been
influenced by the same wickedness, but for the correction of Divine
goodness. And thus we shall always be perplexed, unless we recur to
Paul’s question—“Who maketh thee to differ?”[571] In which he signifies,
that the excellence of some men beyond others, is not from their own
virtue, but solely from Divine grace.
XIII. Why, then, in bestowing grace upon some, does he pass over others?
Luke assigns a reason for the former, that they “were ordained to
eternal life.” What conclusion, then, shall we draw respecting the
latter, but that they are vessels of wrath to dishonour? Wherefore let
us not hesitate to say with Augustine, “God could convert to good the
will of the wicked, because he is omnipotent. It is evident that he
could. Why, then, does he not? Because he would not. Why he would not,
remains with himself.” For we ought not to aim at more wisdom than
becomes us. That will be much better than adopting the evasion of
Chrysostom, “that he draws those who are willing, and who stretch out
their hands for his aid;” that the difference may not appear to consist
in the decree of God, but wholly in the will of man. But an approach to
him is so far from being a mere effort of man, that even pious persons,
and such as fear God, still stand in need of the peculiar impulse of the
Spirit. Lydia, the seller of purple, feared God, and yet it was
necessary that her heart should be opened, to attend to, and profit by,
the doctrine of Paul. This declaration is not made respecting a single
female, but in order to teach us that every one’s advancement in piety
is the secret work of the Spirit. It is a fact not to be doubted, that
God sends his word to many whose blindness he determines shall be
increased. For with what design does he direct so many commands to be
delivered to Pharaoh? Was it from an expectation that his heart would be
softened by repeated and frequent messages? Before he began, he knew and
foretold the result. He commanded Moses to go and declare his will to
Pharaoh, adding at the same time, “But I will harden his heart, that he
shall not let the people go.”[572] So, when he calls forth Ezekiel, he
apprizes him that he is sending him to a rebellious and obstinate
people, that he may not be alarmed if they refuse to hear him.[573] So
Jeremiah foretells that his word will be like fire, to scatter and
destroy the people like stubble.[574] But the prophecy of Isaiah
furnishes a still stronger confirmation; for this is his mission from
the Lord: “Go and tell this people, Hear ye, indeed, but understand not,
and see ye, indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat,
and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their
eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and
convert, and be healed.”[575] Observe, he directs his voice to them, but
it is that they may become more deaf; he kindles a light, but it is that
they may be made more blind; he publishes his doctrine, but it is that
they may be more besotted; he applies a remedy, but it is that they may
not be healed. John, citing this prophecy, declares that the Jews could
not believe, because this curse of God was upon them.[576] Nor can it be
disputed, that to such persons as God determines not to enlighten, he
delivers his doctrine involved in enigmatical obscurity, that its only
effect may be to increase their stupidity. For Christ testifies that he
confined to his apostles the explanations of the parables in which he
had addressed the multitude; “because to you it is given to know the
mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.”[577]
What does the Lord mean, you will say, by teaching those by whom he
takes care not to be understood? Consider whence the fault arises, and
you will cease the inquiry; for whatever obscurity there is in the word,
yet there is always light enough to convince the consciences of the
wicked.
XIV. It remains now to be seen why the Lord does that which it is
evident he does. If it be replied, that this is done because men have
deserved it by their impiety, wickedness, and ingratitude, it will be a
just and true observation; but as we have not yet discovered the reason
of this diversity, why some persist in obduracy while others are
inclined to obedience, the discussion of it will necessarily lead us to
the same remark that Paul has quoted from Moses concerning Pharaoh:
“Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might show my
power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the
earth.”[578] That the reprobate obey not the word of God, when made
known to them, is justly imputed to the wickedness and depravity of
their hearts, provided it be at the same time stated, that they are
abandoned to this depravity, because they have been raised up, by a just
but inscrutable judgment of God, to display his glory in their
condemnation. So, when it is related of the sons of Eli, that they
listened not to his salutary admonitions, “because the Lord would slay
them,”[579] it is not denied that their obstinacy proceeded from their
own wickedness, but it is plainly implied that though the Lord was able
to soften their hearts, yet they were left in their obstinacy, because
his immutable decree had predestinated them to destruction. To the same
purpose is that passage of John, “Though he had done so many miracles
before them, yet they believed not on him; that the saying of Esaias the
prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, ‘Lord, who hath believed our
report?’”[580] For though he does not acquit the obstinate from the
charge of guilt, yet he satisfies himself with this reason, that the
grace of God has no charms for men till the Holy Spirit gives them a
taste for it. And Christ cites the prophecy of Isaiah, “They shall be
all taught of God,”[581] with no other design than to show, that the
Jews are reprobate and strangers to the Church, because they are
destitute of docility; and he adduces no other reason for it than that
the promise of God does not belong to them; which is confirmed by that
passage of Paul, where “Christ crucified, unto the Jews a
stumbling-block, and unto the Greeks foolishness,” is said to be “unto
them which are called, the power of God, and the wisdom of God.”[582]
For, after remarking what generally happens whenever the gospel is
preached, that it exasperates some, and is despised by others, he
represents it as duly appreciated only by “those who are called.” A
little before he had mentioned “them that believe;” not that he had an
intention to deny its proper place to the grace of God, which precedes
faith, but he seems to add this second description by way of correction,
in order that those who had received the gospel might ascribe the praise
of their faith to the Divine call. And so, likewise, in a subsequent
sentence, he represents them as the objects of Divine election. When the
impious hear these things, they loudly complain that God, by a wanton
exercise of power, abuses his wretched creatures for the sport of his
cruelty. But we, who know that all men are liable to so many charges at
the Divine tribunal, that of a thousand questions they would be unable
to give a satisfactory answer to one, confess that the reprobate suffer
nothing but what is consistent with the most righteous judgment of God.
Though we cannot comprehend the reason of this, let us be content with
some degree of ignorance where the wisdom of God soars into its own
sublimity.
XV. But as objections are frequently raised from some passages of
Scripture, in which God seems to deny that the destruction of the wicked
is caused by his decree, but that, in opposition to his remonstrances,
they voluntarily bring ruin upon themselves,—let us show by a brief
explication that they are not at all inconsistent with the foregoing
doctrine. A passage is produced from Ezekiel, where God says, “I have no
pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his
way and live.”[583] If this is to be extended to all mankind, why does
he not urge many to repentance, whose minds are more flexible to
obedience than those of others, who grow more and more callous to his
daily invitations? Among the inhabitants of Nineveh and Sodom, Christ
himself declares that his evangelical preaching and miracles would have
brought forth more fruit than in Judea. How is it, then, if God will
have all men to be saved, that he opens not the gate of repentance to
those miserable men who would be more ready to receive the favour? Hence
we perceive it to be a violent perversion of the passage, if the will of
God, mentioned by the prophet, be set in opposition to his eternal
counsel, by which he has distinguished the elect from the reprobate.
Now, if we inquire the genuine sense of the prophet, his only meaning is
to inspire the penitent with hopes of pardon. And this is the sum, that
it is beyond a doubt that God is ready to pardon sinners immediately on
their conversion. Therefore he wills not their death, inasmuch as he
wills their repentance. But experience teaches, that he does not will
the repentance of those whom he externally calls, in such a manner as to
affect all their hearts. Nor should he on this account be charged with
acting deceitfully; for, though his external call only renders those who
hear without obeying it inexcusable, yet it is justly esteemed the
testimony of God’s grace, by which he reconciles men to himself. Let us
observe, therefore, the design of the prophet in saying that God has no
pleasure in the death of a sinner; it is to assure the pious of God’s
readiness to pardon them immediately on their repentance, and to show
the impious the aggravation of their sin in rejecting such great
compassion and kindness of God. Repentance, therefore, will always be
met by Divine mercy; but on whom repentance is bestowed, we are clearly
taught by Ezekiel himself, as well as by all the prophets and apostles.
XVI. Another passage adduced is from Paul, where he states that “God
will have all men to be saved;”[584] which, though somewhat different
from the passage just considered, yet is very similar to it. I reply, in
the first place, that it is evident from the context, how God wills the
salvation of all; for Paul connects these two things together, that he
“will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the
truth.” If it was fixed in the eternal counsel of God, that they should
receive the doctrine of salvation, what is the meaning of that question
of Moses, “What nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them
as we have?”[585] How is it that God has deprived many nations of the
light of the gospel, which others enjoyed? How is it that the pure
knowledge of the doctrine of piety has never reached some, and that
others have but just heard some obscure rudiments of it? Hence it will
be easy to discover the design of Paul. He had enjoined Timothy to make
solemn prayers in the Church for kings and princes; but as it might seem
somewhat inconsistent to pray to God for a class of men almost past
hope,—for they were not only strangers to the body of Christ, but
striving with all their power to ruin his kingdom,—he subjoins, that
“this is good and acceptable in the sight of God, who will have all men
to be saved;” which only imports, that God has not closed the way of
salvation against any order of men, but has diffused his mercy in such a
manner that he would have no rank to be destitute of it. The other texts
adduced are not declarative of the Lord’s determination respecting all
men in his secret counsel: they only proclaim that pardon is ready for
all sinners who sincerely seek it.[586] For if they obstinately insist
on its being said that God is merciful to all, I will oppose to them,
what is elsewhere asserted, that “our God is in the heavens; he hath
done whatsoever he hath pleased.”[587] This text, then, must be
explained in a manner consistent with another, where God says, “I will
be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and I will show mercy on whom I
will show mercy.”[588] He who makes a selection of objects for the
exercise of his mercy, does not impart that mercy to all. But as it
clearly appears that Paul is there speaking, not of individuals, but
orders of men, I shall forbear any further argument. It must be
remarked, however, that Paul is not declaring the actual conduct of God
at all times, in all places, and to all persons, but merely representing
him as at liberty to make kings and magistrates at length partakers of
the heavenly doctrine, notwithstanding their present rage against it in
consequence of their blindness. There is more apparent plausibility in
their objection, from the declaration of Peter, that “the Lord is not
willing that any should perish, but that all should come to
repentance.”[589] But the second clause furnishes an immediate solution
of this difficulty; for the willingness that they should come to
repentance must be understood in consistence with the general tenor of
Scripture. Conversion is certainly in the power of God; let him be
asked, whether he wills the conversion of all, when he promises a few
individuals to give them “a heart of flesh,” while he leaves others with
“a heart of stone.”[590] If he were not ready to receive those who
implore his mercy, there would indeed be no propriety in this address,
“Turn ye unto me, and I will turn unto you;”[591] but I maintain that no
mortal ever approaches God without being divinely drawn. But if
repentance depended on the will of man, Paul would not have said, “If
God peradventure will give them repentance.”[592] And if God, whose
voice exhorts all men to repentance, did not draw the elect to it by the
secret operation of his Spirit, Jeremiah would not have said, “Turn thou
me, and I shall be turned; for thou art the Lord my God. Surely after
that I was turned, I repented.”[593]
XVII. If this be correct, it will be said there can be but little faith
in the promises of the gospel, which, in declaring the will of God,
assert that he wills what is repugnant to his inviolable decree. But
this is far from a just conclusion. For if we turn our attention to the
effect of the promises of salvation, we shall find that their
universality is not at all inconsistent with the predestination of the
reprobate. We know the promises to be effectual to us only when we
receive them by faith; on the contrary, the annihilation of faith is at
once an abolition of the promises. If this is their nature, we may
perceive that there is no discordance between these two things—God’s
having appointed from eternity on whom he will bestow his favour and
exercise his wrath, and his proclaiming salvation indiscriminately to
all. Indeed, I maintain that there is the most perfect harmony between
them. For his sole design in thus promising, is to offer his mercy to
all who desire and seek it, which none do but those whom he has
enlightened, and he enlightens all whom he has predestinated to
salvation. These persons experience the certain and unshaken truth of
the promises; so that it cannot be pretended that there is the least
contrariety between God’s eternal election and the testimony of his
grace offered to believers. But why does he mention all? It is in order
that the consciences of the pious may enjoy the more secure
satisfaction, seeing that there is no difference between sinners,
provided they have faith; and, on the other hand, that the impious may
not plead the want of an asylum to flee to from the bondage of sin,
while they ungratefully reject that which is offered to them. When the
mercy of God is offered to both by the gospel, it is faith, that is, the
illumination of God, which distinguishes between the pious and impious;
so that the former experience the efficacy of the gospel, but the latter
derive no benefit from it. Now, this illumination is regulated by God’s
eternal election. The complaint and lamentation of Christ, “O Jerusalem,
Jerusalem, how often would I have gathered thy children together, and ye
would not,”[594] however they cite it, affords them no support. I
confess, that Christ here speaks not merely in his human character, but
that he is upbraiding the Jews for having in all ages rejected his
grace. But we must define the will of God which is here intended. It is
well known how sedulously God laboured to preserve that people to
himself, and with what extreme obstinacy, from the first to the last,
they refused to be gathered, being abandoned to their own wandering
desires; but this does not authorize the conclusion, that the counsel of
God was frustrated by the wickedness of men. They object, that nothing
is more inconsistent with the nature of God than to have two wills. This
I grant them, provided it be rightly explained. But why do they not
consider the numerous passages, where, by the assumption of human
affections, God condescends beneath his own majesty? He says, “I have
spread out my hands all the day unto a rebellious people;”[595] early
and late endeavouring to bring them to himself. If they are determined
to accommodate all this to God, and disregard the figurative mode of
expression, they will give rise to many needless contentions, which may
be settled by this one solution, that what is peculiar to man is
transferred to God. The solution, however, elsewhere stated by us, is
fully sufficient—that though to our apprehension the will of God is
manifold and various, yet he does not in himself will things at variance
with each other, but astonishes our faculties with his various and
“manifold wisdom,” according to the expression of Paul, till we shall be
enabled to understand, that he mysteriously wills what now seems
contrary to his will. They impertinently object, that God being the
Father of all, it is unjust for him to disinherit any but such as have
previously deserved this punishment by their own guilt. As if the
goodness of God did not extend even to dogs and swine. But if the
question relates to the human race, let them answer why God allied
himself to one people as their Father; why he gathered even from them
but a very small number, as the flower of them. But their rage for
slander prevents these railers from considering that God “maketh his sun
to rise on the evil and on the good,”[596] but that the inheritance is
reserved for the few, to whom it shall one day be said, “Come, ye
blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the
foundation of the world.”[597] They further object, that God hates
nothing he has made; which though I grant them, the doctrine I maintain
still remains unshaken, that the reprobate are hated by God, and that
most justly, because, being destitute of his Spirit, they can do nothing
but what is deserving of his curse. They further allege, that there is
no difference between the Jew and the Gentile, and therefore that the
grace of God is offered indiscriminately to all: I grant it; only let
them admit, according to the declaration of Paul, that God calls whom he
pleases, both of the Jews and of the Gentiles,[598] so that he is under
no obligation to any. In this way also we answer their arguments from
another text, which says, that “God hath concluded them all in unbelief,
that he might have mercy upon all;”[599] which imports that he will have
the salvation of all who are saved ascribed to his mercy, though this
blessing is not common to all. Now, while many arguments are advanced on
both sides, let our conclusion be to stand astonished with Paul at so
great a mystery, and amidst the clamour of petulant tongues let us not
be ashamed of exclaiming with him, “O man, who art thou that repliest
against God?” For, as Augustine justly contends, it is acting a most
perverse part, to set up the measure of human justice as the standard by
which to measure the justice of God.
Footnote 521:
Rom. viii. 29, 30.
Footnote 522:
Rom viii. 15, 16. Ephes. i. 13, 14.
Footnote 523:
John vi. 46.
Footnote 524:
John xvii. 6.
Footnote 525:
John vi. 44.
Footnote 526:
Isaiah lxv. 1.
Footnote 527:
Joshua xxiv. 2, 3.
Footnote 528:
1 John iii. 24.
Footnote 529:
Acts xiii. 48.
Footnote 530:
Deut. xxx. 14.
Footnote 531:
Isaiah xxv. 1.
Footnote 532:
Matt. iii. 17.
Footnote 533:
Rom. viii. 32. John iii. 15, 16.
Footnote 534:
John v. 24.
Footnote 535:
John vi. 35-58.
Footnote 536:
John vi. 37, 39; xvii. 6, 12.
Footnote 537:
Rom. viii. 30.
Footnote 538:
Matt. xxii. 14.
Footnote 539:
1 Cor. x. 12.
Footnote 540:
Rom. xi. 17-23.
Footnote 541:
John vi. 37, 39.
Footnote 542:
John x. 27-29.
Footnote 543:
Matt. xv. 13.
Footnote 544:
1 John ii. 19.
Footnote 545:
Rom. viii. 35-39.
Footnote 546:
Phil. i. 6.
Footnote 547:
Psalm cxxxviii. 8.
Footnote 548:
1 John ii. 19.
Footnote 549:
Ephes. i. 13, 14.
Footnote 550:
Psalm xv. 1.
Footnote 551:
Psalm xxiv. 6.
Footnote 552:
John xvii. 12.
Footnote 553:
John vi. 70.
Footnote 554:
John xiii. 18.
Footnote 555:
Ezek. xiii. 9.
Footnote 556:
Luke x. 20.
Footnote 557:
Psalm lxix. 28.
Footnote 558:
Phil. iii. 5, 6.
Footnote 559:
Acts x. 2.
Footnote 560:
Ephes. ii. 1-3.
Footnote 561:
Ephes. ii. 11, 12.
Footnote 562:
Ephes. v. 8; iv. 18.
Footnote 563:
Ephes. iv. 25, 28.
Footnote 564:
1 Cor. vi. 9-11.
Footnote 565:
Rom. vi. 19, 21.
Footnote 566:
1 Peter iv. 3.
Footnote 567:
Josh. ii. 1, &c.
Footnote 568:
2 Kings xxi. 16.
Footnote 569:
Luke xxiii. 40-42.
Footnote 570:
Isaiah liii. 6.
Footnote 571:
1 Cor. iv. 7.
Footnote 572:
Exod. iv. 21.
Footnote 573:
Ezek. ii. 3; xii. 2.
Footnote 574:
Jer. v. 14.
Footnote 575:
Isaiah vi. 9, 10.
Footnote 576:
John xii. 39, 40.
Footnote 577:
Matt. xiii. 11.
Footnote 578:
Rom. ix. 17.
Footnote 579:
1 Sam. ii. 25.
Footnote 580:
John xii. 37, 38.
Footnote 581:
John vi. 45.
Footnote 582:
1 Cor. i. 23, 24.
Footnote 583:
Ezek. xxxiii. 11.
Footnote 584:
1 Tim. ii. 4.
Footnote 585:
Deut. iv. 7.
Footnote 586:
Psalm cxlv. 9.
Footnote 587:
Psalm cxv. 3.
Footnote 588:
Exod. xxxiii. 19.
Footnote 589:
2 Peter iii. 9.
Footnote 590:
Ezek. xxxvi. 26.
Footnote 591:
Zech. i. 3.
Footnote 592:
2 Tim. ii. 25.
Footnote 593:
Jer. xxxi. 18, 19.
Footnote 594:
Matt. xxiii. 37.
Footnote 595:
Isaiah lxv. 2.
Footnote 596:
Matt. v. 48.
Footnote 597:
Matt. xxv. 34.
Footnote 598:
Rom. ix. 24.
Footnote 599:
Rom. xi. 32.
CHAPTER XXV.
THE FINAL RESURRECTION.
Though Christ, the Sun of Righteousness, after having “abolished death,”
is declared by Paul to have “brought life and immortality to light,”
shining upon us “through the gospel,”[600] whence also in believing we
are said to have “passed from death unto life,”[601] being “no more
strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of
the household of God,”[602] who “hath made us sit together in heavenly
places” with his only begotten Son,[603] that nothing may be wanting to
our complete felicity,—yet, lest we should find it grievous to be still
exercised with a severe warfare, as though we derived no benefit from
the victory gained by Christ, we must remember what is stated in another
place concerning the nature of hope. For “since we hope for that we see
not,”[604] and, according to another text, “faith is the evidence of
things not seen;”[605] as long as we are confined in the prison of the
flesh, “we are absent from the Lord.”[606] Wherefore the same apostle
says, “Ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God;” and “when
Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with
him in glory.”[607] This, then, is our condition, “that we should live
soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world, looking for that
blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our
Saviour Jesus Christ.”[608] Here we have need of more than common
patience, lest, being wearied, we pursue a retrograde course, or desert
the station assigned us. All that has hitherto been stated, therefore,
concerning our salvation, requires minds elevated towards heaven, that,
according to the suggestion of Peter, we may love Christ, whom we have
not seen, and, believing in him, may “rejoice with joy unspeakable and
full of glory,” till we receive “the end of our faith.”[609] For which
reason, Paul represents the faith and hope of believers as having
respect to “the hope that is laid up in heaven.”[610] When we are thus
looking towards heaven, with our eyes fixed upon Christ, and nothing
detains them on earth from carrying us forward to the promised
blessedness, we realize the fulfilment of that declaration, “Where your
treasure is, there will your heart be also.”[611] Hence it is, that
faith is so scarce in the world; because to our sluggishness nothing is
more difficult than to ascend through innumerable obstacles, “pressing
toward the mark, for the prize of the high calling.”[612] To the
accumulation of miseries which generally oppress us, are added the
mockeries of the profane, with which our simplicity is assailed; while
voluntarily renouncing the allurements of present advantage or pleasure,
we seem to pursue happiness, which is concealed from our view, like a
shadow that continually eludes our grasp. In a word, above and below,
before and behind, we are beset by violent temptations, which our minds
would long ago have been incapable of sustaining, if they had not been
detached from terrestrial things, and attached to the heavenly life,
which is apparently at a remote distance. He alone, therefore, has made
a solid proficiency in the gospel who has been accustomed to continual
meditation on the blessed resurrection.
II. The supreme good was a subject of anxious dispute, and even
contention, among the ancient philosophers; yet none of them, except
Plato, acknowledged the chief good of man to consist in his union with
God. But of the nature of this union he had not even the smallest idea;
and no wonder, for he was totally uninformed respecting the sacred bond
of it. We know what is the only and perfect happiness even in this
earthly pilgrimage; but it daily inflames our hearts with increasing
desires after it, till we shall be satisfied with its full fruition.
Therefore I have observed that the advantage of Christ’s benefits is
solely enjoyed by those who elevate their minds to the resurrection.
Thus Paul also sets before believers this object, towards which he tells
us he directs all his own efforts, forgetting every thing else, “if by
any means he may attain unto it.”[613] And it behoves us to press
forward to the same point with the greater alacrity, lest, if this world
engross our attention, we should be grievously punished for our sloth.
He therefore characterizes believers by this mark, “Our conversation is
in heaven, from whence also we look for the Saviour.”[614] And that
their minds may not flag in this course, he associates with them all
creatures as their companions. For as ruin and deformity are visible on
every side, he tells us that all things in heaven and earth are tending
to renovation. For the fall of Adam having deranged the perfect order of
nature, the bondage to which the creatures have been subjected by the
sin of man is grievous and burdensome to them; not that they are endued
with any intelligence, but because they naturally aspire to the state of
perfection from which they have fallen. Paul therefore attributes to
them groaning and travailing pains,[615] that we who have received the
first-fruits of the Spirit may be ashamed of remaining in our
corruption, and not imitating at least the inanimate elements which bear
the punishment of the sin of others. But as a still stronger stimulus to
us, he calls the second advent of Christ “our redemption.” It is true,
indeed, that all the parts of our redemption are already completed; but
because “Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many, he shall
appear the second time without sin unto salvation.”[616] Whatever
calamities oppress us, this redemption should support us even till its
full consummation.
III. Let the importance of the object sharpen our pursuit. Paul justly
argues, that “if there be no resurrection of the dead,” the whole gospel
is vain and fallacious; for we should be “of all men the most
miserable,” being exposed to the hatred and reproaches of mankind,
“standing in jeopardy every hour,”[617] and being even like sheep
destined to the slaughter; and therefore its authority would fall to the
ground not in one point only, but in every thing it contains relating to
adoption and the accomplishment of our salvation. To this subject, the
most important of all, let us give an attention never to be wearied by
length of time. With this view I have deferred what I shall briefly say
of it to this place, that the reader, after receiving Christ as the
Author of complete salvation, may learn to soar higher, and may know
that he is invested with heavenly glory and immortality, in order that
the whole body may be conformed to the Head; as in his person the Holy
Spirit frequently gives an example of the resurrection. It is a thing
difficult to be believed, that bodies, after having been consumed by
corruption, shall at length, at the appointed time, be raised again.
Therefore, while many of the philosophers asserted the immortality of
the soul, the resurrection of the body was admitted by few. And though
this furnishes no excuse, yet it admonishes us that this truth is too
difficult to command the assent of the human mind. To enable faith to
surmount so great an obstacle, the Scripture supplies us with two
assistances: one consists in the similitude of Christ, the other in the
omnipotence of God. Now, whenever the resurrection is mentioned, let us
set before us the image of Christ, who, in our nature, which he assumed,
finished his course in this mortal life in such a manner, that, having
now obtained immortality, he is the pledge of future resurrection to us.
For in the afflictions that befall us, “we bear about in the body the
dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made
manifest in our body.”[618] And to separate him from us, is not lawful,
nor indeed possible, without rending him asunder. Hence the reasoning of
Paul: “If there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not
risen;”[619] for he assumes this as an acknowledged principle, that
Christ neither fell under the power of death, nor triumphed over it in
his resurrection, for himself as a private individual; but that all this
was a commencement in the Head of what must be fulfilled in all the
members, according to every one’s order and degree. For it would not be
right, indeed, for them to be in all respects equal to him. It is said
in the Psalms, “Thou wilt not suffer thine Holy One to see
corruption.”[620] Though a portion of this confidence belongs to us,
according to the measure bestowed upon us, yet the perfect
accomplishment has been seen in Christ alone, who had his body restored
to him entire, free from all corruption. Now that we may have no doubt
of our fellowship with Christ in his blessed resurrection, and may be
satisfied with this pledge, Paul expressly affirms that the design of
his session in heaven, and his advent in the character of Judge at the
last day, is to “change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like
unto his glorious body.”[621] In another place also, he shows that God
raised his Son from the dead, not in order to display a single specimen
of his power, but to exert on believers the same energy of his Spirit,
whom he therefore calls “our life” while he dwells in us, because he was
given for this very purpose, “to quicken our mortal bodies.”[622] I am
but briefly glancing at things which would admit of a fuller discussion,
and are deserving of more elegance of style; but I trust the pious
reader will find in a small compass sufficient matter for the
edification of his faith. Christ, therefore, rose again, that we might
be the companions of his future life. He was raised by the Father,
inasmuch as he was the Head of the church, from which he does not suffer
him to be separated. He was raised by the power of the Spirit, who is
given to us also for the purpose of quickening us. In a word, he was
raised that he might be “the resurrection and the life.” But as we have
observed that this mirror exhibits to us a lively image of our
resurrection, so it will furnish a firm foundation for our minds to rest
upon, provided we are not wearied or disturbed by the long delay;
because it is not ours to measure the moments of time by our own
inclination, but to wait patiently for God’s establishment of his
kingdom in his own appointed time. To this purpose is the expression of
Paul, “Christ the first-fruits, afterward they that are Christ’s at his
coming.”[623] But that no doubt might be entertained of the resurrection
of Christ, on which the resurrection of us all is founded, we see in how
many and various ways he has caused it to be attested to us. Scorners
will ridicule the history narrated by the evangelists, as a childish
mockery. For what weight, they ask, is there in the message brought by
some women in a fright, and afterwards confirmed by the disciples half
dead with fear? Why does not Christ rather set up the splendid trophies
of his victory in the midst of the temple and the public places? Why
does he not make a formidable entrance into the presence of Pilate? Why
does he not prove himself to be again alive, to the priests and all the
inhabitants of Jerusalem? Profane men will scarcely believe the persons
selected by him to be competent witnesses. I reply, notwithstanding the
contemptible weakness evident in these beginnings, yet all this was
conducted by the admirable providence of God, that they who were lately
dispirited with fear, were hurried away to the sepulchre, partly by love
to Christ and pious zeal, partly by their own unbelief, not only to be
eye-witnesses of the fact, but to hear from the angels the same as they
saw with their eyes. How can we suspect the authority of those who
considered what they heard from the women “as idle tales,” till they had
the fact clearly before them?[624] As to the people at large, and the
governor himself, it is no wonder that after the ample conviction they
had, they were denied a sight of Christ, or any other proofs. The
sepulchre is sealed, a watch is set, the body is not found on the third
day. The soldiers, corrupted by bribes, circulate a rumour that he was
stolen away by his disciples;[625] as if they had power to collect a
strong force, or were furnished with arms, or were even accustomed to
such a daring exploit. But if the soldiers had not courage enough to
repulse them, why did they not pursue them, that with the assistance of
the people they might seize some of them? The truth is, therefore, that
Pilate by his zeal attested the resurrection of Christ; and the guards
who were placed at the sepulchre, either by their silence or by their
falsehood, were in reality so many heralds to publish the same fact. In
the mean time, the voice of the angels loudly proclaimed, “He is not
here, but is risen.”[626] Their celestial splendour evidently showed
them to be angels, and not men. After this, if there was any doubt still
remaining, it was removed by Christ himself. More than once, his
disciples saw, and even felt and handled him; and their unbelief has
eminently contributed to the confirmation of our faith. He discoursed
among them concerning the mysteries of the kingdom of God, and at length
they saw him ascend to heaven.[627] Nor was this spectacle exhibited
only to the eleven apostles, but “he was seen of above five hundred
brethren at once.”[628] By the mission of the Holy Spirit he gave an
undeniable proof, not only of his life, but also of his sovereign
dominion; according to his prediction, “It is expedient for you that I
go away; for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but
if I depart, I will send him unto you.”[629] Paul, in his way to
Damascus, was not prostrated to the ground by the influence of a dead
man, but felt that the person whom he was opposing was armed with
supreme power. He appeared to Stephen for another reason—to overcome the
fear of death by an assurance of life.[630] To refuse credit to
testimonies so numerous and authentic, is not diffidence, but perverse
and unreasonable obstinacy.
IV. The remark we have made, that in proving the resurrection, our minds
should be directed to the infinite power of God, is briefly suggested in
these words of Paul: “Who shall change our vile body, that it may be
fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby
he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.”[631] It would
therefore be extremely unreasonable here, to consider what could
possibly happen in the ordinary course of nature, when the object
proposed to us is an inestimable miracle, the magnitude of which absorbs
all our faculties. Yet Paul adduces an example from nature to reprove
the folly of those who deny the resurrection. “Thou fool,” says he,
“that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die.”[632] He tells
us that seed sown displays an image of the resurrection, because the
corn is reproduced from putrefaction. Nor would it be a thing so
difficult to believe, if we paid proper attention to the miracles which
present themselves to our view in all parts of the world. But let us
remember, that no man will be truly persuaded of the future
resurrection, but he who is filled with admiration, and ascribes to the
power of God the glory that is due to it. Transported with this
confidence, Isaiah exclaims, “Thy dead men shall live; together with my
dead body shall they arise; awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust.”[633]
Surrounded by desperate circumstances, he has recourse to God, the
Author of life, unto whom, as the Psalmist says, “belong the issues from
death.”[634] Even reduced to a state resembling a dead carcass more than
a living man, yet relying on the power of God, just as if he were in
perfect health, Job looks forward without any doubts to that day. “I
know,” says he, “that my Redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the
latter day upon the earth,” there to display his power; “and though
after my skin, worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God;
whom I shall see for myself, and not another.”[635] For though some
persons employ great subtilty to pervert these texts, as if they ought
not to be understood of the resurrection, they nevertheless confirm what
they wish to destroy; since holy men, in the midst of calamities, seek
consolation from no other quarter than from the similitude of the
resurrection; which more fully appears from a passage in Ezekiel.[636]
For when the Jews rejected the promise of their restoration, and
objected, that there was no more probability of a way being opened for
their return, than of the dead coming forth from their sepulchres, a
vision is presented to the prophet, of a field full of dry bones, and
God commands them to receive flesh and nerves. Though this figure is
intended to inspire the people with a hope of restoration, he borrows
the argument for it from the resurrection; as it is to us also the
principal model of all the deliverances which believers experience in
this world. So Christ, after having declared that the voice of the
gospel communicates life, in consequence of its rejection by the Jews,
immediately adds, “Marvel not at this; for the hour is coming, in the
which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come
forth.”[637] After the example of Paul, therefore, let us even now
triumphantly exult in the midst of our conflicts, that he who has
promised us a life to come “is able to keep that which we have committed
to him;” and thus let us glory that “there is laid up for us a crown of
righteousness, which the righteous Judge shall give us.”[638] The
consequence of this will be, that all the troubles we suffer will point
us to the life to come, “seeing it is a righteous thing with God,” and
agreeable to his nature, “to recompense tribulation to them that trouble
us, and to us who are” unjustly “troubled, rest, when the Lord Jesus
shall be revealed, with his mighty angels, in flaming fire.”[639] But we
must remember what immediately follows, that “he shall come to be
glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe,”
because they believe the gospel.
V. Now, though the minds of men ought to be continually occupied with
the study of this subject, yet as if they expressly intended to abolish
all remembrance of the resurrection, they have called death the end of
all things, and the destruction of man. For Solomon certainly speaks
according to a common and received opinion, when he says, “A living dog
is better than a dead lion.”[640] And again: “Who knows whether the
spirit of man goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast goeth
downward?”[641] This brutish stupidity has infected all ages of the
world, and even forced its way into the Church; for the Sadducees had
the audacity publicly to profess, that there is no resurrection, and
that souls are mortal. But that none might be excused by this gross
ignorance, the very instinct of nature has always set before the eyes of
unbelievers an image of the resurrection. For what is the sacred and
inviolable custom of interring the dead, but a pledge of another life?
Nor can it be objected that this originated in error; for the rites of
sepulture were always observed among the holy fathers; and it pleased
God that the same custom should be retained among the Gentiles, that
their torpor might be roused by the image of the resurrection thereby
set before them. Though this ceremony produced no good effects upon
them, yet it will be useful to us, if we wisely consider its tendency;
for it is no slight refutation of unbelief, that all united in
professing a thing that none of them believed. But Satan has not only
stupefied men’s minds, to make them bury the memory of the resurrection
together with the bodies of the dead, but has endeavoured to corrupt
this point of doctrine by various fictions, with an ultimate view to its
total subversion. Not to mention that he began to oppose it in the days
of Paul, not long after arose the Millenarians, who limited the reign of
Christ to a thousand years. Their fiction is too puerile to require or
deserve refutation. Nor does the Revelation, which they quote in favour
of their error, afford them any support; for the term of a thousand
years, there mentioned,[642] refers not to the eternal blessedness of
the Church, but to the various agitations which awaited the Church in
its militant state upon earth. But the whole Scripture proclaims that
there will be no end of the happiness of the elect, or the punishment of
the reprobate. Now, all those things which are invisible to our eyes, or
far above the comprehension of our minds, must either be believed on the
authority of the oracles of God, or entirely rejected. Those who assign
the children of God a thousand years to enjoy the inheritance of the
future life, little think what dishonour they cast on Christ and his
kingdom. For if they are not invested with immortality, neither is
Christ himself, into the likeness of whose glory they will be
transformed, received up into immortal glory. If their happiness will
have any end, it follows that the kingdom of Christ, on the stability of
which it rests, is temporary. Lastly, either these persons are extremely
ignorant of all Divine things, or they are striving, with malignant
perverseness, to overturn all the grace of God and power of Christ; and
these can never be perfectly fulfilled till sin is abolished, and death
swallowed up, and eternal life completely established. But the folly of
being afraid that too much cruelty is attributed to God, if the
reprobate are doomed to eternal punishment, is even evident to the
blind. Will the Lord do any injury by refusing the enjoyment of his
kingdom to persons whose ingratitude shall have rendered them unworthy
of it? But their sins are temporary. This I grant; but the majesty of
God, as well as his justice, which their sins have violated, is eternal.
Their iniquity, therefore, is justly remembered. Then the punishment is
alleged to be excessive, being disproportioned to the crime. But this is
intolerable blasphemy, when the majesty of God is so little valued, when
the contempt of it is considered of no more consequence than the
destruction of one soul. But let us pass by these triflers; lest,
contrary to what we have before said, we should appear to consider their
reveries as worthy of refutation.
VI. Beside these wild notions, the perverse curiosity of man has
introduced two others. Some have supposed that the whole man dies, and
that souls are raised again together with bodies; others, admitting the
immortality of souls, suppose they will be clothed with new bodies, and
thereby deny the resurrection of the flesh. As I have touched on the
former of these notions in the creation of man, it will be sufficient
again to apprize my readers, that it is a brutish error, to represent
the spirit, formed after the image of God, as a fleeting breath which
animates the body only during this perishable life, and to annihilate
the temple of the Holy Spirit; in short, to despoil that part of us in
which Divinity is eminently displayed, and the characters of immortality
are conspicuous, of this property; so that the condition of the body
must be better and more excellent than that of the soul. Very different
is the doctrine of Scripture, which compares the body to a habitation,
from which we depart at death; because it estimates us by that part of
our nature which constitutes the distinction between us and the brutes.
Thus Peter, when near his death, says, “Shortly I must put off this my
tabernacle.”[643] And Paul, speaking of believers, having said that “if
our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building
in the heavens,” adds that “whilst we are at home in the body, we are
absent from the Lord, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and
to be present with the Lord.”[644] Unless our souls survive our bodies,
what is it that is present with God when separated from the body? But
the apostle removes all doubt when he says that we are “come to the
spirits of just men made perfect.”[645] By which expression he means,
that we are associated with the holy fathers, who, though dead, still
maintain the same piety with us, so that we cannot be members of Christ
without being united with them. If souls separated from bodies did not
retain their existence so as to be capable of glory and felicity, Christ
would not have said to the thief, “To-day shalt thou be with me in
paradise.”[646] Supported by such undeniable testimonies, let us not
hesitate, after the example of Christ, when we die, to commend our
spirits to God; or, like Stephen, to resign them to the care of Christ,
who is justly called the faithful “Shepherd and Bishop of souls.”
Over-curious inquiry respecting their intermediate state is neither
lawful nor useful. Many persons exceedingly perplex themselves by
discussing what place they occupy, and whether they already enjoy the
glory of heaven, or not. But it is folly and presumption to push our
inquiries on unknown things beyond what God permits us to know. The
Scripture declares that Christ is present with them, and receives them
into paradise, where they enjoy consolation, and that the souls of the
reprobate endure the torments which they have deserved; but it proceeds
no further. Now, what teacher or doctor shall discover to us that which
God has concealed? The question respecting place is equally senseless
and futile; because we know that the soul has no dimensions like the
body. The blessed assemblage of holy spirits being called the bosom of
Abraham, teaches us that it is enough for us, at the close of this
pilgrimage, to be received by the common Father of believers, and to
participate with him in the fruit of his faith. In the mean while, as
the Scripture uniformly commands us to look forward with eager
expectation to the coming of Christ, and defers the crown of glory which
awaits us till that period, let us be content within these limits which
God prescribes to us—that the souls of pious men, after finishing their
laborious warfare, depart into a state of blessed rest, where they wait
with joy and pleasure for the fruition of the promised glory; and so,
that all things remain in suspense till Christ appears as the Redeemer.
And there is no doubt that the condition of the reprobate is the same as
Jude assigns to the devils, who are confined and bound in chains till
they are brought forth to the punishment to which they are doomed.
VII. Equally monstrous is the error of those who imagine that souls will
not resume the bodies which at present belong to them, but will be
furnished with others altogether different. It was the very futile
reasoning of the Manichæans, that it is absurd to expect that the flesh
which is so impure will ever rise again. As if there were no impurity
attached to the souls, which they nevertheless encouraged to entertain
hopes of a heavenly life. It was therefore just as if they had
maintained, that any thing infected with the contagion of sin is
incapable of being purified by the power of God; for that reverie, that
the flesh was created by the devil, and therefore naturally impure, I at
present forbear to notice; and only observe, that whatever we have in us
now unworthy of heaven, will not hinder the resurrection. In the first
place, when Paul exhorts believers to “cleanse” themselves “from all
filthiness of the flesh and spirit,”[647] thence follows the judgment he
elsewhere denounces, “that every one” shall “receive the things done in
his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or
bad;”[648] with which agrees another passage, “that the life also of
Jesus might be made manifest in our body.”[649] Wherefore in another
place, he prays to God that the whole person may “be preserved blameless
unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ,” even the “body,” as well as
the “soul and spirit.”[650] And no wonder; for that those bodies which
God has dedicated as temples for himself, should sink into corruption,
without any hope of resurrection, would be absurd in the extreme. What
is to be concluded from their being members of Christ?[651] from God’s
enjoining every part of them to be sanctified to himself, requiring
their tongues to celebrate his name, their hands to be lifted up with
purity to him,[652] and their bodies altogether to be presented to him
as “living sacrifices?”[653] This part of our nature therefore being
dignified with such illustrious honour by the heavenly Judge, what
madness is betrayed by a mortal man, in asserting it to be reduced to
ashes without any hope of restoration! And Paul, when he gives us this
exhortation, “Glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are
God’s,”[654] certainly does not countenance consigning to eternal
corruption that which he asserts to be consecrated to God. Nor is there
any point more clearly established in Scripture, than the resurrection
of our present bodies. “This corruptible,” says Paul, “must put on
incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.”[655] If new
bodies were to be formed by God, what would become of this change of
quality? If it had been said, that we must be renewed, the ambiguity of
the expression might have given occasion for cavil: now, when he
particularly designates the bodies that surround us, and promises that
they shall be “raised in incorruption,” it is a sufficient denial of the
formation of new ones. “He could not indeed,” says Tertullian, “have
spoken more expressly, unless he had held his own skin in his hand.” Nor
will any cavil evade the declaration of Isaiah, cited by the apostle,
respecting Christ as the future Judge of the world: “As I live, saith
the Lord, every knee shall bow to me;”[656] for he plainly declares to
the persons addressed by him, that they shall be obliged to give an
account of their lives; which would not be reasonable, if new bodies
were to be placed at the tribunal. There is no obscurity in the language
of Daniel: “Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall
awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting
contempt.”[657] For God does not collect fresh materials from the four
elements for the fabrication of men, but calls the dead out of their
sepulchres. And this the plainest reason dictates. For if death, which
originated in the fall of man, be adventitious, and not necessary to our
nature, the restoration effected by Christ belongs to the same body
which was thus rendered mortal. From the ridicule of the Athenians, when
Paul asserted the resurrection, it is easy to infer the nature of his
doctrine; and that ridicule is of no small weight for the confirmation
of our faith. The injunction of Christ also is worthy of attention:
“Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul;
but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in
hell.”[658] For there would be no reason for this fear, if the body
which we now carry about were not liable to punishment. Another of
Christ’s declarations is equally plain: “The hour is coming, in the
which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come
forth, they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life, and they
that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.”[659] Shall we
say that souls rest in graves, and will there hear the voice of Christ,
and not rather that bodies at his command will return to the vigour they
had lost? Besides, if we are to receive new bodies, where will be the
conformity between the Head and members? Christ rose; was it by making
himself a new body? No, but according to his prediction, “Destroy this
temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”[660] The mortal body
which he before possessed, he again assumed. For it would have conduced
but little to our benefit, if there had been a substitution of a new
body, and an annihilation of that which had been offered as an atoning
sacrifice. We must, therefore, maintain the connection stated by the
apostle—that we shall rise, because Christ has risen;[661] for nothing
is more improbable, than that our body, in which “we bear about the
dying of the Lord Jesus,”[662] should be deprived of a resurrection
similar to his. There was an illustrious example of this immediately on
Christ’s resurrection, when “the graves were opened, and many bodies of
the saints which slept arose.”[663] For it cannot be denied, that this
was a prelude, or rather an earnest, of the final resurrection, which we
expect; such as was exhibited before in Enoch and Elias, whom Tertullian
speaks of as “the candidates of the resurrection,” because they were
taken into the immediate care of God, with an entire exemption from
corruption in body and soul.
VIII. I am ashamed of consuming so many words on so clear a subject; but
my readers will cheerfully unite with me in submitting to this trouble,
that no room may be left for men of perverse and presumptuous minds to
deceive the unwary. The unsteady spirits I am now opposing, bring
forward a figment of their own brains, that at the resurrection there
will be a creation of new bodies. What reason can induce them to adopt
this sentiment, but a seeming incredibility, in their apprehension, that
a body long consumed by corruption can ever return to its pristine
state? Unbelief, therefore, is the only source of this opinion. In the
Scripture, on the contrary, we are uniformly exhorted by the Spirit of
God to hope for the resurrection of our body. For this reason, baptism
is spoken of by Paul as a seal of our future resurrection;[664] and we
are as clearly invited to this confidence by the sacred Supper, when we
receive into our mouths the symbols of spiritual grace. And certainly
the exhortation of Paul, to “yield our members as instruments of
righteousness unto God,”[665] would lose all its force, if unaccompanied
by what he afterwards subjoins: “He that raised up Christ from the dead,
shall also quicken your mortal bodies.”[666] For what would it avail to
devote our feet, hands, eyes, and tongues to the service of God, if they
were not to participate the benefit and reward? This is clearly
confirmed by the following passage of Paul: “The body is not for
fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body. And God hath
both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his own
power.”[667] The following passages are still plainer—that our bodies
are the “temples of the Holy Ghost,” and “members of Christ.”[668] In
the mean time, we see how he connects the resurrection with chastity and
holiness; and so he just after extends the price of redemption to our
bodies. Now, it would be extremely unreasonable that the body of Paul,
in which he “bore the marks of the Lord Jesus,”[669] and in which he
eminently glorified Christ, should be deprived of the reward of the
crown. Hence also that exultation: “We look for the Saviour from heaven,
who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his
glorious body.”[670] And if it be true, “that we must through much
tribulation enter into the kingdom of God,”[671] there can be no reason
for prohibiting this entrance to the bodies, which God trains under the
banner of the cross, and honours with the glory of victory. Therefore no
doubt has ever been entertained by the saints, whether they should hope
to be companions of Christ hereafter; who transfers to his own person
all the afflictions with which we are tried, to teach us that they are
conducting us to life. And God also established the holy fathers under
the law in this faith by an external ceremony. For to what purpose was
the rite of sepulture, as we have already seen, but to instruct them
that another life was prepared for the interred bodies? The same was
suggested by the spices and other symbols of immortality, which, like
the sacrifices under the law, assisted the obscurity of direct
instruction. Nor did this custom arise from superstition; for we find
the Holy Spirit as diligent in mentioning the sepultures, as in
insisting on the principal mysteries of faith. And Christ commends this
as no mean office;[672] certainly for no other reason, but because it
raises our eyes from the view of the grave, which corrupts and dissolves
all things, to the spectacle of future renovation. Besides the very
careful observance of this ceremony, which is commended in the fathers,
sufficiently proves it to have been an excellent and valuable assistance
to faith. Nor would Abraham have discovered such solicitous concern
about the sepulchre of his wife, if he had not been actuated by motives
of religion, and the prospect of more than worldly advantage; that by
adorning her dead body with the emblems of the resurrection, he might
confirm his own faith, and that of his family.[673] There is yet a
clearer proof of this in the example of Jacob; who, to testify to his
posterity that the hope of the promised land did not forsake his heart
even in death, commands his bones to be reconveyed thither.[674] If he
was to be furnished with a new body, would not this have been a
ridiculous command concerning dust that was soon to be annihilated?
Wherefore, if the authority of the Scripture has any weight with us, no
clearer or stronger proof of any doctrine can possibly be desired. Even
children understand this to be the meaning of the term “resurrection;”
for we never apply this term to any instance of original creation; nor
would it be consistent with that declaration of Christ, “Of all which
the Father hath given me, I shall lose nothing, but will raise it up
again at the last day.”[675] The same is implied in the word “sleeping,”
which is only applicable to the body. Hence the appellation of
_cemetery_, or _sleeping-place_, given to places of burial. It remains
for me to touch a little on the manner of the resurrection. And I shall
but just hint at it; because Paul, by calling it a mystery, exhorts us
to sobriety, and forbids all licentiousness of subtle and extravagant
speculation. In the first place, let it be remembered, as we have
observed, that we shall rise again with the same bodies we have now, as
to the substance, but that the quality will be different; just as the
very body of Christ which had been offered as a sacrifice was raised
again, but with such new and superior qualities, as though it had been
altogether different. Paul represents this by some familiar examples.
For as the flesh of man and of brutes is the same in substance, but not
in quality; as the matter of all the stars is the same, but they differ
in glory; so, though we shall retain the substance of our body, he tells
us there will be a change, which will render its condition far more
excellent.[676] The “corruptible” body, therefore, will neither perish
nor vanish, in order to our resurrection; but having laid aside
corruption, will “put on incorruption.”[677] God, having all the
elements subject to his control, will find no difficulty in commanding
the earth, the water, and the fire, to restore whatever they appear to
have consumed. This is declared in figurative language by Isaiah:
“Behold, the Lord cometh out of his place to punish the inhabitants of
the earth for their iniquity; the earth also shall disclose her blood,
and shall no more cover her slain.”[678] But we must remark the
difference between those who shall have been already dead, and those
whom that day shall find alive. “We shall not all sleep,” says Paul,
“but we shall all be changed;”[679] that is, there will be no necessity
for any distance of time to intervene between death and the commencement
of the next life; for “in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, the
trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible,” and
the living transformed by a sudden change into the same glory. So in
another Epistle he comforts believers who were to die, that those “which
are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord, shall not prevent them
which are asleep,” but that “the dead in Christ shall rise first.”[680]
If it be objected that the apostle says, “It is appointed unto men once
to die,”[681] the answer is easy,—that where the state of the nature is
changed, it is a species of death, and may without impropriety be so
called; and therefore there is a perfect consistence between these
things, that all will be removed by death when they put off the mortal
body, but that a separation of the body and soul will not be necessary,
where there will be an instantaneous change.
IX. But here arises a question of greater difficulty. How can the
resurrection, which is a peculiar benefit of Christ, be common to the
impious and the subjects of the Divine curse? We know that in Adam all
were sentenced to death;[682] Christ comes as “the resurrection and the
life;”[683] but was it to bestow life promiscuously on all mankind? But
what would be more improbable, than that they should attain, in their
obstinate blindness, what the pious worshippers of God recover by faith
alone? Yet it remains certain, that one will be a resurrection to
judgment, the other to life; and that Christ will come to “separate the
sheep from the goats.”[684] I reply, we ought not to think that so very
strange, which we see exemplified in our daily experience. We know that
in Adam we lost the inheritance of the whole world, and have no more
right to the enjoyment of common aliments, than to the fruit of the tree
of life. How is it, then, that God not only “maketh his sun to rise on
the evil and on the good,”[685] but that, for the accommodations of the
present life, his inestimable liberality is diffused in the most copious
abundance? Hence we see, that things which properly belong to Christ and
his members, are also extended to the impious; not to become their
legitimate possession, but to render them more inexcusable. Thus impious
men frequently experience God’s beneficence in remarkable instances,
which sometimes exceed all the blessings of the pious, but which,
nevertheless, are the means of aggravating their condemnation. If it be
objected, that the resurrection is improperly compared with fleeting and
terrestrial advantages, I reply again, that when men were first
alienated from God, the Fountain of life, they deserved the ruin of the
devil, to be altogether destroyed; yet the wonderful counsel of God
devised a middle state, that without life they might live in death. It
ought not to be thought more unreasonable, if the impious are raised
from the dead, in order to be dragged to the tribunal of Christ, whom
they now refuse to hear as their Master and Teacher. For it would be a
slight punishment to be destroyed by death, if they were not to be
brought before the Judge whose infinite and endless vengeance they have
incurred, to receive the punishments due to their rebellion. But though
we must maintain what we have asserted, and what is asserted by Paul in
his celebrated confession before Felix, “that there shall be a
resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust,”[686] yet the
Scripture more commonly exhibits the resurrection to the children of God
alone, in connection with the glory of heaven; because, strictly
speaking, Christ will come, not for the destruction of the world, but
for purposes of salvation. This is the reason that the Creed mentions
only the life of blessedness.
X. But, as the prophecy of “death being swallowed up in victory,” shall
then, and not till then, be fully accomplished,—let us always reflect on
eternal felicity as the end of the resurrection; of the excellence of
which, if every thing were said that could be expressed by all the
tongues of men, yet the smallest part of it would scarcely be mentioned.
For though we are plainly informed, that the kingdom of God is full of
light, joy, felicity, and glory, yet all that is mentioned remains far
above our comprehension, and enveloped, as it were, in enigmatical
obscurity, till the arrival of that day, when he shall exhibit his glory
to us face to face. “Now are we the sons of God, (says John,) and it
doth not yet appear what we shall be; but we know, that when he shall
appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.”[687]
Wherefore the prophets, because they could not describe that spiritual
blessedness by any terms expressive of its sublime nature, generally
represented it under corporeal images. Yet, as any intimation of that
happiness must kindle in us a fervour of desire, let us chiefly dwell on
this reflection—If God, as an inexhaustible fountain, contains within
himself a plenitude of all blessings, nothing beyond him can ever be
desired by those who aspire to the supreme good, and a perfection of
happiness. This we are taught in various passages of Scripture.
“Abraham,” says God, “I am thy exceeding great reward.”[688] With this
David agrees: “The Lord is the portion of mine inheritance; the lines
are fallen unto me in pleasant places.”[689] Again: “I will behold thy
face; I shall be satisfied.”[690] Peter declares, that believers are
called, “that they might be partakers of the Divine nature.”[691] How
will this be? Because “he shall be glorified in his saints, and admired
in all them that believe.”[692] If the Lord will make the elect
partakers of his glory, strength, and righteousness, and will even
bestow himself upon them to be enjoyed, and, what is better than this,
to be in some sense united to them,—let us remember, that in this favour
every kind of felicity is comprised. And after we have made considerable
progress in this meditation, we may still acknowledge the conceptions of
our minds to be extremely low, in comparison with the sublimity of this
mystery. Sobriety, therefore, is the more necessary for us on this
subject, lest, forgetful of our slender capacity, we presumptuously soar
to too high an elevation, and are overwhelmed with the blaze of
celestial glory. We perceive, likewise, how we are actuated by an
inordinate desire of knowing more than is right; which gives rise to a
variety of questions, both frivolous and pernicious. I call those
frivolous, from which no advantage can possibly be derived. But those of
the second class are worse, involving persons, who indulge them, in
injurious speculations, and therefore I call them pernicious. What is
taught in the Scriptures, we ought to receive without any controversy;
that as God, in the various distribution of his gifts to the saints in
this world, does not equally enlighten them all, so in heaven, where God
will crown those gifts, there will be an inequality in the degrees of
their glory. The language of Paul is not indiscriminately applicable to
all—“Ye are our glory and joy at our Lord’s coming;”[693] nor Christ’s
address to his apostles—“Ye shall sit judging the twelve tribes of
Israel.”[694] But Paul, who knew that according as God enriches the
saints with spiritual gifts on earth, so he adorns them with glory in
heaven, doubts not that there is in reserve for him a peculiar crown in
proportion to his labours. And Christ commends to his apostles the
dignity of the office with which they were invested, by assuring them
that the reward of it was laid up in heaven.[695] Thus also Daniel:
“They that be wise, shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and
they that turn many to righteousness, as the stars, for ever and
ever.”[696] And an attentive consideration of the Scriptures will
convince us, that they not only promise eternal life generally to
believers, but also a special reward to each individual. Whence that
expression of Paul—“The Lord reward him according to his works.”[697] It
is also confirmed by the promise of Christ that his disciples should
receive a hundred-fold more in eternal life.[698] In a word, as Christ
begins the glory of his body by a manifold variety of gifts in this
world, and enlarges it by degrees, in the same manner he will also
perfect it in heaven.
XI. As all the pious will receive this with one consent, because it is
sufficiently attested in the word of God, so, on the other hand,
dismissing abstruse questions, which they know to be obstructions to
them, they will not transgress the limits prescribed to them. For
myself, I not only refrain as an individual from the unnecessary
investigation of useless questions, but think it my duty to be cautious,
lest I encourage the vanity of others by answering them. Men, thirsting
after useless knowledge, inquire what will be the distance between the
prophets and apostles, and between the apostles and martyrs; and how
many degrees of difference there will be between those who have married
and those who have lived and died in celibacy; in short, they leave not
a corner of heaven unexplored. The next object of their inquiry is, what
end will be answered by the restoration of the world; since the children
of God will want nothing of all its vast and incomparable abundance, but
will be like the angels of God, whose freedom from all animal
necessities is the symbol of eternal blessedness. I reply, there will be
such great pleasantness in the very prospect, and such exquisite
sweetness in the mere knowledge, without any use of it, that this
felicity will far exceed all the accommodations afforded us in the
present state. Let us suppose ourselves placed in some region the most
opulent in the world, and furnished with every pleasure; who would not
sometimes be prevented by disease from making use of the bounties of
God? who would not often have his enjoyment of them interrupted by the
consequences of intemperance? Hence it follows, that calm and serene
enjoyment, pure from every vice and free from all defect, although there
should be no use of a corruptible life, is the perfection of happiness.
Others go further, and inquire, whether dross and all impurities in
metals are not removed from that restoration, and incompatible with such
a state. Though I in some measure grant this, I expect, with Paul, a
reparation of all the evils caused by sin, for which he represents the
creatures as groaning and travailing. They proceed further still, and
inquire, what better state awaits the human race, when the blessing of
posterity shall no longer be enjoyed. The solution of this question also
is easy. The splendid commendations of it in the Scriptures relate to
that progressive increase, by which God is continually carrying forward
the system of nature to its consummation. But as the unwary are easily
caught by such temptations, and are afterwards drawn further into the
labyrinth, till, at length, every one being pleased with his own
opinion, there is no end to disputes,—the best and shortest rule for our
conduct, is to content ourselves with “seeing through a glass darkly,”
till we shall “see face to face.”[699] For very few persons are
concerned about the way that leads to heaven, but all are anxious to
know, before the time, what passes there. Men in general are slow, and
reluctant to engage in the conflict, and yet portray to themselves
imaginary triumphs.
XII. Now, as no description can equal the severity of the Divine
vengeance on the reprobate, their anguish and torment are figuratively
represented to us under corporeal images; as, darkness, weeping, and
gnashing of teeth, unextinguishable fire, a worm incessantly gnawing the
heart.[700] For there can be no doubt but that, by such modes of
expression, the Holy Spirit intended to confound all our faculties with
horror; as when it is said, that “Tophet is ordained of old; the pile
thereof is fire and much wood: the breath of the Lord, like a stream of
brimstone, doth kindle it.”[701] As these representations should assist
us in forming some conception of the wretched condition of the wicked,
so they ought principally to fix our attention on the calamity of being
alienated from the presence of God; and in addition to this,
experiencing such hostility from the Divine majesty as to be unable to
escape from its continual pursuit. For, in the first place, his
indignation is like a most violent flame, which devours and consumes all
that it touches. In the next place, all the creatures so subserve the
execution of his judgment, that those to whom the Lord will thus
manifest his wrath, will find the heaven, the earth, and the sea, the
animals, and all that exists, inflamed, as it were, with dire
indignation against them, and all armed for their destruction. It is no
trivial threatening, therefore, denounced by the apostle, that
unbelievers “shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the
presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power.”[702] And when
the prophets excite terror by corporeal figures, though they advance
nothing hyperbolical for our dull understandings, yet they mingle
preludes of the future judgment with the sun, the moon, and the whole
fabric of the world. Wherefore miserable consciences find no repose, but
are harassed and agitated with a dreadful tempest, feel themselves torn
asunder by an angry God, and, transfixed and penetrated by mortal
stings, are terrified at the thunderbolts of God, and broken by the
weight of his hand; so that to sink into any gulfs and abysses would be
more tolerable than to stand for a moment in these terrors. How great
and severe, then, is the punishment, to endure the never ceasing effects
of his wrath! On which subject there is a memorable passage in the
ninetieth psalm; that though by his countenance he scatters all mortals,
and turns them to destruction, yet he encourages his servants in
proportion to their timidity in this world, to excite them, though under
the burden of the cross, to press forward, till he shall be all in all.
Footnote 600:
2 Tim. i. 10.
Footnote 601:
John v. 24.
Footnote 602:
Ephes. ii. 19.
Footnote 603:
Ephes. ii. 6.
Footnote 604:
Rom. viii. 24.
Footnote 605:
Heb. xi. 1.
Footnote 606:
2 Cor. v. 6.
Footnote 607:
Col. iii. 3, 4.
Footnote 608:
Titus ii. 12, 13.
Footnote 609:
1 Peter i. 8, 9.
Footnote 610:
Col. i. 5.
Footnote 611:
Matt. vi. 21.
Footnote 612:
Phil. iii. 14.
Footnote 613:
Phil. iii. 8-11.
Footnote 614:
Phil. iii. 20.
Footnote 615:
Rom. viii. 19-23.
Footnote 616:
Heb. ix. 28.
Footnote 617:
1 Cor. xv. 13, &c.
Footnote 618:
2 Cor. iv. 10.
Footnote 619:
1 Cor. xv. 13.
Footnote 620:
Psalm xvi. 10.
Footnote 621:
Phil. iii. 21.
Footnote 622:
Col. iii. 4. Rom. viii. 11.
Footnote 623:
1 Cor. xv. 23.
Footnote 624:
Luke xxiv. 11.
Footnote 625:
Matt. xxvii. 66; xxviii. 11, &c.
Footnote 626:
Luke xxiv. 4-6. Matt. xxviii. 3-6.
Footnote 627:
Acts i. 3, 9.
Footnote 628:
1 Cor. xv. 6.
Footnote 629:
John xvi. 7.
Footnote 630:
Acts vii. 55.
Footnote 631:
Phil. iii. 21.
Footnote 632:
1 Cor. xv. 36.
Footnote 633:
Isaiah xxvi. 19.
Footnote 634:
Psalm lxviii. 20.
Footnote 635:
Job xix. 25, 27.
Footnote 636:
Ezek. xxxvii. 1-14.
Footnote 637:
John v. 28, 29.
Footnote 638:
2 Tim. i. 12; iv. 8.
Footnote 639:
2 Thess. i. 6-8, 10.
Footnote 640:
Eccl. ix. 4.
Footnote 641:
Eccl. iii. 21.
Footnote 642:
Rev. xx. 4.
Footnote 643:
2 Peter i. 14.
Footnote 644:
2 Cor. v. 1, 8.
Footnote 645:
Heb. xii. 23.
Footnote 646:
Luke xxiii. 43.
Footnote 647:
2 Cor. vii. 1.
Footnote 648:
2 Cor. v. 10.
Footnote 649:
2 Cor. iv. 10.
Footnote 650:
1 Thess. v. 23.
Footnote 651:
1 Cor. vi. 15.
Footnote 652:
1 Tim. ii. 8.
Footnote 653:
Rom. xii. 1.
Footnote 654:
1 Cor. vi. 20.
Footnote 655:
1 Cor. xv. 54.
Footnote 656:
Rom. xiv. 11, 12.
Footnote 657:
Dan. xii. 2.
Footnote 658:
Matt. x. 28.
Footnote 659:
John v. 28, 29.
Footnote 660:
John ii. 19.
Footnote 661:
1 Cor. xv. 12, &c.
Footnote 662:
2 Cor. iv. 10.
Footnote 663:
Matt. xxvi. 52.
Footnote 664:
Col. ii. 12.
Footnote 665:
Rom. vi. 13.
Footnote 666:
Rom. viii. 11.
Footnote 667:
1 Cor. vi. 13, 14.
Footnote 668:
1 Cor. vi. 15, 19, 20.
Footnote 669:
Gal. vi. 17.
Footnote 670:
Phil. iii. 20, 21.
Footnote 671:
Acts xiv. 22.
Footnote 672:
Matt. xxvi. 10, 12.
Footnote 673:
Gen xxiii. 3-19.
Footnote 674:
Gen. xlvii. 30.
Footnote 675:
John vi. 39, 40.
Footnote 676:
1 Cor. xv. 39-41.
Footnote 677:
1 Cor. xv. 53.
Footnote 678:
Isaiah xxvi. 21.
Footnote 679:
1 Cor. xv. 51, 52.
Footnote 680:
1 Thess. iv. 15, 16.
Footnote 681:
Heb. ix. 27.
Footnote 682:
Rom. v. 12.
Footnote 683:
John xi. 25.
Footnote 684:
Matt. xxv. 32.
Footnote 685:
Matt. v. 45.
Footnote 686:
Acts xxiv. 15.
Footnote 687:
1 John iii. 2.
Footnote 688:
Gen. xv. 1.
Footnote 689:
Psalm xvi. 5, 6.
Footnote 690:
Psalm xvii. 15.
Footnote 691:
2 Peter i. 4.
Footnote 692:
2 Thess. i. 10.
Footnote 693:
1 Thess. ii. 19, 20.
Footnote 694:
Matt. xix. 29.
Footnote 695:
Matt. v. 12.
Footnote 696:
Dan. xii. 3.
Footnote 697:
2 Tim. iv. 14.
Footnote 698:
Matt. xix. 29.
Footnote 699:
1 Cor. xiii. 12.
Footnote 700:
Matt. iii. 12; viii. 12; xxii. 13. Mark ix. 43, 44. Isaiah lxvi. 24.
Footnote 701:
Isaiah xxx. 33.
Footnote 702:
2 Thess. i. 9.
BOOK IV.
ON THE EXTERNAL MEANS OR AIDS BY WHICH GOD CALLS US INTO COMMUNION WITH
CHRIST, AND RETAINS US IN IT.
ARGUMENT.
Three parts of the Apostles’ Creed, respecting God the Creator,
Redeemer, and Sanctifier, have been explained in the former books. This
last book is an exposition of what remains, relating to the Holy
Catholic Church, and the Communion of Saints.
The chapters contained in it may be conveniently arranged in three grand
divisions:—
I. The Church.
II. The Sacraments.
III. Civil Government.
The First Division, extending to the end of the thirteenth chapter,
contains many particulars, which, however, may all be referred to four
principal heads:—
I. The marks of the Church, or the criteria by which it may be
distinguished; since we must cultivate union with it—Chap. I. II.
II. The government of the church—Chap. III.-VII.
1. The order of government in the church—Chap. III.
2. The form practised by the ancient Christians—Chap. IV.
3. The nature of the present ecclesiastical government under the
Papacy—Chap. V. The primacy of the Pope—Chap. VI. And the degrees of his
advancement to this tyrannical power—Chap. VII.
III. The power of the church—Chap. VIII.-XI.
1. Relating to articles of faith,—which resides either in the respective
bishops—Chap. VIII.—or in the church at large, represented in
councils—Chap. IX.
2. In making laws—Chap. X.
3. In ecclesiastical jurisdiction—Chap. XI.
IV. The discipline of the Church—Chap. XII. XIII.
1. The principal use of it—Chap. XII.
2. The abuse of it—Chap. XIII.
The Second Division, relating to the sacraments, contains three parts.
I. The sacraments in general—Chap. XIV.
II. Each sacrament in particular—Chap. XV.-XVIII.
1. Baptism—Chap. XV. Distinct discussion of Pædobaptism—Chap. XVI.
2. The Lord’s Supper—Chap. XVII.—and its profanation—Chap. XVIII.
III. The five other ceremonies, falsely called sacraments—Chap. XIX.
The Third Division regards civil government.
I. This government in general.
II. Its respective branches.
1. The magistrates.
2. The laws.
3. The people.
CHAPTER I.
THE TRUE CHURCH, AND THE NECESSITY OF OUR UNION WITH HER, BEING THE
MOTHER OF ALL THE PIOUS.
That by the faith of the gospel Christ becomes ours, and we become
partakers of the salvation procured by him, and of eternal happiness,
has been explained in the preceding Book. But as our ignorance and
slothfulness, and, I may add, the vanity of our minds, require external
aids, in order to the production of faith in our hearts, and its
increase and progressive advance even to its completion, God has
provided such aids in compassion to our infirmity; and that the
preaching of the gospel might be maintained, he has deposited this
treasure with the Church. He has appointed pastors and teachers, that
his people might be taught by their lips; he has invested them with
authority; in short, he has omitted nothing that could contribute to a
holy unity of faith, and to the establishment of good order.[703] First
of all, he has instituted Sacraments, which we know by experience to be
means of the greatest utility for the nourishment and support of our
faith. For as, during our confinement in the prison of our flesh, we
have not yet attained to the state of angels, God has, in his wonderful
providence, accommodated himself to our capacity, by prescribing a way
in which we might approach him, notwithstanding our immense distance
from him. Wherefore the order of instruction requires us now to treat of
the Church and its government, orders, and power; secondly, of the
Sacraments; and lastly, of Civil Government; and at the same time to
call off the pious readers from the abuses of the Papacy, by which Satan
has corrupted every thing that God had appointed to be instrumental to
our salvation. I shall begin with the Church, in whose bosom it is God’s
will that all his children should be collected, not only to be nourished
by her assistance and ministry during their infancy and childhood, but
also to be governed by her maternal care, till they attain a mature age,
and at length reach the end of their faith. For it is not lawful to “put
asunder” those things “which God hath joined together;”[704] that the
Church is the mother of all those who have him for their Father; and
that not only under the law, but since the coming of Christ also,
according to the testimony of the apostle, who declares the new and
heavenly Jerusalem to be “the mother of us all.”[705]
II. That article of the Creed, in which we profess to believe THE
CHURCH, refers not only to the visible Church of which we are now
speaking, but likewise to all the elect of God, including the dead as
well as the living. The word BELIEVE is used, because it is often
impossible to discover any difference between the children of God and
the ungodly; between his peculiar flock and wild beasts. The particle
IN, interpolated by many, is not supported by any probable reason. I
confess that it is generally adopted at present, and is not destitute of
the suffrage of antiquity, being found in the Nicene Creed, as it is
transmitted to us in ecclesiastical history. Yet it is evident from the
writings of the fathers, that it was anciently admitted without
controversy to say, “I believe the Church,” not “_in_ the Church.” For
not only is this word not used by Augustine and the ancient writer of
the work “On the Exposition of the Creed,” which passes under the name
of Cyprian, but they particularly remark that there would be an
impropriety in the expression, if this preposition were inserted; and
they confirm their opinion by no trivial reason. For we declare that we
believe _in God_ because our mind depends upon him as true, and our
confidence rests in him. But this would not be applicable to the Church,
any more than to “the remission of sins,” or the “resurrection of the
body.” Therefore, though I am averse to contentions about words, yet I
would rather adopt a proper phraseology adapted to express the subject
than affect forms of expression by which the subject would be
unnecessarily involved in obscurity. The design of this clause is to
teach us, that though the devil moves every engine to destroy the grace
of Christ, and all the enemies of God exert the most furious violence in
the same attempt, yet his grace cannot possibly be extinguished, nor can
his blood be rendered barren, so as not to produce some fruit. Here we
must regard both the secret election of God, and his internal vocation;
because he alone “knoweth them that are his;” and keeps them enclosed
under his “seal,” to use the expression of Paul;[706] except that they
bear his impression, by which they may be distinguished from the
reprobate. But because a small and contemptible number is concealed
among a vast multitude, and a few grains of wheat are covered with a
heap of chaff, we must leave to God alone the knowledge of his Church
whose foundation is his secret election. Nor is it sufficient to include
in our thoughts and minds the whole multitude of the elect, unless we
conceive of such a unity of the Church, into which we know ourselves to
be truly ingrafted. For unless we are united with all the other members
under Christ our Head, we can have no hope of the future inheritance.
Therefore the Church is called CATHOLIC, or universal; because there
could not be two or three churches, without Christ being divided, which
is impossible. But all the elect of God are so connected with each other
in Christ, that as they depend upon one head, so they grow up together
as into one body, compacted together like members of the same body;
being made truly one, as living by one faith, hope, and charity, through
the same Divine Spirit, being called not only to the same inheritance of
eternal life, but also to a participation of one God and Christ.
Therefore, though the melancholy desolation which surrounds us, seems to
proclaim that there is nothing left of the Church, let us remember that
the death of Christ is fruitful, and that God wonderfully preserves his
Church as it were in hiding-places; according to what he said to Elijah:
“I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the
knee to Baal.”[707]
III. This article of the creed, however, relates in some measure to the
external Church, that every one of us may maintain a brotherly agreement
with all the children of God, may pay due deference to the authority of
the Church, and, in a word, may conduct himself as one of the flock.
Therefore we add THE COMMUNION OF SAINTS—a clause which, though
generally omitted by the ancients, ought not to be neglected, because it
excellently expresses the character of the Church; as though it had been
said that the saints are united in the fellowship of Christ on this
condition, that whatever benefits God confers upon them, they should
mutually communicate to each other. This destroys not the diversity of
grace, for we know that the gifts of the Spirit are variously
distributed; nor does it disturb the order of civil polity, which
secures to every individual the exclusive enjoyment of his property, as
it is necessary for the preservation of the peace of society that men
should have peculiar and distinct possessions. But the community
asserted is such as Luke describes, that “the multitude of them that
believed were of one heart and of one soul;”[708] and Paul, when he
exhorts the Ephesians to be “one body, and one spirit, even as they were
called in one hope.”[709] Nor is it possible, if they are truly
persuaded that God is a common Father to them all, and Christ their
common Head, but that, being united in brotherly affection, they should
mutually communicate their advantages to each other. Now, it highly
concerns us to know what benefit we receive from this. For we believe
the Church, in order to have a certain assurance that we are members of
it. For thus our salvation rests on firm and solid foundations, so that
it cannot fall into ruin, though the whole fabric of the world should be
dissolved. First, it is founded on the election of God, and can be
liable to no variation or failure, but with the subversion of his
eternal providence. In the next place, it is united with the stability
of Christ, who will no more suffer his faithful people to be severed
from him, than his members to be torn in pieces. Besides, we are
certain, as long as we continue in the bosom of the Church, that we
shall remain in possession of the truth. Lastly, we understand these
promises to belong to us: “In mount Zion shall be deliverance.”[710] God
is in the midst of her; she shall not be moved.“[711] Such is the effect
of union with the Church, that it retains us in the fellowship of God.
The very word _communion_ likewise contains abundant consolation; for
while it is certain that whatever the Lord confers upon his members and
ours belong to us, our hope is confirmed by all the benefits which they
enjoy. But in order to embrace the unity of the Church in this manner,
it is unnecessary, as we have observed, to see the Church with our eyes,
or feel it with our hands; on the contrary, from its being an object of
faith, we are taught that it is no less to be considered as existing,
when it escapes our observation, than if it were evident to our eyes.
Nor is our faith the worse, because it acknowledges the Church which we
do not fully comprehend; for we are not commanded here to distinguish
the reprobate from the elect, which is not our province, but that of God
alone; we are only required to be assured in our minds, that all those
who, by the mercy of God the Father, through the efficacious influence
of the Holy Spirit, have attained to the participation of Christ, are
separated as the peculiar possession and portion of God; and that being
numbered among them, we are partakers of such great grace.
IV. But as our present design is to treat of the _visible_ Church, we
may learn even from the title of _mother_, how useful and even necessary
it is for us to know her; since there is no other way of entrance into
life, unless we are conceived by her, born of her, nourished at her
breast, and continually preserved under her care and government till we
are divested of this mortal flesh, and “become like the angels.”[712]
For our infirmity will not admit of our dismission from her school; we
must continue under her instruction and discipline to the end of our
lives. It is also to be remarked, that out of her bosom there can be no
hope of remission of sins, or any salvation, according to the testimony
of Joel and Isaiah;[713] which is confirmed by Ezekiel,[714] when he
denounces that those whom God excludes from the heavenly life, shall not
be enrolled among his people. So, on the contrary, those who devote
themselves to the service of God, are said to inscribe their names among
the citizens of Jerusalem. For which reason the Psalmist says, “Remember
me, O Lord, with the favour that thou bearest unto thy people: O visit
me with thy salvation; that I may see the good of thy chosen; that I may
rejoice in the gladness of thy nation; that I may glory with thine
inheritance.”[715] In these words the paternal favour of God, and the
peculiar testimony of the spiritual life, are restricted to his flock,
to teach us that it is always fatally dangerous to be separated from the
Church.
V. But let us proceed to state what belongs to this subject. Paul
writes, that Christ, “that he might fill all things, gave some apostles,
and some prophets, and some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers;
for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the
edifying of the body of Christ: till we all come in the unity of the
faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto
the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ.”[716] We see that
though God could easily make his people perfect in a single moment, yet
it was not his will that they should grow to mature age, but under the
education of the Church. We see the means expressed; the preaching of
the heavenly doctrine is assigned to the pastors. We see that all are
placed under the same regulation, in order that they may submit
themselves with gentleness and docility of mind to be governed by the
pastors who are appointed for this purpose. Isaiah had long before
described the kingdom of Christ by this character: “My Spirit that is
upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart
out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth
of thy seed’s seed, from henceforth and for ever.”[717] Hence it
follows, that all who reject the spiritual food for their souls, which
is extended to them by the hands of the Church, deserve to perish with
hunger and want. It is God who inspires us with faith, but it is through
the instrumentality of the gospel, according to the declaration of Paul,
“that faith cometh by hearing.”[718] So also the power to save resides
in God, but, as the same apostle testifies in another place, he displays
it in the preaching of the gospel. With this design, in former ages he
commanded solemn assemblies to be held in the sanctuary, that the
doctrine taught by the mouth of the priest might maintain the unity of
the faith; and the design of those magnificent titles, where the temple
is called God’s “rest,” his “sanctuary,” and “dwelling-place,” where he
is said to “dwell between the cherubim,”[719] was no other than to
promote the esteem, love, reverence, and dignity of the heavenly
doctrine; which the view of a mortal and despised man would otherwise
greatly diminish. That we may know, therefore, that we have an
inestimable treasure communicated to us from earthen vessels,[720] God
himself comes forward, and as he is the Author of this arrangement, so
he will be acknowledged as present in his institution. Therefore, after
having forbidden his people to devote themselves to auguries,
divinations, magical arts, necromancy, and other superstitions, he adds,
that he will give them what ought to be sufficient for every purpose,
namely, that he will never leave them without prophets. Now, as he did
not refer his ancient people to angels, but raised up earthly teachers,
who truly discharged the office of angels, so, in the present day, he is
pleased to teach us by the instrumentality of men. And as formerly he
was not content with the written law, but appointed the priests as
interpreters, at whose lips the people might inquire its true meaning,
so, in the present day, he not only requires us to be attentive to
reading, but has appointed teachers for our assistance. This is attended
with a twofold advantage. For on the one hand, it is a good proof of our
obedience when we listen to his ministers, just as if he were addressing
us himself; and on the other, he has provided for our infirmity, by
choosing to address us through the medium of human interpreters, that he
may sweetly allure us to him, rather than to drive us away from him by
his thunders. And the propriety of this familiar manner of teaching, is
evident to all the pious, from the terror with which the majesty of God
justly alarms them. Those who consider the authority of the doctrine as
weakened by the meanness of the men who are called to teach it, betray
their ingratitude; because among so many excellent gifts with which God
has adorned mankind, it is a peculiar privilege, that he deigns to
consecrate men’s lips and tongues to his service, that his voice may be
heard in them. Let us not therefore, on our parts, be reluctant to
receive and obey the doctrine of salvation proposed to us at his express
command; for though the power of God is not confined to external means,
yet he has confined us to the ordinary manner of teaching, the fanatical
rejecters of which necessarily involve themselves in many fatal snares.
Many are urged by pride, or disdain, or envy, to persuade themselves
that they can profit sufficiently by reading and meditating in private,
and so to despise public assemblies, and consider preaching as
unnecessary. But since they do all in their power to dissolve and break
asunder the bond of unity, which ought to be preserved inviolable, not
one of them escapes the just punishment of this impious breach, but they
all involve themselves in pestilent errors and pernicious reveries.
Wherefore, in order that the pure simplicity of faith may flourish among
us, let us not be reluctant to use this exercise of piety, which the
Divine institution has shown to be necessary, and which God so
repeatedly commends to us. There has never been found, among the most
extravagant of mortals, one insolent enough to say that we ought to shut
our ears against God; but the prophets and pious teachers, in all ages,
have had a difficult contest with the wicked, whose arrogance can never
submit to be taught by the lips and ministry of men. Now, this is no
other than effacing the image of God, which is discovered to us in the
doctrine. For the faithful under the former dispensation were directed
to seek the face of God in the sanctuary;[721] and this is so frequently
repeated in the law, for no other reason, but because the doctrine of
the law and the exhortations of the prophets exhibited to them a lively
image of God; as Paul declares that his preaching displayed “the glory
of God in the face of Jesus Christ.”[722] And in so much the greater
detestation ought we to hold those apostates, who make it their study to
cause divisions in churches, as if they would drive away the sheep from
the fold, and throw them into the jaws of wolves. But let us remember
what we have quoted from Paul—that the Church can only be edified by the
preaching of this word, and that the saints have no common bond of union
to hold them together, any longer than, while learning and profiting
with one accord, they observe the order which God has prescribed for the
Church. It was principally for this end, as I have already stated, that
the faithful under the law were commanded to resort to the sanctuary;
because Moses not only celebrates it as the residence of God, but
likewise declares it to be the place where God has fixed the record of
his name;[723] which without the doctrine of piety, he plainly suggests,
would be of no use. And it is undoubtedly for the same reason that David
complains, with great bitterness of soul, of being prevented from access
to the tabernacle by the tyrannical cruelty of his enemies.[724] To many
persons perhaps this appears to be a puerile lamentation, because it
could be but a very trivial loss, and not a privation of much
satisfaction to be absent from the court of the temple, provided he were
in the possession of other pleasures. But by this one trouble, anxiety,
and sorrow, he complains that he is grieved, tormented, and almost
consumed; because nothing is more valued by believers than this
assistance, by which God gradually raises his people from one degree of
elevation to another. For it is also to be remarked, that God always
manifested himself to the holy fathers, in the mirror of his doctrine,
in such a manner that their knowledge of him was spiritual. Hence the
temple was not only called his _face_, but in order to guard against all
superstition, was also designated as his _footstool_.[725] And this is
that happy conjunction in the unity of the faith spoken of by Paul, when
all, from the highest to the lowest, are aspiring towards the head. All
the temples which the Gentiles erected to God with any other design,
were nothing but a profanation of his worship—a crime which, though not
to an equal extent, was also frequently committed by the Jews. Stephen
reproaches them for it in the language of Isaiah: “The Most High
dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet, Heaven is
my throne, and earth is my footstool,”[726] because God alone sanctifies
temples by his word, that they may be legitimately used for his worship.
And if we presumptuously attempt any thing without his command, the evil
beginning is immediately succeeded by further inventions, which multiply
the mischief without end. Xerxes, however, acted with great
indiscretion, when, at the advice of the magi, he burned or demolished
all the temples of Greece, from an opinion of the absurdity that gods,
to whom all space ought to be left perfectly free, should be enclosed
within walls and roofs. As if it were not in the power of God to descend
in any way to us, and yet at the same time not to make any change of
place, or to confine us to earthly means, but rather to use them as
vehicles to elevate us towards his celestial glory, which fills all
things with its immensity, as well as transcends the heavens in its
sublimity.
VI. Now, as the present age has witnessed a violent dispute respecting
the efficacy of the ministry, some exaggerating its dignity beyond
measure, and others contending that it is a criminal transfer to mortal
man of what properly belongs to the Holy Spirit, to suppose that
ministers and teachers penetrate the mind and heart, so as to correct
the blindness of the one, and the hardness of the other,—we must proceed
to a decision of this controversy. The arguments advanced on both sides
may be easily reconciled by a careful observation of the passages, in
which God, the Author of preaching, connecting his Spirit with it,
promises that it shall be followed with success; or those in which,
separating himself from all external aids, he attributes the
commencement of faith, as well as its subsequent progress, entirely and
exclusively to himself. The office of the second Elias, according to
Malachi, was to illuminate the minds and to “turn the hearts of the
fathers to the children,” and the disobedient to the wisdom of the
just.[727] Christ declares that he sent his disciples, that they “should
bring forth fruit”[728] from their labours. What that fruit was, is
briefly defined by Peter, when he says that we are “born again, not of
corruptible seed, but of incorruptible.”[729] Therefore Paul glories
that he had “begotten” the Corinthians “through the gospel,” and that
they were “the seal of his apostleship;”[730] and even that he was “not
a minister of the letter,” merely striking the ear with a vocal sound,
but that the energy of the Spirit had been given to him to render his
doctrine efficacious.[731] In the same sense, he affirms, in another
Epistle, that his “gospel came not in word only, but also in
power.”[732] He declares also to the Galatians, that they “received the
Spirit by the hearing of faith.”[733] In short, there are several
places, in which he not only represents himself as a “labourer together
with God,”[734] but even attributes to himself the office of
communicating salvation. He certainly never advanced all these things,
in order to arrogate to himself the least praise independent of God, as
he briefly states in other passages: “Our entrance in unto you was not
in vain.”[735] “I labour, striving according to his working, which
worketh in me mightily.”[736] “He that wrought effectually in Peter to
the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward
the Gentiles.”[737] Besides, it is evident, from other places, that he
leaves ministers possessed of nothing, considered in themselves:
“Neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but
God that giveth the increase.”[738] Again: “I laboured more abundantly
than they all; yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.”[739]
And it is certainly necessary to bear in memory those passages, in which
God ascribes to himself the illumination of the mind and renovation of
the heart, and thereby declares it to be sacrilege for man to arrogate
to himself any share in either. Yet every one who attends with docility
of mind to the ministers whom God has appointed, will learn from the
beneficial effect, that this mode of teaching has not in vain been
pleasing to God, and that this yoke of modesty has not without reason
been imposed upon believers.
VII. From what has been said, I conceive it must now be evident what
judgment we ought to form respecting the Church, which is visible to our
eyes, and falls under our knowledge. For we have remarked that the word
_Church_ is used in the sacred Scriptures in two senses. Sometimes, when
they mention the Church, they intend that which is really such in the
sight of God, into which none are received but those who by adoption and
grace are the children of God, and by the sanctification of the Spirit
are the true members of Christ. And then it comprehends not only the
saints at any one time resident on earth, but all the elect who have
lived from the beginning of the world. But the word _Church_ is
frequently used in the Scriptures to designate the whole multitude,
dispersed all over the world, who profess to worship one God and Jesus
Christ, who are initiated into his faith by baptism, who testify their
unity in true doctrine and charity by a participation of the sacred
supper, who consent to the word of the Lord, and preserve the ministry
which Christ has instituted for the purpose of preaching it. In this
Church are included many hypocrites, who have nothing of Christ but the
name and appearance; many persons ambitious, avaricious, envious,
slanderous, and dissolute in their lives, who are tolerated for a time,
either because they cannot be convicted by a legitimate process, or
because discipline is not always maintained with sufficient vigour. As
it is necessary, therefore, to believe that Church, which is invisible
to us, and known to God alone, so this Church, which is visible to men,
we are commanded to honour, and to maintain communion with it.
VIII. As far, therefore, as was important for us to know it, the Lord
has described it by certain marks and characters. It is the peculiar
prerogative of God himself to “know them that are his,”[740] as we have
already stated from Paul. And to guard against human presumption ever
going to such an extreme, the experience of every day teaches us how
very far his secret judgments transcend all our apprehensions. For those
who seemed the most abandoned, and were generally considered past all
hope, are recalled by his goodness into the right way; while some, who
seemed to stand better than others, fall into perdition. “According to
the secret predestination of God,” therefore, as Augustine observes,
“there are many sheep without the pale of the Church, and many wolves
within.” For he knows and seals those who know not either him or
themselves. Of those who externally bear his seal, his eyes alone can
discern who are unfeignedly holy, and will persevere to the end; which
is the completion of salvation. On the other hand, as he saw it to be in
some measure requisite that we should know who ought to be considered as
his children, he has in this respect accommodated himself to our
capacity. And as it was not necessary that on this point we should have
an assurance of faith, he has substituted in its place a judgment of
charity, according to which we ought to acknowledge as members of the
Church all those who by a confession of faith, an exemplary life, and a
participation of the sacraments, profess the same God and Christ with
ourselves. But the knowledge of the body itself being more necessary to
our salvation, he has distinguished it by more clear and certain
characters.
IX. Hence the visible Church rises conspicuous to our view. For wherever
we find the word of God purely preached and heard, and the sacraments
administered according to the institution of Christ, there, it is not to
be doubted, is a Church of God; for his promise can never deceive—“where
two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst
of them.”[741] But, that we may have a clear understanding of the whole
of this subject, let us proceed by the following steps: That the
universal Church is the whole multitude, collected from all nations,
who, though dispersed in countries widely distant from each other,
nevertheless consent to the same truth of Divine doctrine, and are
united by the bond of the same religion; that in this universal Church
are comprehended particular churches, distributed according to human
necessity in various towns and villages; and that each of these
respectively is justly distinguished by the name and authority of a
church; and that individuals, who, on a profession of piety, are
enrolled among Churches of the same description, though they are really
strangers to any particular Church, do nevertheless in some respect
belong to it, till they are expelled from it by a public decision. There
is some difference, however, in the mode of judging respecting private
persons and churches. For it may happen, in the case of persons whom we
think altogether unworthy of the society of the pious, that, on account
of the common consent of the Church, by which they are tolerated in the
body of Christ, we may be obliged to treat them as brethren, and to
class them in the number of believers. In our private opinion we approve
not of such persons as members of the Church, but we leave them the
station they hold among the people of God, till it be taken away from
them by legitimate authority. But respecting the congregation itself, we
must form a different judgment. If they possess and honour the ministry
of the word, and the administration of the sacraments, they are, without
all doubt, entitled to be considered as a Church; because it is certain
that the word and sacraments cannot be unattended with some good
effects. In this manner, we preserve the unity of the universal Church,
which diabolical spirits have always been endeavouring to destroy; and
at the same time without interfering with the authority of those
legitimate assemblies, which local convenience has distributed in
different places.
X. We have stated that the marks by which the Church is to be
distinguished, are, the preaching of the word and the administration of
the sacraments. For these can nowhere exist without bringing forth
fruit, and being prospered with the blessing of God. I assert not that
wherever the word is preached, the good effects of it immediately
appear; but that it is never received so as to obtain a permanent
establishment, without displaying some efficacy. However this may be,
where the word is heard with reverence, and the sacraments are not
neglected, there we discover, while that is the case, an appearance of
the Church, which is liable to no suspicion of uncertainty, of which no
one can safely despise the authority, or reject the admonitions, or
resist the counsels, or slight the censures, much less separate from it
and break up its unity. For so highly does the Lord esteem the communion
of his Church, that he considers every one as a traitor and apostate
from religion, who perversely withdraws himself from any Christian
society which preserves the true ministry of the word and sacraments. He
commends the authority of the Church, in such a manner as to account
every violation of it an infringement of his own. For it is not a
trivial circumstance, that the Church is called “the house of God, the
pillar and ground of truth.”[742] For in these words Paul signifies that
in order to keep the truth of God from being lost in the world, the
Church is its faithful guardian; because it has been the will of God, by
the ministry of the Church, to preserve the pure preaching of his word,
and to manifest himself as our affectionate Father, while he nourishes
us with spiritual food, and provides all things conducive to our
salvation. Nor is it small praise, that the Church is chosen and
separated by Christ to be his spouse, “not having spot or wrinkle,”[743]
to be “his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.”[744] Hence
it follows, that a departure from the Church is a renunciation of God
and Christ. And such a criminal dissension is so much the more to be
avoided, because, while we endeavour, as far as lies in our power, to
destroy the truth of God, we deserve to be crushed with the most
powerful thunders of his wrath. Nor is it possible to imagine a more
atrocious crime, than that sacrilegious perfidy, which violates the
conjugal relation that the only begotten Son of God has condescended to
form with us.
XI. Let us, therefore, diligently retain those characters impressed upon
our minds, and estimate them according to the judgment of God. For there
is nothing that Satan labours more to accomplish, than to remove and
destroy one or both of them; at one time to efface and obliterate these
marks, and so to take away all true and genuine distinction of the
Church; at another to inspire us with contempt of them, and so to drive
us out of the Church by an open separation. By his subtlety it has
happened, that in some ages the pure preaching of the word has
altogether disappeared; and in the present day he is labouring with the
same malignity to overturn the ministry; which, however, Christ has
ordained in his Church, so that if it were taken away, the edification
of the Church would be quite at an end. How dangerous, then, how fatal
is the temptation, when it even enters into the heart of a man to
withdraw himself from that congregation, in which he discovers those
signs and characters which the Lord has deemed sufficiently descriptive
of his Church! We see, however, that great caution requires to be
observed on both sides. For, to prevent imposture from deceiving us,
under the name of the Church, every congregation assuming this name
should be brought to that proof, like gold to the touchstone. If it have
the order prescribed by the Lord in the word and sacraments, it will not
deceive us; we may securely render to it the honour due to all churches.
On the contrary, if it pretend to the name of a Church, without the word
and sacraments, we ought to beware of such delusive pretensions, with as
much caution as, in the other case, we should use in avoiding
presumption and pride.
XII. When we affirm the pure ministry of the word, and pure order in the
celebration of the sacraments, to be a sufficient pledge and earnest,
that we may safely embrace the society in which both these are found, as
a true Church, we carry the observation to this point, that such a
society should never be rejected as long as it continues in those
things, although in other respects it may be chargeable with many
faults. It is possible, moreover, that some fault may insinuate itself
into the preaching of the doctrine, or the administration of the
sacraments, which ought not to alienate us from its communion. For all
the articles of true doctrine are not of the same description. Some are
so necessary to be known, that they ought to be universally received as
fixed and indubitable principles, as the peculiar maxims of religion;
such as, that there is one God; that Christ is God and the Son of God;
that our salvation depends on the mercy of God; and the like. There are
others, which are controverted among the churches, yet without
destroying the unity of the faith. For why should there be a division on
this point, if one church be of opinion, that souls, at their departure
from their bodies, are immediately removed to heaven; and another church
venture to determine nothing respecting their local situation, but be
nevertheless firmly convinced, that they live to the Lord; and if this
diversity of sentiment on both sides be free from all fondness for
contention and obstinacy of assertion? The language of the apostle is,
“Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded; and if in any
thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you.”[745]
Does not this sufficiently show, that a diversity of opinion respecting
these nonessential points ought not to be a cause of discord among
Christians? It is of importance, indeed, that we should agree in every
thing; but as there is no person who is not enveloped with some cloud of
ignorance, either we must allow of no church at all, or we must forgive
mistakes in those things, of which persons may be ignorant, without
violating the essence of religion, or incurring the loss of salvation.
Here I would not be understood to plead for any errors, even the
smallest, or to recommend their being encouraged by connivance or
flattery. But I maintain, that we ought not, on account of every trivial
difference of sentiment, to abandon the Church, which retains the saving
and pure doctrine that insures the preservation of piety, and supports
the use of the sacraments instituted by our Lord. In the mean time, if
we endeavour to correct what we disapprove, we are acting in this case
according to our duty. And to this we are encouraged by the direction of
Paul: “If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the
first hold his peace.”[746] From which it appears, that every member of
the Church is required to exert himself for the general edification,
according to the measure of his grace, provided he do it decently and in
order; that is to say, that we should neither forsake the communion of
the Church, nor, by continuing in it, disturb its peace and well
regulated discipline.
XIII. But in bearing with imperfections of life, we ought to carry our
indulgence a great deal further. For this is a point in which we are
very liable to err, and here Satan lies in wait to deceive us with no
common devices. For there have always been persons, who, from a false
notion of perfect sanctity, as if they were already become disembodied
spirits, despised the society of all men in whom they could discover any
remains of human infirmity. Such, in ancient times, were the Cathari,
and also the Donatists, who approached to the same folly. Such, in the
present day, are some of the Anabaptists, who would be thought to have
made advances in piety beyond all others. There are others who err, more
from an inconsiderate zeal for righteousness, than from this
unreasonable pride. For when they perceive, that among those to whom the
gospel is preached, its doctrine is not followed by correspondent
effects in the life, they immediately pronounce, that there no church
exists. This is, indeed, a very just ground of offence, and one for
which we furnish more than sufficient occasion in the present unhappy
age; nor is it possible to excuse our abominable inactivity, which the
Lord will not suffer to escape with impunity, and which he has already
begun to chastise with heavy scourges. Woe to us, therefore, who, by the
dissolute licentiousness of our crimes, cause weak consciences to be
wounded on our account! But, on the other hand, the error of the persons
of whom we now speak, consists in not knowing how to fix any limits to
their offence. For where our Lord requires the exercise of mercy, they
entirely neglect it, and indulge themselves in immoderate severity.
Supposing it impossible for the Church to exist, where there is not a
perfect purity and integrity of life, through a hatred of crimes they
depart from the true Church, while they imagine themselves to be only
withdrawing from the factions of the wicked. They allege, that the
Church of Christ is holy. But that they may also understand, that it is
composed of good and bad men mingled together, let them hear that
parable from the lips of Christ, where it is compared to a net, in which
fishes of all kinds are collected, and no separation is made till they
are exposed on the shore.[747] Let them hear another parable, comparing
the Church to a field, which, after having been sown with good seed, is,
by the craft of an enemy, corrupted with tares, from which it is never
cleared till the harvest is brought into the barn.[748] Lastly, let them
hear another comparison of the Church to a threshing-floor, in which the
wheat is collected in such a manner, that it lies concealed under the
chaff, till, after being carefully purged, by winnowing and sifting, it
is at length laid up in the garner.[749] But if our Lord declares, that
the Church is to labour under this evil, and to be encumbered with a
mixture of wicked men, even till the day of judgment, it is vain to seek
for a Church free from every spot.
XIV. But they exclaim, that it is an intolerable thing that the
pestilence of crimes so generally prevails. I grant it would be happy if
the fact were otherwise; but in reply, I would present them with the
judgment of the apostle. Among the Corinthians, more than a few had gone
astray, and the infection had seized almost the whole society; there was
not only one species of sin, but many; and they were not trivial faults,
but dreadful crimes; and there was not only a corruption of morals, but
also of doctrine. In this case, what is the conduct of the holy apostle,
the organ of the heavenly Spirit, by whose testimony the Church stands
or falls? Does he seek to separate from them? Does he reject them from
the kingdom of Christ? Does he strike them with the thunderbolt of the
severest anathema? He not only does none of these things, but, on the
contrary, acknowledges and speaks of them as a Church of Christ and a
society of saints. If there remained a church among the Corinthians,
where contentions, factions, and emulations were raging; where cupidity,
disputes, and litigations were prevailing; where a crime held in
execration even among the Gentiles, was publicly sanctioned; where the
name of Paul, whom they ought to have revered as their father, was
insolently defamed; where some ridiculed the doctrine of the
resurrection, with the subversion of which the whole gospel would be
annihilated; where the graces of God were made subservient to ambition,
instead of charity; where many things were conducted without decency and
order;[750] and if there still remained a Church, because the ministry
of the word and sacraments was not rejected—who can refuse the name of a
Church to those who cannot be charged with a tenth part of those crimes?
And those who display such violence and severity against the Churches of
the present age, I ask, how would they have conducted themselves towards
the Galatians, who almost entirely deserted the gospel, but among whom,
nevertheless, the same apostle found Churches?[751]
XV. They object that Paul bitterly reproves the Corinthians for
admitting an atrocious offender into their company, and follows this
reproof with a general declaration, that with a man of scandalous life
it is not lawful even to eat.[752] Here they exclaim, If it be not
lawful to eat common bread with him, how can it be lawful to unite with
him in eating the bread of the Lord? I confess it is a great disgrace,
if persons of immoral lives occupy places among the children of God; and
if the sacred body of Christ be prostituted to them, the disgrace is
vastly increased. And, indeed, if Churches be well regulated, they will
not suffer persons of abandoned characters among them, nor will they
promiscuously admit the worthy and the unworthy to that sacred supper.
But because the pastors are not always so diligent in watching over
them, and sometimes exercise more indulgence than they ought, or are
prevented from exerting the severity they would wish, it happens that
even those who are openly wicked are not always expelled from the
society of the saints. This I acknowledge to be a fault, nor have I any
inclination to extenuate it, since Paul sharply reproves it in the
Corinthians. But though the Church may be deficient in its duty, it does
not therefore follow that it is the place of every individual to pass
judgment of separation for himself. I admit that it is the duty of a
pious man to withdraw himself from all private intimacy with the wicked,
and not to involve himself in any voluntary connection with them. But it
is one thing to avoid familiar intercourse with the wicked; and another
thing, from hatred of them, to renounce the communion of the Church. And
persons who deem it sacrilege to participate with them the bread of the
Lord, are in this respect far more rigid than Paul. For when he exhorts
us to a pure and holy participation of it, he requires not one to
examine another, or every one to examine the whole Church, but each
individual to prove himself. If it were unlawful to communicate with an
unworthy person, Paul would certainly have enjoined us to look around
us, to see whether there were not some one in the multitude by whose
impurity we might be contaminated. But as he only requires every one to
examine himself, he shows that it is not the least injury to us if some
unworthy persons intrude themselves with us. And this is fully implied
in what he afterwards subjoins: “He that eateth and drinketh unworthily,
eateth and drinketh judgment to himself.”[753] He says, not to others,
but to himself, and with sufficient reason. For it ought not to be left
to the judgment of every individual _who_ ought to be admitted into the
Church, and _who_ ought to be expelled from it. This authority belongs
to the whole Church, and cannot be exercised without legitimate order,
as will be stated more at large hereafter. It would be unjust,
therefore, that any individual should be contaminated with the
unworthiness of another, whose approach it is neither in his power nor
his duty to prevent.
XVI. But though this temptation sometimes arises even to good men, from
an inconsiderate zeal for righteousness, yet we shall generally find
that excessive severity is more owing to pride and haughtiness, and a
false opinion which persons entertain of their own superior sanctity,
than to true holiness, and a real concern for its interests. Those,
therefore, who are most daring in promoting a separation from the
Church, and act, as it were, as standard-bearers in the revolt, have in
general no other motive than to make an ostentatious display of their
own superior excellence, and their contempt of all others. Augustine
correctly and judiciously observes—“Whereas the pious rule and method of
ecclesiastical discipline ought principally to regard the unity of the
Spirit in the bond of peace, which the apostle enjoined to be preserved
by mutual forbearance, and which not being preserved, the medicinal
punishment is evinced to be not only superfluous, but even pernicious,
and therefore to be no longer medicinal; those wicked children, who, not
from a hatred of the iniquities of others, but from a fondness for their
own contentions, earnestly endeavour to draw the simple and uninformed
multitude wholly after them, by entangling them with boasting of their
own characters, or at least to divide them; those persons, I say,
inflated with pride, infuriated with obstinacy, insidious in the
circulation of calumnies, and turbulent in raising seditions, conceal
themselves under the mask of a rigid severity, lest they should be
proved to be destitute of the truth; and those things which in the Holy
Scriptures are commanded to be done with great moderation, and without
violating the sincerity of love, or breaking the unity of peace, for the
correction of the faults of our brethren, they pervert to the sacrilege
of schism, and an occasion of separation from the Church.” To pious and
peaceable persons he gives this advice: that they should correct in
mercy whatever they can; that what they cannot, they should patiently
bear, and affectionately lament, till God either reform and correct it,
or, at the harvest, root up the tares and sift out the chaff. All pious
persons should study to fortify themselves with these counsels, lest,
while they consider themselves as valiant and strenuous defenders of
righteousness, they depart from the kingdom of heaven, which is the only
kingdom of righteousness. For since it is the will of God that the
communion of his Church should be maintained in this external society,
those who, from an aversion to wicked men, destroy the token of that
society, enter on a course in which they are in great danger of falling
from the communion of saints. Let them consider, in the first place,
that in a great multitude there are many who escape their observation,
who, nevertheless, are truly holy and innocent in the sight of God.
Secondly, let them consider, that of those who appear subject to moral
maladies, there are many who by no means please or flatter themselves in
their vices, but are oftentimes aroused, with a serious fear of God, to
aspire to greater integrity. Thirdly, let them consider that judgment
ought not to be pronounced upon a man from a single act, since the
holiest persons have sometimes most grievous falls. Fourthly, let them
consider, that the ministry of the word, and the participation of the
sacraments, have too much influence in preserving the unity of the
Church, to admit of its being destroyed by the guilt of a few impious
men. Lastly, let them consider, that in forming an estimate of the
Church, the judgment of God is of more weight than that of man.
XVII. When they allege that there must be some reason why the Church is
said to be holy, it is necessary to examine the holiness in which it
excels; lest by refusing to admit the existence of a Church without
absolute and sinless perfection, we should leave no Church in the world.
It is true, that, as Paul tells us, “Christ loved the Church, and gave
himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it, by the washing of
water by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious
Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing.”[754] It is
nevertheless equally true, that the Lord works from day to day in
smoothing its wrinkles, and purging away its spots; whence it follows,
that its holiness is not yet perfect. The Church, therefore, is so far
holy, that it is daily improving, but has not yet arrived at perfection;
that it is daily advancing, but has not yet reached the mark of
holiness; as in another part of this work will be more fully explained.
The predictions of the prophets, therefore, that “Jerusalem shall be
holy, and there shall no strangers pass through her any more,” and that
the way of God shall be a “way of holiness, over which the unclean shall
not pass,”[755] are not to be understood as if there were no blemish
remaining in any of the members of the Church; but because they aspire
with all their souls towards perfect holiness and purity, the goodness
of God attributes to them that sanctity to which they have not yet fully
attained. And though such evidences of sanctification are oftentimes
rarely to be found among men, yet it must be maintained, that, from the
foundation of the world, there has never been a period in which God had
not his Church in it; and that, to the consummation of all things, there
never will be a time in which he will not have his Church. For although,
in the very beginning of time, the whole human race was corrupted and
defiled by the sin of Adam; yet, from this polluted mass, God always
sanctifies some vessels to honour, so that there is no age which has not
experienced his mercy. This he has testified by certain promises, such
as the following: “I have made a covenant with my chosen: I have sworn
unto David, my servant, Thy seed will I establish for ever, and build up
thy throne to all generations.”[756] Again: “The Lord hath chosen Zion;
he hath desired it for his habitation. This is my rest for ever.”[757]
Again: “Thus saith the Lord, which giveth the sun for a light by day,
and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night: If
those ordinances depart from before me, saith the Lord, then the seed of
Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever.”[758]
XVIII. Of this truth Christ himself, the apostles, and almost all the
prophets, have given us an example. Dreadful are those descriptions in
which Isaiah, Jeremiah, Joel, Habakkuk, and others, deplore the
disorders of the Church of Jerusalem. There was such general and extreme
corruption in the people, in the magistrates, and in the priests, that
Isaiah does not hesitate to compare Jerusalem to Sodom and Gomorrah.
Religion was partly despised, partly corrupted. Their manners were
generally disgraced by thefts, robberies, treacheries, murders, and
similar crimes. Nevertheless, the prophets on this account neither
raised themselves new churches, nor built new altars for the oblation of
separate sacrifices; but whatever were the characters of the people, yet
because they considered that God had deposited his word among that
nation, and instituted the ceremonies in which he was there worshipped,
they lifted up pure hands to him even in the congregation of the
impious. If they had thought that they contracted any contagion from
these services, surely they would have suffered a hundred deaths rather
than have permitted themselves to be dragged to them. There was nothing
therefore to prevent their departure from them, but the desire of
preserving the unity of the Church. But if the holy prophets were
restrained by a sense of duty from forsaking the Church on account of
the numerous and enormous crimes which were practised, not by a few
individuals, but almost by the whole nation,—it is extreme arrogance in
us, if we presume immediately to withdraw from the communion of a Church
where the conduct of all the members is not compatible either with our
judgment, or even with the Christian profession.
XIX. Now, what kind of an age was that of Christ and his apostles? Yet
the desperate impiety of the Pharisees, and the dissolute lives every
where led by the people, could not prevent _them_ from using the same
sacrifices, and assembling in the same temple with others, for the
public exercises of religion. How did this happen, but from a knowledge
that the society of the wicked could not contaminate those who with pure
consciences united with them in the same solemnities? If any one pay no
deference to the prophets and apostles, let him at least acquiesce in
the authority of Christ. Cyprian has excellently remarked, “Although
tares, or impure vessels, are found in the Church, yet this is not a
reason why we should withdraw from it. It only behoves us to labour that
we may be the wheat, and to use our utmost endeavours and exertions,
that we may be vessels of gold or of silver. But to break in pieces the
vessels of earth belongs to the Lord alone, to whom a rod of iron is
also given. Nor let any one arrogate to himself what is exclusively the
province of the Son of God, by pretending to fan the floor, clear away
the chaff, and separate all the tares by the judgment of man. This is
proud obstinacy and sacrilegious presumption, originating in a corrupt
frenzy.” Let these two points, then, be considered as decided; first,
that he who voluntarily deserts the external communion of the Church
where the word of God is preached, and the sacraments are administered,
is without any excuse; secondly, that the faults either of few persons
or of many, form no obstacles to a due profession of our faith in the
use of the ceremonies instituted by God; because the pious conscience is
not wounded by the unworthiness of any other individual, whether he be a
pastor or a private person; nor are the mysteries less pure and salutary
to a holy and upright man, because they are received at the same time by
the impure.
XX. Their severity and haughtiness go to still greater lengths.
Acknowledging no church but such as is pure from the smallest blemishes,
they are even angry with honest teachers, because, by exhorting
believers to progressive improvements, they teach them to groan under
the burden of sins, and to seek for pardon all their lifetime. For
hereby, they pretend, the people are drawn away from perfection. I
confess, that in urging men to perfection, we ought to labour with
unremitting ardour and diligence; but to inspire their minds with a
persuasion that they have already attained it, while they are yet in the
pursuit of it, I maintain to be a diabolical invention. Therefore, in
the Creed, _the communion of saints_ is immediately followed by _the
forgiveness of sins_, which can only be obtained by the citizens and
members of the Church, as we read in the prophet.[759] The heavenly
Jerusalem, therefore, ought first to be built, in which this favour of
God may be enjoyed, that whoever shall enter it, their iniquity shall be
blotted out. Now, I affirm that this ought first to be built; not that
there can ever be any Church without remission of sins, but because God
has not promised to impart his mercy, except in the communion of saints.
Our first entrance, therefore, into the Church and kingdom of God, is
the remission of sins, without which we have no covenant or union with
God. For thus he speaks by the prophet: “In that day will I make a
covenant for them with the beasts of the field, and with the fowls of
heaven, and with the creeping things of the ground; and I will break the
bow and the sword, and the battle out of the earth, and will make them
to lie down safely. And I will betroth thee unto me for ever; yea, I
will betroth thee unto me in righteousness, and in judgment, and in
loving-kindness, and in mercies.”[760] We see how God reconciles us to
himself by his mercy. So in another place, where he foretells the
restoration of the people whom he had scattered in his wrath, he says,
“I will cleanse them from all their iniquity, whereby they have sinned
against me.”[761] Wherefore it is by the sign of ablution, that we are
initiated into the society of his Church; by which we are taught that
there is no admittance for us into the family of God, unless our
pollution be first taken away by his goodness.
XXI. Nor does God only once receive and adopt us into his Church by the
remission of sins; he likewise preserves and keeps us in it by the same
mercy. For to what purpose would it be, if we obtained a pardon which
would afterwards be of no use? And that the mercy of the Lord would be
vain and delusive, if it were only granted for once, all pious persons
can testify to themselves; for every one of them is all his lifetime
conscious of many infirmities, which need the Divine mercy. And surely
it is not without reason, that God particularly promises this grace to
the members of his family, and commands the same message of
reconciliation to be daily addressed to them. As we carry about with us
the relics of sin, therefore, as long as we live, we shall scarcely
continue in the Church for a single moment, unless we are sustained by
the constant grace of the Lord in forgiving our sins. But the Lord has
called his people to eternal salvation; they ought, therefore, to
believe that his grace is always ready to pardon their sins. Wherefore
it ought to be held as a certain conclusion, that from the Divine
liberality, by the intervention of the merit of Christ, through the
sanctification of the Spirit, pardon of sins has been, and is daily,
bestowed upon us, who have been admitted and ingrafted into the body of
the Church.
XXII. It was to dispense this blessing to us, that the keys were given
to the Church.[762] For, when Christ gave commandment to his apostles,
and conferred on them the power of remitting sins,[763] it was not with
an intention that they should merely absolve from their sins those who
were converted from impiety to the Christian faith, but rather that they
should continually exercise this office among the faithful. This is
taught by Paul, when he says, that the message of reconciliation was
committed to the ministers of the Church, that in the name of Christ
they might daily exhort the people to be reconciled to God.[764] In the
communion of saints, therefore, sins are continually remitted to us by
the ministry of the Church, when the presbyters or bishops, to whom this
office is committed, confirm pious consciences, by the promises of the
gospel, in the hope of pardon and remission; and that as well publicly
as privately, according as necessity requires. For there are many
persons who, on account of their infirmity, stand in need of separate
and private consolation. And Paul tells us that he “taught,” not only
publicly, but also “from house to house, testifying repentance toward
God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ;”[765] and admonished every
individual separately respecting the doctrine of salvation. Here are
three things, therefore, worthy of our observation. First, that whatever
holiness may distinguish the children of God, yet such is their
condition as long as they inhabit a mortal body, that they cannot stand
before God without remission of sins. Secondly, that this benefit
belongs to the Church; so that we cannot enjoy it unless we continue in
its communion. Thirdly, that it is dispensed to us by the ministers and
pastors of the Church, either in the preaching of the gospel, or in the
administration of the sacraments; and that this is the principal
exercise of the power of the keys, which the Lord has conferred on the
society of believers. Let every one of us, therefore, consider it as his
duty, not to seek remission of sins any where but where the Lord has
placed it. Of public reconciliation, which is a branch of discipline, we
shall speak in its proper place.
XXIII. But as those fanatic spirits, of whom I spoke, endeavour to rob
the Church of this sole anchor of salvation, our consciences ought to be
still more strongly fortified against such a pestilent opinion. The
Novatians disturbed the ancient Churches with this tenet; but the
present age also has witnessed some of the Anabaptists, who resemble the
Novatians by falling into the same follies. For they imagine that by
baptism the people of God are regenerated to a pure and angelic life,
which cannot be contaminated by any impurities of the flesh. And if any
one be guilty of sin after baptism, they leave him no prospect of
escaping the inexorable judgment of God. In short, they encourage no
hope of pardon in any one who sins after having received the grace of
God; because they acknowledge no other remission of sins than that by
which we are first regenerated. Now, though there is no falsehood more
clearly refuted in the Scripture than this, yet because its advocates
find persons to submit to their impositions, as Novatus formerly had
numerous followers, let us briefly show how very pernicious their error
is both to themselves and to others. In the first place, when the saints
obey the command of the Lord by a daily repetition of this prayer,
“forgive us our debts,”[766] they certainly confess themselves to be
sinners. Nor do they pray in vain, for our Lord has not enjoined the use
of any petitions, but such as he designed to grant. And after he had
declared that the whole prayer would be heard by the Father, he
confirmed this absolution by a special promise. What do we want more?
The Lord requires from the saints a confession of sins, and that daily
as long as they live, and he promises them pardon. What presumption is
it either to assert that they are exempt from sin, or, if they have
fallen, to exclude them from all grace! To whom does he enjoin us to
grant forgiveness seventy times seven times? Is it not to our brethren?
And what was the design of this injunction, but that we might imitate
his clemency? He pardons, therefore, not once or twice, but as often as
the sinner is alarmed with a sense of his sins, and sighs for mercy.
XXIV. But to begin from the infancy of the Church: the patriarchs had
been circumcised, admitted to the privileges of the covenant, and
without doubt instructed in justice and integrity by the care of their
father, when they conspired to murder their brother. This was a crime to
be abominated even by the most desperate and abandoned robbers. At
length, softened by the admonitions of Judah, they sold him for a slave.
This also was an intolerable cruelty. Simon and Levi, in a spirit of
nefarious revenge, condemned even by the judgment of their father,
murdered the inhabitants of Sichem. Reuben was guilty of execrable
incest with his father’s concubine. Judah, with an intention of
indulging a libidinous passion, violated the law of nature by a criminal
connection with his son’s wife. Yet they are so far from being expunged
out of the number of the chosen people, that, on the contrary, they are
constituted the heads of the nation.[767] What shall we say of David?
Though he was the official guardian of justice, how scandalously did he
prepare the way for the gratification of a blind passion, by the
effusion of innocent blood! He had already been regenerated, and among
the regenerate had been distinguished by the peculiar commendations of
the Lord; yet he perpetrated a crime even among heathens regarded with
horror, and yet he obtained mercy.[768] And not to dwell any longer on
particular examples, the numerous promises which the law and the
prophets contain, of Divine mercy towards the Israelites, are so many
proofs of the manifestation of God’s placability to the offences of his
people. For what does Moses promise to the people in case of their
return to the Lord, after having fallen into idolatry? “Then the Lord
thy God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will
return and gather thee from all the nations, whither the Lord thy God
hath scattered thee. If any of thine be driven out unto the outmost
parts of heaven, from thence will the Lord thy God gather thee.”[769]
XXV. But I am unwilling to commence an enumeration which would have no
end. For the prophets are full of such promises, which offer mercy to
the people, though covered with innumerable crimes. What sin is worse
than rebellion? It is described as a divorce between God and the Church:
yet this is overcome by the goodness of God. Hear his language by the
mouth of Jeremiah: “If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and
become another man’s, shall he return unto her again? Shall not that
land be greatly polluted? But thou hast played the harlot with many
lovers, and thou hast polluted the land with thy whoredoms and with thy
wickedness. Yet return again to me, thou backsliding Israel, saith the
Lord, and I will not cause mine anger to fall upon you; for I am
merciful, saith the Lord, and will not keep anger for ever.”[770] And
surely there cannot possibly be any other disposition in him who
affirms, that he “hath no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that
the wicked turn from his way and live.”[771] Therefore, when Solomon
dedicated the temple, he appointed it also for this purpose, that
prayers, offered to obtain pardon of sins, might there be heard and
answered. His words are, “If they sin against thee, (for there is no man
that sinneth not,) and thou be angry with them, and deliver them to the
enemy, so that they carry them away captives unto the land of the enemy,
far or near; yet if they shall bethink themselves, and repent in the
land whither they were carried captives, and repent and make
supplication unto thee in the land of those that carried them captives,
saying, We have sinned, and have done perversely, we have committed
wickedness; and pray unto thee toward the land which thou gavest unto
their fathers, the city which thou hast chosen, and the house which I
have built for thy name; then hear thou their prayer and their
supplication in heaven, and forgive thy people that have sinned against
thee, and all their transgressions wherein they have transgressed
against thee.”[772] Nor was it without cause that in the law the Lord
ordained daily sacrifices for sins; for unless he had foreseen that his
people would be subject to the maladies of daily sins, he would never
have appointed these remedies.[773]
XXVI. Now, I ask whether, by the advent of Christ, in whom the fulness
of grace was displayed, believers have been deprived of this benefit, so
that they can no longer presume to supplicate for the pardon of their
sins; so that if they offend against the Lord, they can obtain no mercy.
What would this be but to affirm, that Christ came for the destruction
of his people, and not for their salvation; if the loving-kindness of
God, in the pardon of sins, which was continually ready to be exercised
to the saints under the Old Testament, be maintained to be now entirely
withdrawn? But if we give any credit to the Scriptures, which proclaim
that in Christ the grace and philanthropy of God have at length been
fully manifested, that his mercy has been abundantly diffused, and
reconciliation between God and man accomplished,[774] we ought not to
doubt that the clemency of our heavenly Father is displayed to us in
greater abundance, rather than restricted or diminished. Examples to
prove this are not wanting. Peter, who had been warned that he who would
not confess the name of Christ before men would be denied by him before
angels, denied him three times in one night, and accompanied the denial
with execrations; yet he was not refused pardon.[775] Those of the
Thessalonians who led disorderly lives, are reprehended by the apostle,
in order to be invited to repentance.[776] Nor does Peter drive Simon
Magus himself to despair; but rather directs him to cherish a favourable
hope, when he persuades him to pray for forgiveness.[777]
XXVII. What are we to say of cases in which the most enormous sins have
sometimes seized whole Churches? From this situation Paul rather
mercifully reclaimed them, than abandoned them to the curse. The
defection of the Galatians was no trivial offence.[778] The Corinthians
were still less excusable, their crimes being more numerous and equally
enormous.[779] Yet neither are excluded from the mercy of the Lord: on
the contrary, the very persons who had gone beyond all others in
impurity, unchastity, and fornication, are expressly invited to
repentance. For the covenant of the Lord will ever remain eternal and
inviolable, which he has made with Christ, the antitype of Solomon, and
with all his members, in these words: “If his children forsake my law,
and walk not in my judgments; if they break my statutes, and keep not my
commandments; then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and
their iniquity with stripes. Nevertheless my loving-kindness will I not
utterly take from him.”[780] Finally, the order of the Creed teaches us
that pardon of sins ever continues in the Church of Christ, because,
after having mentioned the Church, it immediately adds _the forgiveness
of sins_.
XXVIII. Some persons, who are a little more judicious, perceiving the
notion of Novatus to be so explicitly contradicted by the Scripture, do
not represent every sin as unpardonable, but only voluntary
transgression, into which a person may have fallen with the full
exercise of his knowledge and will. These persons admit of no pardon for
any sins, but such as may have been the mere errors of ignorance. But as
the Lord, in the law, commanded some sacrifices to be offered to expiate
the voluntary sins of believers, and others to atone for sins of
ignorance, what extreme presumption is it to deny that there is any
pardon for voluntary transgression! I maintain, that there is nothing
more evident, than that the one sacrifice of Christ is available for the
remission of the voluntary sins of the saints, since the Lord has
testified the same by the legal victims, as by so many types. Besides,
who can plead ignorance as an excuse for David, who was evidently so
well acquainted with the law? Did not David know that adultery and
murder were great crimes, which he daily punished in others? Did the
patriarchs consider fratricide as lawful? Had the Corinthians learned so
little that they could imagine impurity, incontinence, fornication,
animosities, and contentions, to be pleasing to God? Could Peter, who
had been so carefully warned, be ignorant how great a crime it was to
abjure his Master? Let us not, therefore, by our cruelty, shut the gate
of mercy which God has so liberally opened.
XXIX. I am fully aware that the old writers have explained those sins,
which are daily forgiven to believers, to be the smaller faults, which
are inadvertently committed through the infirmity of the flesh; but
solemn repentance, which was then required for greater offences, they
thought, was no more to be repeated than baptism. This sentiment is not
to be understood as indicating their design, either to drive into
despair such persons as had relapsed after their first repentance, or to
extenuate those errors, as if they were small in the sight of God. For
they knew that the saints frequently stagger through unbelief; that they
sometimes utter unnecessary oaths; that they occasionally swell into
anger, and even break out into open reproaches; and that they are
likewise chargeable with other faults, which the Lord holds in the
greatest abomination. They expressed themselves in this manner, to
distinguish between private offences and those public crimes which were
attended with great scandal in the Church. But the difficulty, which
they made, of forgiving those who had committed any thing deserving of
ecclesiastical censure, did not arise from an opinion that it was
difficult for them to obtain pardon from the Lord; they only intended by
this severity to deter others from rashly running into crimes, which
would justly be followed by their exclusion from the communion of the
Church. The word of the Lord, however, which ought to be our only rule
in this case, certainly prescribes greater moderation. For it teaches,
that the rigour of discipline ought not to be carried to such an extent,
as to overwhelm with sorrow the person whose benefit we are required to
regard as its principal object; as we have before shown more at large.
Footnote 703:
Ephes. iv. 11-16.
Footnote 704:
Mark x. 9.
Footnote 705:
Gal. iv. 26.
Footnote 706:
2 Tim. ii. 19.
Footnote 707:
Rom. xi. 4. 1 Kings xix. 18.
Footnote 708:
Acts iv. 32.
Footnote 709:
Ephes. iv. 4.
Footnote 710:
Joel ii. 32. Obad. 17.
Footnote 711:
Psalm xlvi. 5.
Footnote 712:
Matt. xxii. 30.
Footnote 713:
Isaiah xxxvii. 35. Joel ii. 32.
Footnote 714:
Ezek. xiii. 9.
Footnote 715:
Psalm cvi. 4, 5.
Footnote 716:
Ephes. iv. 10-13.
Footnote 717:
Isaiah lix. 21.
Footnote 718:
Rom. x. 17.
Footnote 719:
Psalm cxxxii. 14; lxxx. 1.
Footnote 720:
2 Cor. iv. 7.
Footnote 721:
Psalm cv. 4.
Footnote 722:
2 Cor. iv. 6.
Footnote 723:
Exod. xx. 24.
Footnote 724:
Psalm lxxxiv.
Footnote 725:
Psalm cxxxii. 7. xcix. 5.
Footnote 726:
Acts vii. 48, 49.
Footnote 727:
Mal. iv. 6.
Footnote 728:
John xv. 16.
Footnote 729:
1 Peter i. 23.
Footnote 730:
1 Cor. iv. 15. ix. 2.
Footnote 731:
2 Cor. iii. 6.
Footnote 732:
1 Thess. i. 5.
Footnote 733:
Gal. iii. 2.
Footnote 734:
1 Cor. iii. 9; xv. 10. 2 Cor. vi. 1.
Footnote 735:
1 Thess. ii. 1.
Footnote 736:
Col. i. 29.
Footnote 737:
Gal. ii. 8.
Footnote 738:
1 Cor. iii. 7.
Footnote 739:
1 Cor. xv. 10.
Footnote 740:
2 Tim. ii. 19.
Footnote 741:
Matt. xviii. 20.
Footnote 742:
1 Tim. iii. 15.
Footnote 743:
Eph. v. 27.
Footnote 744:
Eph. i. 23.
Footnote 745:
Phil. iii. 15.
Footnote 746:
1 Cor. xiv. 30.
Footnote 747:
Matt. xiii. 47.
Footnote 748:
Matt. xiii. 24.
Footnote 749:
Matt. iii. 12.
Footnote 750:
1 Cor. i. 11; iii. 3; v. 1; vi. 7; ix. 1; xiv. 26, 40; xv. 12.
Footnote 751:
Gal. i. 6; iii. 1; iv. 11.
Footnote 752:
1 Cor. v. 2, 11, 12.
Footnote 753:
1 Cor. xi. 28, 29.
Footnote 754:
Ephes. v. 25-27.
Footnote 755:
Joel iii. 17. Isaiah xxxv. 8.
Footnote 756:
Psalm lxxxix. 3, 4.
Footnote 757:
Psalm cxxxii. 13, 14.
Footnote 758:
Jer. xxxi. 35, 36.
Footnote 759:
Isaiah xxxiii. 24.
Footnote 760:
Hos. ii. 18, 19.
Footnote 761:
Jerem. xxxiii. 8.
Footnote 762:
Matt. xvi. 19; xviii. 18.
Footnote 763:
John xx. 23.
Footnote 764:
2 Cor. v. 18-20.
Footnote 765:
Acts xx. 20, 21.
Footnote 766:
Matt. vi. 12.
Footnote 767:
Gen. xxxvii. 18, 28; xxxiv. 25; xxxv. 22; xxxviii. 16.
Footnote 768:
2 Sam. xi. 4, 15; xii. 13.
Footnote 769:
Deut. xxx. 3, 4.
Footnote 770:
Jer. iii. 1, 2, 12.
Footnote 771:
Ezek. xxxiii. 11.
Footnote 772:
1 Kings viii. 46-50.
Footnote 773:
Numb. xxviii. 3.
Footnote 774:
2 Tim. i. 9, 10. Tit. ii. 11; iii. 4-7.
Footnote 775:
Matt. x. 33. Mark viii. 38. Matt. xxvi. 69, &c.
Footnote 776:
2 Thess. iii. 6, 11, 12.
Footnote 777:
Acts viii. 22.
Footnote 778:
Gal. i. 6; iii. 1; iv. 9.
Footnote 779:
1 Cor. i. 11, 12; v. 1. 2 Cor. xii. 21.
Footnote 780:
Psalm lxxxix. 30-33.